In recent discourse, a group of thinkers—most largely championed by James Lindsay—has begun publicly criticizing an ideology that they refer to as the “Woke Right.” The idea is that it is the right-wing equivalent of what has come to be understood as the “woke” parts of the left. Because of the vagueness of the word “woke,” Lindsay published this X thread explaining what exactly he means by “Woke Right.” However, for a shorter and simpler explanation, Lindsay offers the following rough definition:

Woke Right means you think people in your particular identity group are oppressed and need to band together in your identity group to fight back and take power against your enemies.

Perhaps there is an argument to be made that there is such a group, however, the use of “woke” for both sides shows that he is missing a key point. It is easiest to demonstrate with Lindsay’s stance on the recent immigration discourse where he claimed that:

You don’t want to hear it, but the slogan “America is for Americans (first)” is the Woke Right’s “black lives matter.” You can get really mad at me for pointing it out, but you should also try to reflect on the truth of what I’ve told you here.

This is the main thesis of the criticism of the Woke Right put into practice. The ultimate example of the Woke Left that everyone has largely understood was the Black Lives Matter movement of 2020. He’s now claiming that the “America is for Americans” movement is the same concept from the right-wing perspective. The logic is that both are defending a certain identity group against a different identity group, which seems sound enough, but what he is failing to understand is the difference between meaning and machinery. He is operating as if usage of the same or similar machinery means that the groups have the same or similar meaning. G. K. Chesterton answered this very problem well over one hundred years ago in his book Orthodoxy…..