The Emerging Religion of Wokeness

https://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/wokeness-and-the-new-religious-establishment

I too see a lot of religious sentiment and thinking within the "woke". It has collective sin, declares you unclean and in need of repentance, pushes a caste system, etc. But unlike most further developed religions, it lacks a path to salvation.

I also agree with the writer that as secularism against traditional religion has advanced, wokism had been filling the space these religions once dominated.

 

Being a life long liberal and atheist, I have seen this woke religion rise from around me. It used to be conservative christians wanting to ban everything from rock and roll to porn to videogames. It used to be the religious right that wanted to control our sex lives, segregate races, get us fired for having politically incorrect opinions, etc. But now, with the retreat of them, they are being replaced by "woke" people who claim to be liberals, but are very illiberal.

In twenty years time, will there be Woke Cathedrals springing up?

I also have noticed that under the extreme political polarization of today, many liberals refuse to see or acknowledge this religion growing in their midst. It leans heavily into virtue signalling and claims to stand for the repressed, while not actually doing so, and actual liberals should notice this.

 

Nature abhors a vacuum, and the human mind, without a regular religion to fill it, will go out seeking one.

 

“Certain segments of wokeness also exhibit pantheistic traits in that they view the natural world as divine. For these adherents particularly those who identify as vegan, green, and in some cases, indigenous - nature unmolested offers harmony within the individual and among the growing multiplicity of identities that make up humanity.”


Hey look! It’s me! A new stereotype about my lifestyle choice! Awesome!

 

It's 100% a religion. The same mechanics as all such 'youth-oriented cults' of the past century. Moonies, Shri Rashneesh, Hari Krishna, Twelve Tribes, Christian Fundamentalists, etc etc. And it's the same kinds of people who are vulnerable to being exploited.

It starts with disenfranchised youth - primarily from middle class and upper class dysfunctional homes, searching desperately for validation and purpose. They in turn influence the academics around them, who spread it further afield in the general demographic. In this instance, that demographic is the well heeled white athiest, who regard themselves as a special kind of sophisticate. Immune to uncouth rusticity via their own brilliance, rather than the accident of their birth. People who've long since lost the substance provided by traditional social obligations, and who are generally quite empty and lost (though most aren't aware that that's what drives them to interfere so much).

 

I am inclined to agree. It seems that we liberal atheists won the war against repressive religion only for so many of us to fall directly into the same trap, only now being the ones pushing it.

I don't know what the strategy should be for those of us who are still liberal minded, and not "woke".

I don't want "woke" religion to repress us as traditional religion did before it, but I also don't want to return to repressive traditional religion.

Why must there always be somebody trying to tell me how to control my life, what I must say or not say, what I can listen to, where I can go, what I can eat or drink and when, how I can style my hair or what clothes I can wear, who I can be friends with or have sex with, etc ?

Be it the religious right or the woke left, why won't they just live and let live?

 

On the conservative side, we have always believed atheists to be a religious belief in themselves as gods. Or, another way to put it, above anyone who believes in a literal God in Heaven. A caste system of sorts. This opinion has always been rejected by atheists. Yet, we see the "Woke" religious people are joining up with the atheists in their critical race theories and other wokeisms (LGBTQ). Heck, I don't think I'd put women in their anymore. The woke left seem to have thrown them under the bus.

You say will there be Woke Cathedrals? They already exist in the liberalist of liberal Christian Churches such as the United Methodists Church. I know many of them personally and it's hard to see Christ in them anymore except they do get involved with helping the poor and illegal aliens with necessities. The problem is they also work to undermine immigration laws at the same time.

 

I would agree that the natural world is as close to the divine as I can get. Or want to get. And I don't want to 'cancel', 'fire' or 'ostracize' anyone...I just wish that humans displayed more decency to one another.

 

However, there's that vacuum that has to be filled. It's like in a classroom, when the teacher stops talking, several students start talking which is a natural fill the void of sound. It's like clockwork. The Chinese put it in terms of yin-yang. Right now, wokeism has swung to the forefront because of corrupt politicians, media and big tech. The conservatives have woken up to the wokeism and are beginning to fight back.

 

I agree. And that won't come with "woke" religious persecution of others.

There is a good motive at the base of a lot of woke people. They want to be good people, and they want to be seen as good people.

But too often that leads to them pushing division and injustice instead of defending against it. Too often it leads to racial prejudice, for example, instead of the undoing of it.

 

It may be that we're something like Pragmatic Anarchists. That may be the best way to describe those of us who remain loyal to the Left's ultra-pragmatic origins - before it was hijacked by wealthy and highborn capitalists.

I find that living my own Leftism (collectivism etc), while remaining liberal (in regards to the politics, class, and beliefs of others), is a useful combination. It doesn't help with the slow regression of Western Govts back into quasi theocracies, but it makes day to day living pretty comfortable

 

Woke-ists might call themselves atheists, but only they believe that to be true. A bona fide atheist sees the religiosity of wokism from a mile away.

 

Humans display as much decency to each other as it is safe to do. When we trust that our decency will not be abused, we pour it out without limit.

 

While I agree with your post in general, I'm not sure I can agree with this.

Given the effect of their ideology (ie, demonstrable negative impact on the human condition), it would seem the motivation is more about self-satisfaction, than its benefit to others.

 

I think it starts from a social need to be seen as a good person. I think we can see the exact same motivation in followers of traditional religions.

I agree that much if that is about self-satisfaction. It is about image. The people who go on Facebook or Twitter to grandstand their support for various good social cause may not be so likely to help the downtrodden without a spotlight.

This reminds me of the CAFE event I attended here in Toronto years ago, that was swarmed by unthinking virtue signaling drones protesting and shouting it down (ultimately ending with them pulling the fire alarm) just because CAFE had some speakers who were speaking about male suicide and the lack of shelters and support for male victims of domestic violence.

The protestors decided to declare these speakers and anyone who went to hear them every sort of evil. The chant was "Racist, Sexist, Anti-Gay, MRA go away". Nobody at CAFE had even mentioned race or sexual orientation whatsoever. There was no misogyny in the venue that I could see.

But these people felt righteous in their chanting and demonization of these people. Not very different from the psychology of witch trials, etc.

 

One does not have to be controlled by any belief/trend that comes down the the pike.One does not need to buy into any of it. The important thing...IMHO.......is to remain objective.....evaluate the current trends in religious beliefs ...........for what hey are............be informed but uninvolved. Each "religion" that has come down the pike is a for m of Group think.. (self and mutually reinforcing).......and fosters that ............ans it becomes easier to manipulate a group once they buy into an idea . Perhaps it is as basic as not letting the need to belong over rule sound reason............


Also .....just follow the money............as no religious group can function without money. Ther eis a good reason that the Catholic church is one o f the richest entities on the planet ...

 

I'd rather be decent to someone and they abuse it rather than me holding back. Live and learn

 

Perception is everything. Perhaps those people are good people and those who criticize them just don't see it as 'good'.

 

But if we are discussing the goodness of those who are 'woke', what are they fighting back against?

 

Only because you have the immense and unusual privilege (by world standards) to be able to absorb the losses - and because it would not threaten your survival. That is an absolutely TERRIBLE parameter for decency. It's the equivalent of saying: "If you don't toss money around like an aristocrat, you're a bad person".

 

Their 'goodness' can only be qualified in the results. If the impact of their 'charity' equates to a net diminishment of the human condition (and it most definitely does), then goodness cannot be any part of the motivation.

 

The result of that 'goodness'. IOW, increasing disempowerment, loss of merit and justice, increasing homelessness, increasing mental illness, increasing isolation, etc etc.

 

I disagree. Motivation and effect are not necessarily the same. As they say "The road to hell is paved with good intentions".

 

Only if you're a small child, or brain damaged. We all understand cause and effect, from quite a young age.

The most unworldly and least educated peasants on earth, know not to make life 'too easy' for the next generation - because they know it will threaten the survival of the village. There's no way that educated First Worlders can claim innocence or non-intention, given that. They would have to be profoundly stupid for that to be true. Alternatively, so self-interested that the impact of their actions on others is of no consequence.

 

Not really. People can be and often are wrong. People make mistakes too. There is a reason why criminal law, for example, requires both act and intent.

I don't think that is true. I actually think the cycle of hard times making strong people, strong people making easy times, easy times making weak people, and weak people making hard times is pretty much inevitable, sadly.

Lots of people are profoundly stupid by this measure. Perhaps even most.