The weaponising of woke-ism

There can be few phrases more abused — and weaponised — than “woke” and “cancel culture”. They are thrown around with abandon to denounce ideas, people and things one does not like, and it has become commonplace to see this presented as the major threat to free speech in the West.

“With woke-ism, aren’t we becoming too sensitive about what we can or cannot say? Aren’t we silencing opinions we don’t like?” a radio host asked me this week.

It struck me as a strange question: in a society such as ours with such deeply imbedded issues of race, gender and inequality, surely a heightened awareness and responsiveness about these social justice concerns is a good thing?

Woke is an old word, with roots in the language of hip jazz musicians, meaning one is aware of hot issues such as race and gender. But the word has been weaponised to denounce people as obsessed with these issues, especially when they are uncomfortable and challenging.

Out of that flows cancel culture — the drive to ostracise those who do or say something considered unacceptable, such as expressing racism, misogyny or homophobia. In particular, it has increasingly been used against celebrities, calling them to account for doing or saying things that cross a line into the socially unacceptable.

But many of those we are told are victims of cancel culture — one thinks of politician Helen Zille or author JK Rowling — have the loudest voices, are the most unstoppable and have the platforms and the resources to ensure they are heard all over the place. If there is a problem with someone’s capacity to speak out and be heard, it is not these individuals.

MOB RULE

For those who denounce cancel culture, it is mob rule by self-righteous guardians of what is acceptable. For those who embrace it, it is the only weapon they have to hold to account the powerful who express bigotry. All we are doing is boycotting the reprehensible, they would say — and we are entitled to do that.

There are instances where cancel culture appears to have got out of hand. One thinks of academic Adam Habib, who ran into trouble for using a slur word in the context of saying why such words are not acceptable. That incident blew over and he wasn’t cancelled.

Or New York Times writer Donald McNeil, who was fired after 45 years at the newspaper for quoting someone else using the “N-word” in a discussion with students. He has since conceded his words were inappropriate and his departure

was the result of “a series of disasters and blunders”.

In fact, many of the incidents often cited as the worst examples of cancel culture don’t stand up to scrutiny. They are used for political point-scoring rather than pointing to real acts of silencing. There is nothing wrong with calling out bigotry and ostracising those who express it. Social opprobrium is one of the best antidotes.

The problem arises when it is petty and targets people for views that may be offensive or unpopular but no more than that. Or when it takes no account of context, such as the study of classic works of literature that use terms now considered offensive.

This is particularly true on campuses, which should be havens of free discussion. Similarly, it is a problem when the action takes the form of a social media mob and becomes harassing and threatening. It is important to distinguish between calling out the powerful and using social media to threaten violence and spread hate. The former is part of open debate, the latter is inimical to it.

BOOK BANNINGS

This issue detracts from one of far greater concern: the wave of book bannings at schools and libraries in some US states.

PEN America recorded 2,532 instances of book bannings in the past year, involving 1,648 titles and 1,260 authors. The vast majority of these dealt with LGBTQ+ themes, sex education or issues of race and racism. It includes many informational books that deal with teen pregnancy, sexual assault, puberty or the history of slavery. This was no longer just the work of anxious parents; it had become a “fully fledged social and political movement, powered by local, state and national groups”.

The town of Jamestown, Michigan, defunded its library because it was stocking such books. Maus, the extraordinary, awardwinning graphic book about the Holocaust, was banned in some places for bad language and nudity. Gay teachers in Florida are not allowed to discuss their partners.

It is a shocking proxy for the US cultural wars, a triumph of ignorance and intolerance over an open society, a frontline in the battle to save US democracy.