Wokism & Hypermorality E-Book

Hermann Selchow

• Herausgeber: tredition
• Kategorie: Geisteswissenschaft
• Sprache: Englisch
• Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2024

Seitenzahl: 241

Beschreibung

"Wokism and Hypermorality: Notes on the New Virtue Vigilantism" In the current political debate, moral convictions are increasingly determining the public debate. The book "Wokism and Hypermorality" poses the burning questions of our society: Who and what is behind modern virtue guardians? Why is political correctness becoming the standard for correct action and thought in all areas of life? And what effects does this moral overzealousness have on freedom of expression, social discourse and our democratic values? This book offers a critical analysis of the modern wokism movement and the hypermorality associated with it. It uncovers the mechanisms behind cancel culture, virtue signaling and alleged moral superiority. With astute observations and pointed arguments, the author shows how the balance between tolerance and moral dominance is in danger and what price we as a society could pay for it. Who is this book for? For anyone who wants to understand the term wokism and question its effects on our society. For critics of cancel culture who are looking for a well-founded and fact-based argument. For those interested in politics and society who want to delve deeper into the discourse on identity politics, freedom of expression and social change. Why should you read this book? "Wokism and Hypermorality" is essential reading for anyone who is not satisfied with simple answers to current questions, but wants to understand the background and reflect on the consequences of the current moral vigilance. Provocative, precise and current - this book not only stimulates thought, but also offers new perspectives on the most important socio-political debates of our time. Immerse yourself in an insightful analysis that re-explores the boundaries of morality, tolerance and freedom.

Leseprobe

Wokism & Hypermorality

Notes on the New Virtue Vigilantism

© 2024 Hermann Candahashi

Druck und Distribution im Auftrag des Autors:

tredition GmbH, Heinz-Beusen-Stieg 5, 22926 Ahrensburg, Germany

Das Werk, einschließlich seiner Teile, ist urheberrechtlich geschützt. Für die Inhalte ist der Autor verantwortlich. Jede Verwertung ist ohne seine Zustimmung unzulässig. Die Publikation und Verbreitung erfolgen im Auftrag des Autors, zu erreichen unter: tredition GmbH, Abteilung "Impressumservice", Heinz-Beusen-Stieg 5, 22926 Ahrensburg, Deutschland

You shouldn't be morally proud if you stumble upon the word "racist."

Gregor Brand (*1957)

Wokism & Hypermorality

Notes on the New Virtue Vigilantism

Table of contents

Introduction

What is Wokism and what does it want?

The origins of contemporary hypermorality

The new political correctness and its consequences

The rise of cancel culture

The role of identity politics

Consequences and implications for education

Impact on freedom of expression and censorship

International perspectives on global wokism

Backers and financiers of the wokist ideology

Criticism and countermovements to wokism

A look ahead: Possible paths into the future

Closing words

Also published by me:

Introduction

In this book, I would like to discuss with you the omnipresent influence and indoctrination through excessive moralization and bans on language and thought. We must talk about education and future prospects for our next generations and the danger posed by increasingly ideologized and often externally controlled trends. At present, public debate is increasingly characterized by polarization and moral exaggeration. Terms and interpretations in our debates are gradually and increasingly changing our culture of conversation. A new racism, disguised as a virtue, is taking over the areas of our everyday lives, education and, for a long time, our politics. Bans on language and censorship determine the topics and the limits of what can be said and thought everywhere. It seems urgently necessary to take a sober look at the phenomena of wokism and hypermorality. This book attempts to critically examine the current culture of conversation and to find possible rational starting points for the often hysterical discussions that threaten to divide our society into many small, often rival groups.

In recent years, the term "wokism" has crept more and more into the social debate. What once began as a vigilant awareness of social justice and inequality has developed into a far-reaching movement that has attracted criticism from conservative circles. Hypermorality, an externally controlled claim to moral superiority that goes hand in hand with wokism, has fundamentally changed the way people communicate with each other and rarely to their advantage. It is striking that this phenomenon is predominantly evident in wealthy Western countries. It seems to be a remote-controlled feeling of shame towards less wealthy countries and ethnic groups. If we only base our analysis on this phenomenon, we only get a partial answer. The question of the financial backers brings us closer to a more comprehensive answer. If we follow the trail of money, we come across the same names that we already know from the top positions of the WEF or other global organizations.

Hypermorality refers to an exaggerated form of morality in which moral principles are often applied to the extreme, often at the expense of rationality and pragmatism. In a hypermoral society, the pursuit of moral purity and perfection becomes the highest commandment, and anyone who does not conform to the currently prescribed norms is quickly denounced as inferior or even "evil".

In my book, I would like to examine these topics with you from different perspectives. I would like to examine the origins of these movements, their developments and the diverse effects they now have on almost all areas of social and private life, from politics and the economy to art and culture or even into schools, universities and the private sphere of the family. It is hardly possible to express one's opinion on a topic, choose a product or apply for a job at a company without encountering excessive and all-determining moral concepts or wokistic indignation.

At the same time, critical voices are also being heard, warning against morality being used for its own sake and abuse, and the associated dangers for freedom of expression and democracy. Nevertheless, I must disappoint you if you are expecting ready-made answers or recipes for dealing with these phenomena at this point. This book can only provide a stimulus for reflection and discussion. Please understand the comments made here as a starting point for internal and public discussion. Whether and to what extent this will succeed will also depend on our willingness to deal with these issues.

The influence of social media on the spread of wokism and the reinforcement of hypermorality should not be underestimated; after all, it has a direct and possibly irreparable influence on our young generation. Information and opinions can be spread in a matter of seconds, and it is easy to stir up collective outrage and condemn people for their views or actions, and also to destroy them socially and personally. This new media dynamic has extremely negative consequences in such cases. On the one hand, it makes it possible to quickly uncover and combat social injustices, but on the other hand, it promotes a culture of quick and often devastating condemnation and simplistic black-and-white thinking.

It is not always immediately clear whose interests these campaigns actually serve and who the actual initiator is.

Another important topic that we will cover in this book is cancel culture. This term describes the phenomenon of people or organizations that are or should be considered morally or politically reprehensible being publicly boycotted and "cancelled". Cancel culture is a rightly controversial topic; while some interest groups declare it a necessary tool for accountability, others criticize it as a new authoritarianism and a threat to freedom of expression. It is not uncommon for such campaigns to be reminiscent of medieval inquisitions, in which the accused is not given any chance to explain themselves.

The book also aims to shed light on the role of identity politics, which is at the heart of many woker movements. The emphasis on identity - be it race, gender, sexual orientation or other characteristics - is a double-edged sword. At least in theory, it enables a targeted confrontation with real or invented injustices, but in practice it is likely to lead to a fragmentation of society and endanger the common good. It often uses real examples without asking, without obtaining the consent or approval of those actually affected, and instrumentalizes these people or groups without their consent and without considering their own personal rights.

Finally, this book also takes a look at possible paths into the future. How can we preserve the positive aspects of wokism and morality that certainly exist and at the same time minimize the negative consequences? How can we preserve the positive aspects of wokism and morality that certainly exist and at the same time minimize the negative consequences? How can we create a society that is both fairer and more tolerant, a society that recognizes differences without exaggerating or absolutizing them, but at the same time emphasizes what connects and shares them? These questions are not easy to answer at the moment, but they are crucial for shaping our common future.

This book therefore invites you, the reader, to engage with, reflect on and debate these current questions. It does not offer simple answers, but rather is intended to serve as an impetus for a deeper examination of the challenges and opportunities that the present offers us.

Originally from Afro-American English, where "woke" stood for a heightened awareness of social injustice, it has also developed into a buzzword in Europe and Germany, which, depending on the perspective, is understood either as an expression of progressive thinking or as a synonym for sometimes hysterical political "correctness". The supporters of wokeism see themselves as advocates of a fairer and more inclusive society, while their critics accuse them of endangering social cohesion and discourse through excessive demands and moral rigorism, even to the point of legally relevant actions. Critics also claim that equality and equal treatment are already anchored in human rights and the constitution.

The consequences of this development are far-reaching: debates become emotionally charged and make it difficult to exchange arguments objectively. The space for nuances and differentiated positions shrinks, while the fear of social ostracism leads many people to self-censor. At the same time, parts of the population are becoming increasingly dissatisfied with supposed bans on thinking and a "virtue vigilantism" that is perceived as patronizing. This movement is thus placing itself outside or above our democratic values and its extremist tendencies can be interpreted as anti-social and a threat to democracy.

This book does not aim to provide an apology for the status quo or a blanket condemnation of progressive concerns. Rather, it is about analyzing the mechanisms and background of the current conversation hysteria and showing ways in which we as a society can find our way back to a more productive discourse that is characterized less by outrage and more by rationalism and pragmatism.

To achieve this goal, we first want to look at the roots and the driving forces behind wokism. We will examine how an originally emancipatory movement could grow into a phenomenon that critics perceive as dogmatic and illiberal. In doing so, we will also take a look at the social and economic conditions that have favored the rise of wokism.

The true goals and intentions behind the promotion of this left-wing hypermorality and the current wokism, however, are determined by political ideologues and financiers and vary greatly depending on the political and ideological perspective. Nevertheless, some possible motives and intentions seem plausible:

These political ideologues and financiers seek to gain more influence and control over the social structure and public discourse by promoting a certain ideological agenda. By establishing certain moral standards and narratives, they can direct public opinion and thus tend to exert influence.

Some actors pursue the intention of determining existing social, cultural and economic developments in order to create new social orders that serve their own interests. By emphasizing identity politics and highlighting real and fictional social injustices, traditional institutions and values could be questioned and weakened in the long term.

An important motive could be the intention to establish a new social order based on the principles of diversity, inclusion and supposedly social justice. For certain ideologues, this may be a means of promoting a more radical form of social change that is intended to reverse or undermine existing power relations.

The intention behind the promotion of these movements is often to further polarize and divide society. By creating and intensifying conflicts between different social groups, existing tensions can be exploited to advance one's own political agendas or to manipulate voters.

It cannot be denied that certain financial supporters of movements that are described as "woke" seek economic advantages. Companies and financiers benefit by positioning themselves as morally progressive to strengthen their brand and gain access to new markets that value social responsibility.

Another benefit is that by promoting a "woke" narrative, the basis is laid for the implementation of stricter surveillance and control mechanisms. By using moral arguments, surveillance and control measures that would be resisted in other contexts could be justified.

It is important to question these motives behind the current movements. The goals and intentions are not always easy and clear to determine, as they depend heavily on the individual beliefs, interests and strategies of the respective actors. In addition, not all individuals and groups within these movements are guided by the same motives or goals.

Attention must be paid to the role of social media, which acts as a catalyst for the spread and radicalization of woke ideas. The mechanisms of the digital public sphere - from filter bubbles to echo chambers to viral waves of outrage - have contributed significantly to discussions becoming increasingly emotional and less objective.

We must not ignore the psychological aspects of hypermorality. Why do people tend to simplify complex issues and squeeze them into moral categories? What needs are satisfied by the feeling of being on the "right side"? And how can we explain that, at a time when traditional moral concepts are losing importance, a new form of moral rigorism is emerging at the same time?

Particular attention should be paid to the analysis of the language used in the context of wokism. We will examine how terms such as "microaggression", "cultural appropriation" or "check your privilege" work and what effects they have on social discourse. This also addresses the question of the extent to which language actually creates and changes realities - a central thesis of many wokist approaches.

The effects of wokism and hypermorality on various areas of society should also be examined in detail in this context. How does the political landscape change when moral superiority becomes the decisive criterion? What consequences does increasing politicization have for science and education? And how do art and culture deal with the new demands of political correctness and representation?

In this context, we must not ignore the phenomenon of cancel culture. This refers to the practice of publicly ostracizing and excluding people or institutions who violate the norms of wokeism or who are believed to have done so. We will examine the mechanisms behind such campaigns and ask what long-term consequences this form of social sanctioning has for an open and liberal society.

In addition, we must also deal with the backlash against wokeism. How can we explain the fact that in many Western countries conservative and right-wing movements that explicitly position themselves against the "woke ideology" are gaining popularity? To what extent does the moral elevation of left-wing concerns help to strengthen the forces that it actually wants to combat?

We will also have to ask ourselves to what extent wokeism can be understood as a form of substitute religion. In an increasingly secularized world, it seems to offer many people a new source of meaning and moral guidance. What parallels are there between wokist thought patterns and religious belief systems? And what dangers does such a quasi-sacralization of political and social concerns pose?

Impatient young people tend to follow so-called "wokism" because they often seek a quick and direct change in society. This is what is promised to them in the visions of a left-wing ideology that promotes wokism and is portrayed in the most dazzling colors. In our time, when information and trends spread rapidly via social media, young people are used to seeing immediate reactions and successes. Wokism offers them a platform on which they can actively campaign for social justice, equality and the recognition of marginalized groups. This fits well with their desire for immediate impact and their often idealistic view of the world. Differentiations and realistic feasibility fall by the wayside. The vision of an allegedly fairer and better society and world is put forward as a topic by the leading forces and is often praised as a panacea. Reality is often distorted or even ignored. Conservatism, on the other hand, appears to many young people to be too slow, archaic and boring because it relies on traditions and slow, realistically feasible changes. Conservative ideas usually emphasise the importance of stability, causality, continuity and the preservation of existing social structures. For young people who have to find their way in a dynamic, rapidly changing world and often feel the urge to quickly eliminate grievances, this approach does not seem attractive.

They usually do not feel sufficiently addressed by conservatism because it does not promise rapid change and therefore does not seem innovative enough to them.

In summary, the appeal of wokism for young people lies in its urgency and its ability to simulate quick results, the failure of which is then due to the conservative actions of a society of "old people". Thus, like every left-wing tradition, wokism also provides its enemy image as a justification for its own failure.

In the course of the book, we will occasionally resort to concrete case studies to illustrate and substantiate the theoretical considerations. We will look at events and debates both nationally and internationally that are characteristic of the debates about wokism and hypermorality.

Our main focus, however, will be on the situation in Germany. How do the phenomena described manifest themselves in German society? What specific historical and cultural factors shape the way we deal with issues such as identity, discrimination and political correctness in this country? And how does the German debate differ from discussions in other countries, particularly the USA, where many of the wokist concepts originate?

I will try to answer the question of how the media and journalism deal with the challenges posed by wokism and hypermorality. Are the media doing justice to their role as the fourth estate or are they even promoting these movements through financially and politically dependent entities? To what extent do they run the risk of becoming victims of such movements themselves if any critical reporting can be branded as discriminatory or reactionary? So what role do the media play in spreading and reinforcing morally charged narratives, and how could they contribute to making the debate more objective?

One important issue that cannot be ignored is how wokeism and hypermorality affect the understanding of individuality and personal responsibility. How does the image of humanity change when individuals are primarily perceived as representatives of certain group identities? What consequences does it have for the personal development of adolescents when moral judgments are increasingly made dependent on group membership? And how can the ideal of individual freedom be reconciled with the collective demands of wokeism?

What effect does the constant fear of moral condemnation have on friendships and family relationships? And how can authentic closeness and trust be built in a climate of moral exaltation?

In other words, how does the discourse in families, clubs and companies change when moral judgments take the place of factual arguments? What consequences does it have for political decision-making when certain positions are considered morally reprehensible from the outset? And how can political institutions deal with the pressure of constantly having to take a position on moral issues?

The current way of dealing with our history and our cultural heritage should not be underestimated. How does historiography change when it is viewed primarily from the perspective of today's moralizing standards? What consequences does dealing with problematic historical figures and events have for the collective memory of a society? And how can a critical approach to the past be designed without falling into ahistorical moralism? What chances do factual and rational arguments have in connection with our history?

Particular attention is paid to the question of how wokism and hypermorality affect the development of the constitutional state. How does the understanding of law and justice change when moral judgments replace legal norms? What consequences does it have for legal certainty when laws are increasingly interpreted according to moral criteria? And how can courts maintain their independence when they come under pressure to take a moral stance?

When we consider these diverse aspects of wokism and hypermorality, it becomes clear that we are dealing with a complex and multifaceted phenomenon that can have profound effects on almost all areas of our private and social coexistence. It would be too easy to condemn these developments across the board or even to celebrate them uncritically. Rather, we need to take a differentiated look at the opportunities and risks that come with this new form of moral awareness.

This book is intended as a contribution to a necessary debate about the future of our society. It does not intend to provide an apology for the status quo or a condemnation of progressive concerns. Instead, I would like to invite you to take a step back and critically reflect on how we as a community want to deal with the challenges that wokism and hypermorality pose to us.

It is my hope that this book will help to objectify the often hysterical debate and open up space for differentiated positions. Because only through a respectful and, if possible, rational exchange of arguments can we as a society find solutions together that meet these complex challenges.

Let us enter into a debate together that will lead us to a better understanding of the dynamics that shape our current culture of conversation. May this book also be a stimulus and inspiration for you to engage in a constructive dialogue about the future of our coexistence.

What is Wokism and what does it want?

The term "wokism" has had a remarkable career in recent years and has become one of the most controversial buzzwords in social and political debates. To understand this phenomenon, it is necessary to take a closer look at its origins, development and current meaning.

The roots of wokism lie in African-American English, where the expression "woke" (derived from the English word "awake") was originally used to describe a heightened awareness of social injustices, especially in relation to racism. The use of the term can be traced back to the 1930s, but only gained wider attention in the 2010s through the Black Lives Matter movement.

However, wokism as a social and political movement goes beyond the pure issue of racism. It now encompasses a wide range of topics related to social justice, equality and discrimination. These include issues of gender equality, LGBTQ+ rights, environmental justice, economic inequality and many other areas where structural disadvantages are perceived, both ostensibly and in reality.

A central feature of wokism is the desire to critically question and destroy existing power structures and privileges. Supporters of wokism argue that many social institutions and cultural practices are permeated by historical injustices that need to be exposed and eliminated. This often leads to conflicts with democratic and conservative views and their established structures.

The spread of wokist ideas has been largely facilitated by left-leaning political and financial actors, social media and digital platforms. Hashtag campaigns such as #MeToo or #BlackLivesMatter originally helped to bring issues such as sexual harassment or police violence against black people to the center of public attention. The speed and reach with which such campaigns can spread has fundamentally changed the way in which social debates are conducted.

Another characteristic feature of wokism is the emphasis on individual responsibility to confront one's own real or perceived privileges and to actively stand up against injustices. This is often linked to the concept of "being an ally" - the idea that members of supposedly privileged groups have an obligation to support marginalized groups in their fight for equality. This overlooks the fact that in democratic systems all people already have equal rights by law and constitution, but also equal responsibilities.

Language plays a central role in wokism. There is a strong awareness of how language can create and perpetuate realities. This leads to the development of new terms and expressions that are intended to be perceived as more inclusive and less discriminatory. Examples of this include the use of gender-neutral pronouns or the avoidance of terms that are portrayed as racist or otherwise problematic. On the other hand, terms are often given new meanings, which further complicates possible discourses.

Critics of wokism see this movement as a threat to freedom of expression and open discourse. They argue that the strong moral charge of certain topics and terms leads to an atmosphere of self-censorship and a narrowing of the spectrum of opinions. Wokism is also accused of reducing complex social problems to simplistic good-evil schemes and neglecting important nuances, such as the principle of performance or the laws of the markets.

Another point of criticism is the so-called "cancel culture", which can be associated with wokism. This is the practice of publicly ostracizing and socially or economically sanctioning people or institutions who have violated the principles of wokism. Critics see this as a form of mob justice that undermines constitutional and democratic principles and leads to a climate of fear and conformity.

Proponents of wokism, on the other hand, argue that this criticism often comes from those who do not want to give up their own privileges. They see the movement as a necessary correction of historical injustices and a means of creating a fairer and more inclusive society. This gives the impression of left-wing and communist ideologies, such as egalitarianism to the detriment of the principle of performance. At the same time, the woke backward-looking view prevents a constructive approach to the present and future for society.

The effects of wokism are felt in many areas of public life. In politics, it has led to an increased focus on issues of social justice and broken down traditional left-center-right schemes. Many companies have launched diversity and inclusion initiatives in order to be seen as "woke" and to avert potential criticism. In the culture and entertainment industry, there are increased efforts to ensure diverse representation and to prevent so-called stereotypical representations in public.

An important aspect of wokism is intersectionality - the idea that different forms of discrimination and oppression are interwoven and cannot be viewed in isolation. This concept, originally developed by legal scholar Kimberlé Crenshaw, has helped to bring the complexity of identities and experiences of discrimination more massively into all areas of social life and to subject society to restructuring. Thus, it now seems impossible to rationally criticize or question certain groups or individuals, while other people are already guilty per se, whether by chance of birth or because they are among the top performers in society.

The intersectional perspective emphasizes that people can often belong to several marginalized groups at the same time and therefore face specific, overlapping forms of disadvantage. For example, a black woman can face both racism and sexism, with these experiences overlapping in a way that is different from the experiences of white women or black men. This fragmentation of previously existing possible interest groups, such as "black human rights activists" or "women's rights movements", leads to the organization of real political goals in their current form being shattered and rendered ineffective.

This view has led to a less than useful view of alleged privileges or disadvantages. In wokist thinking, there is often talk of a "privilege check" - the request to become aware of one's own social position and the advantages associated with it. This can lead to complex and sometimes difficult discussions, as privileges are often relative and context-dependent, such as the achievements made.

It must be clear to everyone that equal educational and development opportunities do not automatically lead to equal results and life paths. The equalization sought by wokism therefore intends to question the principles of performance and the privileges that arise from it. In my opinion, it should not be forgotten that left-wing currents have always produced privileged elites.

Another central concept of wokism is the idea of "structural" or "systemic" discrimination. According to this idea, prejudice and disadvantage are not just the result of individual actions, but are deeply rooted in social structures, institutions and cultural practices. This view leads to the demand for comprehensive, systemic changes that go beyond individual behavioral changes. These ideas clearly question and threaten the democratic and liberal ideas of our society. Wokism naturally derives its alleged right to overthrow the existing order from its moral superiority, without realizing that it is thereby granting itself privileges that it clearly denies other groups.

The demand for structural changes has led to controversy in many areas. In business, for example, there are debates about quotas and positive discrimination as a means of promoting diversity. Qualitative aspects are put aside or reduced to absurdity when selecting employees. In the education system, there is discussion about the need to fundamentally revise curricula and teaching methods in order to better take woke perspectives into account. Any form of performance assessment or school competition is declared to be discrimination. What is ignored is that this leads to a loss of performance and willingness to learn in children. The first consequences of this can already be seen in the level of education.

Another important aspect of wokism is the emphasis on "lived experience" - the lived experience of marginalized groups. This perspective assumes that people who are themselves affected by discrimination have special expertise in relation to these experiences, which must be respected and recognized. This often leads to the demand to give marginalized voices a greater voice and to include them in decision-making processes. However, it must be taken into account that the affected groups themselves do not always have their say, but that those who feel morally called upon and who are endowed with the privilege of public perception emerge as advocates.

The emphasis on lived experience has also led to criticism, however. Skeptics argue that this can lead to a hierarchy of opinions based on identity categories and makes objective, fact-based discussions more difficult. The question is also raised as to the extent to which individual experiences can be generalized.