As usual , insightful and accurate. Ambiguous agendas in politics are common since messages are microtargeted to different audiences with echo chambers without the risk of endangering sympathies from other circles. However, these polarize people without even noticing it. Elites embed their interests in norms, codes and institutions to always bolster their authority and power over the masses and their interests are pretty clear.
'Woke' will mean just what Humpty Dumpty said in Through the Looking Glass: "A word means what I want it to mean, nothing more, nothing less.". In other words, everything, and nothing, for maximum damage.
Unfortunately, court challenges and federal intervention are the only recourse we Albertans have to roll back the hot mess Danielle is creating as she "unwokes" Alberta to pacify her dwindling power base.
Are you overthinking Poilievre? My impression, he is following the Republican 2025 Playbook and after the Trump backlash his handlers decided to slowly introduce the policies. Allowing them to present the worst as a necessity and downgrading or dismissing the negatives.
We can try to intellectualize til the cows come home, but the fact seems to be that " woke " to the Conservatives means anti-Liberal. The party since Harper convinced the Progressives that he was the king of the castle, made it the REFORM PARTY by another name has simply complained about the liberal agenda, without ever stating clearly what they see that as being.. They still respond to posts about the Liberals and or Carney as being "woke", calling people Libtards that question what the CPC (REFORM) agenda is. I understand many people are hurting and angry about some of the issues in Canada, but they have swallowed the REFORM/Maple MAGA mantra that it is all the fault of the Liberalsand specifically Trudeau. What Jared Wesly describes, as he says, is an extreme result, but when we know the Poilievre has been endorsed by the Republican power structure in the USA and that Poilievre and his MPs have voted against every progressive Bill over the last 9 years or so, why should anyone doubt that under his leadership we will not see much of what happened in the US? Comparing Poilievre and Smith who are the same under the skin, is not really helpful because Smith doesn't seem to have the patience of Poilievre. We in Alberta know exactly what can happen if we get a conservative government that is supported by antiProgressive electors who are angry at Ottawa. Don't be fooled by all this CPC blather. The woke thing was not an editorial mistake, they did not want that put out there in English. I guess they do not realize that a good number of people beyond Quebec's borders actually speak, read and understand French very well.
Although I agree with you that terms should be clearly defined and articulated, I do think you have projected a "worst-case" scenario here with scant evidence that this will actually play out. Trump is a singular character who lies without ceasing, and has no respect for democratic institutions or processes, up to and including the American electoral system. Though Poilievere promotes policies and certain framing of problems with which I disagree, he has given no indication that he doesn't respect democratic processes. He is certainly no Trump (Smith seems much more similar to Trump than Poilievre, in my view). Casting Poilievre in this light stokes unnecessary fear.
Further, your article brushes past why this rhetoric can be and is being used opportunistically by Poilievre: because there is a "there" there when it comes to so-called "wokeness." "Woke" used to mean simply "enlightened" or some version of "attuned to and caring about the inequities impacting marginalized groups." But now, to subscribe to "woke" - I prefer the more precise term "critical social justice" ideology - means to sign off on a very specific framing of problems like racism, homophobia, etc. and very specific solutions to these problems. The best post I have read on this is by Helen Pluckrose titled "Defining 'Woke' and 'Wokeness.'" https://www.hpluckrose.com/p/defining-woke-and-wokeness?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2
What is frustrating about your article is that you don't appear to recognize how thoroughly critical social justice ideas have permeated Canadian academic, government, and media institutions, and your baseline assumption seems to be that any criticism or pushback against critical social justice ideology in these institutions would be bad (or, more specifically, a reflection of racism, homophobia, transphobia, etc.). This attitude unfortunately contributes to our inability to dialogue honestly about these issues, both within and across the political aisle, and pushes people to the ideological extremes.
To be clear, I am not a fan of Poilievre, and I'm voting for Carney. But I think it's important to be precise and realistic in our criticisms, not inflaming or overblowing things.
I was worried about University of Alberta discontinuing DEI, but after reading further, I like their choice of "access, community and belonging" to help avoided the political polarization, particularly here in Alberta.
Just give the UCP time and they will then be against "ACB". The point is that regardless of what kind of words one uses, they are against any kind of equity for human beings in anything. Sad to say, the UCP is very much Maple MAGA. It is a very bad situation here in Alberta, but until the inmates are no longer running the asylum, we will have to brace and fight them all the way.
As usual , insightful and accurate. Ambiguous agendas in politics are common since messages are microtargeted to different audiences with echo chambers without the risk of endangering sympathies from other circles. However, these polarize people without even noticing it. Elites embed their interests in norms, codes and institutions to always bolster their authority and power over the masses and their interests are pretty clear.
'Woke' will mean just what Humpty Dumpty said in Through the Looking Glass: "A word means what I want it to mean, nothing more, nothing less.". In other words, everything, and nothing, for maximum damage.
Anti woke is pro-racism and homophobic. Enough of the euphemisms. Call it what it is.
Unfortunately, court challenges and federal intervention are the only recourse we Albertans have to roll back the hot mess Danielle is creating as she "unwokes" Alberta to pacify her dwindling power base.
Are you overthinking Poilievre? My impression, he is following the Republican 2025 Playbook and after the Trump backlash his handlers decided to slowly introduce the policies. Allowing them to present the worst as a necessity and downgrading or dismissing the negatives.
This migh be interesting to some:
https://andrewkoster.substack.com/p/woke-and-the-corruption-of-a-perfectly?r=33x0d
We can try to intellectualize til the cows come home, but the fact seems to be that " woke " to the Conservatives means anti-Liberal. The party since Harper convinced the Progressives that he was the king of the castle, made it the REFORM PARTY by another name has simply complained about the liberal agenda, without ever stating clearly what they see that as being.. They still respond to posts about the Liberals and or Carney as being "woke", calling people Libtards that question what the CPC (REFORM) agenda is. I understand many people are hurting and angry about some of the issues in Canada, but they have swallowed the REFORM/Maple MAGA mantra that it is all the fault of the Liberalsand specifically Trudeau. What Jared Wesly describes, as he says, is an extreme result, but when we know the Poilievre has been endorsed by the Republican power structure in the USA and that Poilievre and his MPs have voted against every progressive Bill over the last 9 years or so, why should anyone doubt that under his leadership we will not see much of what happened in the US? Comparing Poilievre and Smith who are the same under the skin, is not really helpful because Smith doesn't seem to have the patience of Poilievre. We in Alberta know exactly what can happen if we get a conservative government that is supported by antiProgressive electors who are angry at Ottawa. Don't be fooled by all this CPC blather. The woke thing was not an editorial mistake, they did not want that put out there in English. I guess they do not realize that a good number of people beyond Quebec's borders actually speak, read and understand French very well.
Although I agree with you that terms should be clearly defined and articulated, I do think you have projected a "worst-case" scenario here with scant evidence that this will actually play out. Trump is a singular character who lies without ceasing, and has no respect for democratic institutions or processes, up to and including the American electoral system. Though Poilievere promotes policies and certain framing of problems with which I disagree, he has given no indication that he doesn't respect democratic processes. He is certainly no Trump (Smith seems much more similar to Trump than Poilievre, in my view). Casting Poilievre in this light stokes unnecessary fear.
Further, your article brushes past why this rhetoric can be and is being used opportunistically by Poilievre: because there is a "there" there when it comes to so-called "wokeness." "Woke" used to mean simply "enlightened" or some version of "attuned to and caring about the inequities impacting marginalized groups." But now, to subscribe to "woke" - I prefer the more precise term "critical social justice" ideology - means to sign off on a very specific framing of problems like racism, homophobia, etc. and very specific solutions to these problems. The best post I have read on this is by Helen Pluckrose titled "Defining 'Woke' and 'Wokeness.'" https://www.hpluckrose.com/p/defining-woke-and-wokeness?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2
What is frustrating about your article is that you don't appear to recognize how thoroughly critical social justice ideas have permeated Canadian academic, government, and media institutions, and your baseline assumption seems to be that any criticism or pushback against critical social justice ideology in these institutions would be bad (or, more specifically, a reflection of racism, homophobia, transphobia, etc.). This attitude unfortunately contributes to our inability to dialogue honestly about these issues, both within and across the political aisle, and pushes people to the ideological extremes.
To be clear, I am not a fan of Poilievre, and I'm voting for Carney. But I think it's important to be precise and realistic in our criticisms, not inflaming or overblowing things.
This is a truly dystopian scenario. We cannot let our country follow in the same direction as the U.S.
I was worried about University of Alberta discontinuing DEI, but after reading further, I like their choice of "access, community and belonging" to help avoided the political polarization, particularly here in Alberta.
Just give the UCP time and they will then be against "ACB". The point is that regardless of what kind of words one uses, they are against any kind of equity for human beings in anything. Sad to say, the UCP is very much Maple MAGA. It is a very bad situation here in Alberta, but until the inmates are no longer running the asylum, we will have to brace and fight them all the way.