The Western World is engaged in a new form of bloodless conflict, in which words are the weapons and the combatants are to be found everywhere. This free-for-all battle for cultural dominance is being fought over “hearts and minds” in the new battlegrounds of online user-generated social media platforms. As the war intensifies, British actor/activist Laurence Fox has used an interview with The Daily Telegraph on 6 March 2021 to announce his candidacy for Mayor of London, standing in his capacity as leader of the newly-founded “anti-woke” Reform Party.
To better understand this new cultural battle, you have to first acquire a new vocabulary. The term “woke” itself was culturally appropriated from the African American vernacular, and probably first appeared in mainstream media on May 20 1962, as an adjective in a New York Times essay by the novelist William Melvin Kelley titled “If You’re Woke You Dig It”. The word was then popularised by Black musical performers, social media outlets and the Black Lives Matter movement before finding its way into the Oxford English Dictionary in June 2017. In its original meaning, “woke” referred to a heightened awareness of racial discrimination and other forms of social and political injustice. What started out as a manifestation of black consciousness acquired a new meaning when it was adopted by those on the political right- the fierce critics of “political correctness”- even though woke tendencies can be identified at both ends of the political spectrum, and not just within the ranks of the political left. In its latest incarnation, “woke” is a pejorative term, used to refer, with contempt, to apparently self-righteous people who are intent on rewriting history on their own terms. The worst form of wokes, in the eyes of many anti-wokes, are people troubled by their “white privilege” who are now taking disruptive actions to set right the misdeeds of their ancestors.
“Woke” people seek apologies and compensation for past injustices. Others, mostly celebrities and politicians, who have made controversial statements in the past, are outed as part of a process of cultural cleansing. The process begins with “calling out”, a form of public naming and shaming, and then proceeds to actual “cancellation”. Cancelled people are deemed toxic and ostracised, which may require denying them a voice by removing them from their favoured social media outlets. However, being called out rarely leads to cancellation, although reputations may be damaged and some of those cancelled may lose their jobs or face financial sanctions in punishment for past indiscretions. It is almost impossible to “cancel” people, in the sense of removing them out of sight and mind, as they will inevitably find ways to resurface as long as they live in a liberal democracy.
This new cancel culture has engendered widespread rage, on both sides of the conflict. First of all, there are the undeniable victims of past racial injustices, including discrimination, oppression and slavery, and then there are the newer “victims” of call-out culture itself. The latter include self-declared defenders of “free speech”, responsible or otherwise, who attract support from unlikely sources, as shown by the diversity of the 153 signatories of an open letter criticising ideological conformity, which appeared in Harper’s Magazine on 7 July 2020.
Cancel culture has spread to matters beyond those of purely race. “Anti-woke” people claim they are being held back from freely expressing their views on such matters as climate change, immigration, gender discrimination, gay and transgender rights, Covid-19, vaccination, lockdowns, and so on. In particular, they dislike being called “racists” , defending any seemingly racist rhetoric on their part as justifiable on cultural and economic grounds, and in turn labelling their tormentors as “racist” themselves. Similarly, “woke” people, so-called “do-gooders”, have also taken on a wider social agenda, filled with issues that can best be described as “progressive” and “liberal”- again pejorative terms in this context.
As well-intentioned “wokes” insist, you cannot deny or gloss over the many injustices of the past. History must not be sanitised and the lessons of the past should not be forgotten. However, forced and insincere apologies for past indiscretions mean little unless backed up by tangible actions further down the line. We must not overlook humanity’s often barbaric past, nor glorify the perpetrators of bad deeds from history. But we must also recognise that the cultural norms, attitudes, actions, and behaviours of the past were the by-products of a totally different era , when things were very different. The many pressing issues of today demand a shared outlook and constructive action for the future, rather than cultural wars over events from the past.
Unfortunately, the cultural keyboard warriors of today are wedded to seemingly irreconcilable positions, based on their shared perceptions, which are often clouded by a narrow and biased view of history. Cultural warfare is nothing more than an untimely diversion which distracts us from directly tackling the inequalities that really matter. There is much indignation around which could be put to better use than it is being at present.
Ashis Banerjee