3 ms·
The problem is, I think the people behind that mean well - they really do. But, unfortunately, in a mindcuffs echo chamber kind of way that is removed from the
by kleiba 4y ago
The problem is, I think the people behind that mean well - they really do. But, unfortunately, in a mindcuffs echo chamber kind of way that is removed from the rest of society. Of course, you could argue that this description fits the early stages of any grassroots movement. However, I think this is not grass roots at all - at this point, it's a loud minority.
And whether you agree with their position or not, I think, the woke movement is not proceeding very strategically. Granted, so far their approach - which basically boils down to "lots of pressure" - has been admirably successful. Yet, I don't think it's going to be sustainable. I see a real risk that the tide might be turning and a backlash will happen when the pressure gets too much on those that feel pressurized. This could destroy a lot of successes of the woke campaign, which could be avoided if those pushing these ideas tried to be appear less confrontational, matter-of-factly, and aggressive.
For instance, instead of presenting a proposal like the one hand at hand "top down" - which now meets a predictable opposition - it could be a more successful long-term strategy to get all of the affected people into the same boat first, and then move forward with strong support, rather than dropping suggestions for what appear like radical changes.
I suppose, though, that one reason this latter strategy hasn't already been pursued in some fields is that the opposition, like in this article, just immediately makes more sense, which then leaves little hope to get the changes implemented.
- notahacker 4y ago> For instance, instead of presenting a proposal like the one hand at hand "top down" - which now meets a predictable opposition - it could be a more successful long-term strategy to get all of the affected people into the same boat first, and then move forward with strong support, rather than dropping suggestions for what appear like radical changes. But this isn't a "top down" proposal to change everything. This is a 30 page document by an independent rankings agency that mentions "decolonisation" twice, both in sentences which advise mentioning the historical context of certain mathematical developments (congratulations, your lecture mentions in passing that Spearman came up with his rank correlation coefficient in part to justify his horrible racial hierarchy theories, but it's useful for other things too. Curriculum decolonised!) which I suspect some lecturers have been doing for years. Some people are going to disagree no matter what the change is and how it's suggested. Examples of actual "top down" proposals in the culture war come from government ministers insisting that the National Trust shouldn't be referencing Churchill's position on India in its Churchill exhibitions lest it paint him in a less-than-heroic light and threatening to make university funding contingent on universities hosting particular speakers. For some reason HN is convinced that student petitions and consultation documents are a more egregious abuse of power though...
- onos 4y agoWhat would you say have been the achievements of the woke to date?