Perhaps "system of belief" rather than religion, with at play a human tendency to believe uncritically once convinced (or converted) and to castigate those who do not share one's beliefs? Marxism has been situated within the Millenarian tradition; the withering away of the state and arrival of the dictatorship of the proletariat thus fun…
Perhaps "system of belief" rather than religion, with at play a human tendency to believe uncritically once convinced (or converted) and to castigate those who do not share one's beliefs? Marxism has been situated within the Millenarian tradition; the withering away of the state and arrival of the dictatorship of the proletariat thus function as the End Time after a thousand years (more or less) of class struggle. A secular vale of sin and tears leading to a secular Second Coming. Since Marxism has had enormous power on the minds and lives of people in the Latin countries and in Asia--Cultural Revolution anyone?--tying wokery to Protestantism alone has its limits. That said, the label "Great Awokening" is a brilliant take on the tendency's American roots. The woke also remind me, however, of Freudians. Years ago I had a discussion with a Freudian who believed that women's carrying pocketbooks represented an unconscious desire to exhibit an otherwise invisible womb. I remarked that women's clothing--this was back in the day--rarely had pockets. And that men in the Middle Ages carried purses, their clothes also lacking pockets. And that medieval women often wore a ring of large keys on their belts (what would Uncle Sig make of that?) To no avail. So the woke find racists in anyone who challenges their analysis.
I agree with McWhorter's recommendations, but would nuance them. First to include all poor people in any initiative to improve schools, reduce the impact of drugs on communities, and create solid, decently paying working class jobs. This is only fair. It would also challenge the perception that Democrats, the elite, call them what you will, care only about black people or people of color, and so would reduce resentment and receptivity toward populist manipulations. Second, to acknowledge the necessity of policing and, instead of demonizing police, find ways to reform poor practice where it exists. Third, to look hard at the implications for the cohesion of this country, and the west more generally, of history practiced as indictment, prosecution and conviction, and at the cultural cost of limiting perception of art, literature and music to (an often ungenerous) take on the race or gender of the artist, writer or musician. Since the woke claim that they act out of an overriding concern for black people, challenging them on the implications of their words and actions for ordinary black people is of the first importance. But they have a lot to answer for to the entire society as well.
Perhaps "system of belief" rather than religion, with at play a human tendency to believe uncritically once convinced (or converted) and to castigate those who do not share one's beliefs? Marxism has been situated within the Millenarian tradition; the withering away of the state and arrival of the dictatorship of the proletariat thus function as the End Time after a thousand years (more or less) of class struggle. A secular vale of sin and tears leading to a secular Second Coming. Since Marxism has had enormous power on the minds and lives of people in the Latin countries and in Asia--Cultural Revolution anyone?--tying wokery to Protestantism alone has its limits. That said, the label "Great Awokening" is a brilliant take on the tendency's American roots. The woke also remind me, however, of Freudians. Years ago I had a discussion with a Freudian who believed that women's carrying pocketbooks represented an unconscious desire to exhibit an otherwise invisible womb. I remarked that women's clothing--this was back in the day--rarely had pockets. And that men in the Middle Ages carried purses, their clothes also lacking pockets. And that medieval women often wore a ring of large keys on their belts (what would Uncle Sig make of that?) To no avail. So the woke find racists in anyone who challenges their analysis.
I agree with McWhorter's recommendations, but would nuance them. First to include all poor people in any initiative to improve schools, reduce the impact of drugs on communities, and create solid, decently paying working class jobs. This is only fair. It would also challenge the perception that Democrats, the elite, call them what you will, care only about black people or people of color, and so would reduce resentment and receptivity toward populist manipulations. Second, to acknowledge the necessity of policing and, instead of demonizing police, find ways to reform poor practice where it exists. Third, to look hard at the implications for the cohesion of this country, and the west more generally, of history practiced as indictment, prosecution and conviction, and at the cultural cost of limiting perception of art, literature and music to (an often ungenerous) take on the race or gender of the artist, writer or musician. Since the woke claim that they act out of an overriding concern for black people, challenging them on the implications of their words and actions for ordinary black people is of the first importance. But they have a lot to answer for to the entire society as well.