5 ms·

There's no such thing as a woke corporation. Corporate wokeness is an illusion created by PR departments to maximize market share.

drnonsense42 4y ago
I find this take ridiculous. This is the liberal equivalent of “no systemic racism”. What would you call it when a significant portion of your company believes in woke values and promotes some of these individuals into influential roles where they have power to pressure people? I’m sure their influence on product always rationally optimizes shareholder value and is not influenced by their beliefs.
AlexandrB 4y ago
Yes. There's a good video on this topic: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=06yy88tLWlg https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=06yy88tLWlg
zmgsabst 4y ago
If that were true, Disney’s shareholders would be a lot happier.
high_5 4y ago
So you're implying LGBT are fundamentalist that corporations bowed to too.
- meatsauce 4y ago
  A mob of LGBT allies will make your life a living hell if you don't pledge total fealty, so yes, they are fundamentalists and zealots of their own little religion.
  - happytoexplain 4y ago
    It seems unreasonable to essentially accuse the group "gay and trans people" of being a religion of fundamentalist zealots who demand total fealty.
    - meatsauce 4y ago
      Sure it is, and no where did I do such a thing. I merely pointed out the mob attacks that occur when you don't put the pride flag above everything else.
    - Banana699 4y ago
      - plsbenice34 4y ago
        I can't control who I am attracted to - that is a psycho-biological issue, not a cultural one. I may simultaneously be LGBT but hate 'LGBT culture', actively dislike pride parades, etc. You are failing to distinguish between the sexual orientations and the cultural movement, in a way that I find discriminatory. It is offensive stereotyping.
Banana699 4y ago
Alternatively, there is such a thing as a woke corporation, and there is such a thing as an anti gay corporation, and they might even be the same corporation at different points in space and\or time. Wokism is a dominant religion (not demographically) in the US, therefore corporations there pray to wokism and observe its rituals. Anti gay islam is a dominant religion in the Middle East, therefore corporations there will do the same things they do to wokism elsewhere, if grudgingly. This is quite different than what the employees of a corporation might think, which will depend on the cultural milieu they were raised in. The corporation itself, however, is an emergent non-human intelligence, and it tends to abhor non-profit-related conflicts.
- ziddoap 4y ago
  Genuine question: what is the definition of 'woke' (in the context of how you're using it)? Dictionary tells me it is "alert to injustice in society, especially racism". But the vast majority of time I see someone talk about 'wokeness' or 'woke culture', they use the word in a derogatory manner. So I'm guessing the 'woke' mentioned is not "being alert to injustice" (as it is a pretty reasonable stance to be alert to injustices). In your case, you go as far as to call it a religion. Is being alert to injustice really a religion in your view? Or, how are you defining 'woke' and 'wokism'?
  - FooBarBizBazz 4y ago
    - ziddoap 4y ago
      What does any of this have to do with how the word 'woke' was used? The word 'woke' has one applicable dictionary definition (and not thousands of years of teachings, etc.) which doesn't align with how I see it used. I'm not asking for a theology lesson, just how OP intended their usage of 'woke' to be interpreted by the reader. This isn't some 'gotcha' question or start of a debate. I literally am just not understanding what 'woke' is intended to convey, outside of the dictionary definition, especially when used in a derogatory or negative way. Your comment does literally 0 to answer the question, and I fail to see how it is even related.
jaywalk 4y ago
Look up ESG scores.
happytoexplain 4y ago
This is an almost-true fallacy levied against all ostensibly benevolent corporate behavior, not just "woke"ness. The theory is that, since profit is supreme, they must engage in benevolence only when it directly or indirectly increases profits (usually via the long-term game of public image). However, it's a fallacy because those making these decisions are not "corporations", but, in fact, humans, and many of them (optimistically, most of them) are not sociopathic monsters, and therefore like the idea of engaging in benevolence. (You can make an argument that all benevolence is merely atavistic tribe/family-protection behavior on a long enough timeline, and that's another topic, but it is a good analogy for the "true benevolence" vs "false benevolence" theory of corporate behavior). All desires inescapably inform decisions to some extent, no matter how shrewd a person is - therefore, genuine benevolence plays a part in corporate benevolence. It's unrealistically pessimistic to assume all corporate benevolence is purely false, and it seems like that accusation is frequently used to make shallow arguments about social politics.
hypertele-Xii 4y ago
That's like saying magicians don't exist, they're just people who present the illusion of magic for entertainment. Yeah, that's what 'magician' means. You literally explained what a woke corporation is, while simultaneously denying its existence.
FerociousTimes 4y ago
Third party PR firms in particular to bring in more cash and expand their business at the expense of everyone's sanity and the shareholders' financial health.

drnonsense42 4y ago

I find this take ridiculous. This is the liberal equivalent of “no systemic racism”. What would you call it when a significant portion of your company believes in woke values and promotes some of these individuals into influential roles where they have power to pressure people? I’m sure their influence on product always rationally optimizes shareholder value and is not influenced by their beliefs.

AlexandrB 4y ago

Yes. There's a good video on this topic: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=06yy88tLWlg https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=06yy88tLWlg

zmgsabst 4y ago

If that were true, Disney’s shareholders would be a lot happier.

high_5 4y ago

So you're implying LGBT are fundamentalist that corporations bowed to too.

meatsauce 4y ago
A mob of LGBT allies will make your life a living hell if you don't pledge total fealty, so yes, they are fundamentalists and zealots of their own little religion.
- happytoexplain 4y ago
  It seems unreasonable to essentially accuse the group "gay and trans people" of being a religion of fundamentalist zealots who demand total fealty.
  - meatsauce 4y ago
    Sure it is, and no where did I do such a thing. I merely pointed out the mob attacks that occur when you don't put the pride flag above everything else.
  - Banana699 4y ago
    - plsbenice34 4y ago
      I can't control who I am attracted to - that is a psycho-biological issue, not a cultural one. I may simultaneously be LGBT but hate 'LGBT culture', actively dislike pride parades, etc. You are failing to distinguish between the sexual orientations and the cultural movement, in a way that I find discriminatory. It is offensive stereotyping.

Banana699 4y ago

Alternatively, there is such a thing as a woke corporation, and there is such a thing as an anti gay corporation, and they might even be the same corporation at different points in space and\or time. Wokism is a dominant religion (not demographically) in the US, therefore corporations there pray to wokism and observe its rituals. Anti gay islam is a dominant religion in the Middle East, therefore corporations there will do the same things they do to wokism elsewhere, if grudgingly. This is quite different than what the employees of a corporation might think, which will depend on the cultural milieu they were raised in. The corporation itself, however, is an emergent non-human intelligence, and it tends to abhor non-profit-related conflicts.

ziddoap 4y ago
Genuine question: what is the definition of 'woke' (in the context of how you're using it)? Dictionary tells me it is "alert to injustice in society, especially racism". But the vast majority of time I see someone talk about 'wokeness' or 'woke culture', they use the word in a derogatory manner. So I'm guessing the 'woke' mentioned is not "being alert to injustice" (as it is a pretty reasonable stance to be alert to injustices). In your case, you go as far as to call it a religion. Is being alert to injustice really a religion in your view? Or, how are you defining 'woke' and 'wokism'?
- FooBarBizBazz 4y ago
  - ziddoap 4y ago
    What does any of this have to do with how the word 'woke' was used? The word 'woke' has one applicable dictionary definition (and not thousands of years of teachings, etc.) which doesn't align with how I see it used. I'm not asking for a theology lesson, just how OP intended their usage of 'woke' to be interpreted by the reader. This isn't some 'gotcha' question or start of a debate. I literally am just not understanding what 'woke' is intended to convey, outside of the dictionary definition, especially when used in a derogatory or negative way. Your comment does literally 0 to answer the question, and I fail to see how it is even related.

jaywalk 4y ago

Look up ESG scores.

happytoexplain 4y ago

This is an almost-true fallacy levied against all ostensibly benevolent corporate behavior, not just "woke"ness. The theory is that, since profit is supreme, they must engage in benevolence only when it directly or indirectly increases profits (usually via the long-term game of public image). However, it's a fallacy because those making these decisions are not "corporations", but, in fact, humans, and many of them (optimistically, most of them) are not sociopathic monsters, and therefore like the idea of engaging in benevolence. (You can make an argument that all benevolence is merely atavistic tribe/family-protection behavior on a long enough timeline, and that's another topic, but it is a good analogy for the "true benevolence" vs "false benevolence" theory of corporate behavior). All desires inescapably inform decisions to some extent, no matter how shrewd a person is - therefore, genuine benevolence plays a part in corporate benevolence. It's unrealistically pessimistic to assume all corporate benevolence is purely false, and it seems like that accusation is frequently used to make shallow arguments about social politics.

hypertele-Xii 4y ago

That's like saying magicians don't exist, they're just people who present the illusion of magic for entertainment. Yeah, that's what 'magician' means. You literally explained what a woke corporation is, while simultaneously denying its existence.

FerociousTimes 4y ago

Third party PR firms in particular to bring in more cash and expand their business at the expense of everyone's sanity and the shareholders' financial health.