pull down to refresh

Just had to share one more worthwhile newsletter from Woods.

Tom Wood's Newsletter

I don't want to mention names, because I have no interest in another fight, but there's a certain person you probably know who goes around calling dissidents like you and me "woke right" -- a meaningless and foolish term, but one he returns to again and again.
The right-wing dissidents he targets are "woke," he thinks, because among other things they believe in oppressors and oppressed, just like Marxists and the left.
What he doesn't mention, and probably doesn't know, is that long before Karl Marx and his "woke" descendents came along, the classical liberals of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries had developed their own class theory.
Marx himself noted that "no credit is due to me for discovering the existence of classes in modern society or the struggle between them. Long before me bourgeois historians had described the historical development of this class struggle and bourgeois economists the economic anatomy of the classes."
So in fact there is nothing inherently "Marxist" about noting the existence of classes, or of oppressors and oppressed. Marx himself admits that others perceived these phenomena long before he came along.
The classical liberal theory of classes was that the oppressors were the ruling class who populated the state apparatus, and the oppressed were the ordinary citizens who were expropriated by that apparatus.
(The late historian Ralph Raico discusses the classical liberal theory of class in an article called "Classical Liberal Roots of the Marxist Doctrine of Classes.")
Simply because someone uses language Marx used, or says something that sounds -- superficially -- like something Marx said, doesn't make that person "woke." As we've said, Marx actually adapted his theory of class from others, and furthermore Marx had a habit of saying things that might have been true had his subsequent analysis not been hopelessly confused.
For example, Marx had a theory of exploitation. It was entirely wrong. It is therefore not "Marxist" to adopt a correct theory of exploitation -- as in, the state exploits peaceful participants in the private economy. I realize the word "exploitation" appears in both theories, but that is where the similarity ends.
Thus I am unmoved by the accusation that I am "woke right."

More from the email

Yesterday I mentioned poor Senator Tim Kaine, who evidently despises the fundamental ideas of his own country, and who recently mocked those ideas in the U.S. Senate.
In particular, Kaine is appalled that people believe that "rights don't come from laws and don't come from the government, but come from the Creator."
Common sense will tell you that if you have no rights until government grants them to you, then you really have no rights at all, because what government gives you, government can also take away.
Kaine is a perfect example of the kind of person we mean when we say we are ruled by people who hate us.
I don't know exactly what "woke right" means.
If "woke right" is being applied to people like JD Vance, who are class conscious and raising awareness of the problems of the lower-middle class, then I think that term is being misapplied.
However, I do think there is a "woke right", and that would contain certain variations of conspiracy theorists, mens rights activists, nativists, etc, that see the world entirely through an identitarian perspective
reply
We've lost the plot on the word "woke". I forget who started the woke right thing. No one I care to listen to that's for sure. If I recall it is one of these guys that came from the left during the Trump takeover of the Republican party.
Basically people that hold to natural rights, anarchism, and classical liberal ideals seem to be called "woke right". Like if you don't support every action of the Israeli government. Or you don't support whatever nonsense Trump is doing this week.
It doesn't seem to have much of a definition.
reply
That's why Wesley Yang's "successor ideology" might be a better term for what wokism was originally meant to describe: #1211545
reply
James Lindsay. That's the guy I think Woods is talking about. He's the guy I was thinking of. I've never been impressed with him. If I'm not mistaken he's best known for doing those fake sociology studies that tricked a bunch of people in academics.
reply
Ah, yes. James Lindsay is known for publishing a bunch of fake papers in various progressive journals, to show that they have zero publication standards.
This is something I'll always respect him for, but in the end it is just a stunt and doesn't mean that his other ideas necessarily carry weight.
reply
Yep.
The number of bad faith actors is really getting old to me. Its everywhere and pretty much all the time. In faith circles, bitcoin, politics, and many other areas. The part that is most frustrating to me is how many people do not seem to realize that they are acting in bad faith. By that I mean they don't care about learning and growth. They do not care about the truth. They only care about self promotion and seeming to "win" whatever current fake battle they are in.
My view is that the only way to win is to not play that game so that is what I try to do. I want to be fair. I don't care if that makes my "position" weaker. Its frustrating when you have to defend people that you actually disagree with because the things being said are so off base. It gets so old.
reply
It's the ethics of social media, man. Gotta secure that follower count!
reply
I think its also that "we" have become addicted the emotion of outrage. On top of the human tendency to scapegoat. We can blame most of our problems on some outside group or movement. That can be Trump supporters, the woke, the Jews, the Christians, Christian Nationalists, and for bitcoiners the state and fiat.
There are rational reasons why things happen but more often than not we get over-simplified theories that make groups of us feel good about our in-group. I hear some people say things like this. They almost sound like they get it. Then they only point outward outside of their team when they say it. Its hard to see the flaws in your own team and realize we are all human and have the same weaknesses.
I really feel like a therapist to many of my friends. They get so spun up about the latest outrage. And its not just one of the teams. Its both. Its also in faith traditions where one group strawmans another. I have my opinions but this stuff gets absolutely stupid far too often. It is social media for sure and how traditional media has copied this human pattern of scape-goating.
Yep, it is. But, that's an excuse and I won't get us a pass on it. We have to learn.
I didn't mention this because it is so seldom discussed now. I remember hearing the phrase "stay woke" from the black activist movement back in the day. It then began to be used as a slur against the modern progressive movement. I don't think many people know the origins of the term. At least those using it the most don't seem to.
reply
I mean... I'm no expert but my dumb description of "woke" is a progressive left wing world view centered on post-modern deconstruction. So you have the belief that everything is is based on oppressor and oppressed. And on top of this the post-modern view on sexuality and gender. Many people that are in this camp have no idea that this is a descendant of Marxism.
As far as the right using the term woke, I don't think most of them know what it means. Its the new "liberal". Which just means you disagree with me. I still get called a liberal. And by that they mean a democrat. Most people are absolutely clueless on political thought. They merely mimic their influencer's talking points.
And these people have no right over my rights. Sorry, I don't care how much you love democracy. My rights are not up for debate and I don't care what you think about them. I care what God thinks.
reply