Woke: Empathy vs. Strategy
/By Don Varyu
Oct 2023
When the first issue of Cascade Review was coming together more than five years ago, contributor Shawn Ross asked me if I had heard of the term “woke.” I said that I had not, and he explained (although the meaning has certainly morphed some since then.)
Recently, contributor Kildo sent me an email about “woke”, citing this definition:
“(to) become more aware of social injustice”, and he added that there is, “happiness that all human beings deserve and pursue regardless of race, creed, color, religion, gender or sexual orientation. The desire for equality, equity and justice is universal.”
Hooray!—I endorse those sentiments. But I also took his words as a gentle rebuke to my previous criticism of the term “woke.” My criticism was not those of a right-winger, equating “woke” with “clueless” or “dangerous.” Instead, as a liberal, I simply assert this is the wrong path to achieve that “equality, equity and justice.”
New York Times writer David Leonhardt recently spoke about this. He noted that three passionate liberal movements of the last dozen years—Occupy Wall Street, Black Lives Matter and #metoo—have fallen flat in terms of any legislation or real structural remedies. In other words, expressing outrage and generating empathy is a necessary first step—but means nothing unless solutions are proposed, and results realized. In each of those campaigns, failure was assured once the participants refused to create any form of organization, or even designate a leader.
To cite an effective but unfortunate example of “success”, let’s look at the “other team.” More than 40 years ago the Federalist Society was founded to--in simplest terms--destroy liberalism in law and government. For most of the decades since, it toiled quietly and tirelessly, forming student groups at 200 U.S. law schools, and creating practicing lawyer associations in 90 cities. They bided their time until the right moment came to reap their rewards—and that moment arrived with the presidency of Donald Trump. The Federalist Society vetted (if not created) three full lists of Trump’s Supreme Court candidates. The three confirmed justices are Federalist Society members, joining two others already on the high court. Of Trump’s 51 appellate court appointments, 43 are members of the society. Work and dedication paid off—to the great detriment of the country.
On lower levels, the sustained efforts by Republicans to dominate legislatures in even red states was built by patient gerrymandering of voting districts.
This kind of dedication doesn’t have to be confined only to right-wing loonies. There is more than enough energy and money for liberals to do the same thing. But we don’t. We spend too much time in rage and lament…slyly eyeing each other to determine who might be lacking sufficient wokeness…and if found wanting, move quickly to banish them from the tribe. It’s exhausting, without any real benefit.
Let me make two other broad generalizations:
1. No one is unaware of social injustice. Everyone knows about the original sin of American slavery…the battle of women to win the vote…and the constant abuses still suffered by minority groups. This is not news.
Of course, the majority of Americans are empathetic. But it must be said that a minority thinks these abuses are just fine--part of the process of “making American great again.” Either way, if someone on TV says, “people need to realize!...”—believe me, they already realize. That job is done. So stop.
2. The people bemoaning the injustices frequently are not the people actually suffering from them. Sociologists have a relatively new term for this: “elite capture.” It describes the academics, media personalities and celebrities who “take up the cause”--while remaining tone deaf to the real-world. The prime example came in the aftermath of the George Floyd murder, where angry protestors first screamed, “defund the police!” The liberal elite quickly adopted the slogan. This was preposterous on the face of it, but more importantly a downright betrayal of the people in minority neighborhoods like the one where George Floyd lived. Surveys showed those people were looking for more policing, not its extinction. Their primary concern was protection for their property and their families. You know—exactly the things that those practicing “elite capture” take for granted.
All this leads in my mind to a simple dichotomy: empathy, no matter how heartfelt, is necessarily backwards looking, whether the injustice came two centuries or two minutes ago; it’s past tense. I concede It’s only natural to feel empathy in these cases. But empathy alone solves nothing. It does not develop strategies or find solutions.
In short, I say stop wasting so much time looking to the past, and focus on the future.
This simple (simplistic?) dichotomy prompted discussions with contributor Linda Byron. She said my prescription was too black and white. For her, being reminded of fresh instances of injustice is helpful because it prompts her to more action.
But even here, it begs the question: what actions? Beyond what is felt, how will things change? Certainly, a lot is already being done. You can donate to a candidate or a charity, even work at a local food bank. There are a thousand individual outreaches, from a church bake sale benefitting refugees, to the massive apparatus of the ACLU. But it seems there is nothing on the concerted scale of a Federalist Society.
Well, that’s not entirely true. Liberals already have such a structure, built and funded. It’s called the Democratic Party. But how that structure operates is anything but unified. In its middle, the Joe Bidens of the party fight for better jobs, better pay, rebuilding infrastructure, preserving law, deterring climate collapse. These are universal goals, aimed at improving life for everyone.
But for a distinct fringe of the Democratic party, this is never enough; it may even be misguided. Because to them, what matters most are identity politics. Who is suffering from discrimination…or bias…or physical abuse? I know those complaints are heartfelt and real…but to me, they’re also getting in the way. They describe suffering by subsets, and ignore the country as a whole.
Recently, news coverage has overflowed with the issue of transgender treatment for kids. This is not unimportant; but according to Reuters, the issue impacts just .0005 per cent of American kids. Compare that to the 60% of kids under the age of 6 whose childcare is paid for by parents. Those costs are soaring…and more than half the country consists of so-called “childcare deserts”, where no care is readily available at any cost. How much media attention is directed to this?
Like many other maladies, adequate childcare is a problem that needs to be fixed. But that’s far less likely to happen as long as the cacophony of identity grievances drowns out the discussion of remedies. “Woke” is not the same thing as being awake.
Look forward, not backward. Without strategy, empathy is for naught.
Have a comment or thought on this? Just hit the Your Turn tab here or email us at mailbox@cascadereview.net to have your say.
