Memo To The Woke

[naomi24]

//1984 was not supposed to be an instruction manual//

An observation by Leo McKinstry.

//Ever since its publication more than 70 years ago, 1984 has been widely heralded for its message about the horrors of political repression. Yet, to today’s woke fanatics, the book is not so much a warning as a blueprint. Total compliance with their dogma is their goal. Thought control and punishment are their means to that end.

In true Orwellian spirit, they seek to create a climate of fear where dissent is crushed.
Their malignant influence is already undermining British traditions of tolerance and openness. Just as our country begins to emerge from the ordeal of lockdown, there is a real risk that the embrace of post-Covid freedom may be outweighed by the zealots’ capture of the public realm.

All too many of our institutions have succumbed to this extremist ideology in all its contempt for our heritage and its toxic fixation with identity politics. Indeed, at times it feels as if we are in the midst of a cultural revolution. Schools and universities now boast of “decolonising” their curriculums, while classical sheet music is held to be racist. Earlier this month, one teaching trade union sent guidance to kindergartens on how to combat “white privilege” in toddlers.//

I’ll leave you to read the rest.

https://www.express.co.uk/comment/columnists/leo-mckinstry/1426912/george-orwell-1984-britain-totalitarian-rule

Anyone disagree with him - and if so, why?

[Khandro]

From another (wrong) thread, I had pasted from The Spectator - 17th April, the theatre critic Lloyd Evans writes:

'At Shepherd’s Bush, the local playhouse is so convinced of its moral excellence that it supports prejudice without realising it. The Bush offers bursaries of £7,500 to theatre--makers with ‘Black, Asian, Minority Ethnic and Refugee’ status, - no whites in other words. So there it is. Systemic racism but with a smiley face.'

[The Builder]

Hard to disagree with that Naomi.
1984 versus woke:
The book details state-induced control; totalitarianism. I imagine his thinking came from a time where the outcome was likely to be either Soviet type control, or Fascist. I guess he was implying that we were headed one way or the other.
Either way, the state was in total control. With today's woke, it's individual factions and individuals who are trying to impose their own personal sensibilities on anyone who'll listen, which, with today's media, includes just about everybody.

So... either "state knows best" or "individual freedom knows best"
Everyone knows where they are with universal contempt for state control. You just have to be "against sin." The woke-warriors are guerrillas. Far more insidious. They pick soft targets, knowing that they will always get an audience..... somewhere.

[sevenOP]

McKinstry uses the all-encompassing and conveniently undefined 'woke' labeling. e.g. "they seek to create a climate of fear where dissent is crushed."
What a useful broad brush.
Of course we should use our history to avoid 'bad practice' in our present.
Brave New World and 1984, the carrot and the stick... both noxious.
McKinstry could have mentioned Orwell's missing 'Introduction' to Animal Farm, 'The Freedom of the Press', which warned of dangers similar to McKinstry's 'woke' fears.

https://www.nytimes.com/1972/10/08/archives/the-freedom-of-the-press-orwell.html

[naomi24]

SevenOP, what ‘bad practice’ do you think is likely to be repeated in our present? Slavery, sending children up chimneys, transporting people to the wilds of Australia for stealing a loaf of bread? What?

[sevenOP]

"SevenOP, what ‘bad practice’ do you think is likely to be repeated in our present?"

I never said "likely to be repeated".
If we learn from previous mistakes, such as slavery, Sykes–Picot Agreement, Doctrine of Discovery, Manifest Destiny, Peterloo massacre, Munich Agreement, etc, we might avoid 'blowback'.

[naomi24]

sevenOP, //I never said "likely to be repeated".//

No you didn’t, but you did say //we should use our history to avoid 'bad practice' in our present.// which to me indicates a fear of repetition. That said, and addressing the rest of your latest post, I fear you credit the ‘Woke’ with far more intelligence and worldliness than most of them actually possess because I’d hazard an educated guess that the majority of them wouldn’t have the foggiest idea what you’re talking about.

When universities deem good written English unnecessary (one wonders how the incapable got there in the first place), when ‘no platforming’ becomes acceptable and wholly supported, when because the BAME are intolerant of dairy products, serving such innocent staples as cheese in schools is deemed ‘racist’, when Jane Austen, a truly British icon, is being investigated for racism by the very people who oversee her legacy - quite shamefully she wore cotton and ate sugar you know - when we’re reprimanded for saying that Covid originated in China because that’s racist, when we’re told that democracy doesn’t mean what we think it means, and when we are expected to refer to men who decide they don’t want to be men as ‘she’ or ‘her’, we are surely on the road to accepting that 2 plus 2 does indeed equal 5 - and that’s something that really should concern everyone.

[jim360]

At least three of your examples seem interesting, because they take an issue with an individual, or with at most a vocal minority, and blow it up to be far more pervasive than it actually is. So too does the article, if it comes to that. The single biggest flaw in the argument is that, whatever you make of recent trends, they are very much *not* being imposed by the State, the key feature of 1984's dystopia. If there are loud groups insisting that such-and-such is verboten, their power is far more limited than they seem to think, and it's well to remember that.

It's separately important to ensure that the examples given are placed in their proper context, or aren't being misrepresented. Take this one:

//...we’re reprimanded for saying that Covid originated in China because that’s racist... //

This is simply not true, being neither the original quote nor even remotely an accurate reflection of its meaning. The context is the link below, and what's interesting to note is that the phrase "the virus originated in China" is used several times by the person apparently insisting that saying so is racist:

https://www.theanswerbank.co.uk/Society-and-Culture/Question1699462-6.html

The issue wasn't even "Chinese Virus", if it comes to that, but rather all of the attitudes surrounding that phrase shown by those who tended to use it. I can't see much point in going into detail, but the simple fact is that context matters, and it's a shame that all the context was stripped away from the examples above. Even if including it doesn't change your position, the full context is relevant.

[naomi24]

Hmmm....context. That sounds familiar.

[fiveleaves]

Strangely in this internet age when we can communicate with each other easier than at any point in history people are less not more tolerant of other views.
This woke idea that there is only one acceptable position on a subject is dangerous and fascist