BY DOMINIC WIGHTMAN
To combat ‘wokeness’, one must first define it. One should assess levels of wokeness based on criteria that highlight divisive factors, ideological rigidity, and rejection of open dialogue, with the intention of identifying these traits as problematic.
Otherwise, you’re merely pinning jelly to a wall.
Below, as a helpful aid to DOGE, I have created the Wightman Wokeness Valuator (WWV)*. New DOGE Secretary Mr Musk can use it for free for the betterment of the free world and to permanently remove the smile from the faces of some of the miscreants who have employed critical theory far too successfully for far too long.
WWV Detailed Criteria for Evaluation:
1. Promotion of Division vs. Unity:
High Wokeness (3 points): Actively promotes division by emphasising identity categories (e.g., race, gender, sexual orientation) over common humanity. Advocates for policies or rhetoric that segment society into groups, often fostering animosity or distrust between them.
- Example: Supporting initiatives that treat individuals primarily as representatives of their identity group rather than as individuals, such as a recruitment policy that prioritises gender representation over qualifications.
Moderate Wokeness (2 points): Recognises social inequalities but sometimes inadvertently promotes division through group-focused narratives. In discussions, may fail to encourage unity or common goals.
- Example: Advocating for awareness of cultural issues but framing them in ways that create an us-versus-them dynamic, such as only discussing diversity within the context of competition for resources.
Low Wokeness (1 point): Pursues an inclusive approach that emphasises shared values and interests among all individuals, fostering collaboration and unity regardless of identity.
- Example: Promoting initiatives that bring diverse groups together to work on common issues, such as litter picking / reaching out to the lonely / addressing local needs.
2. Reaction to Disagreement:
High Wokeness (3 points): Displays intolerance of opposing viewpoints, labelling dissenting opinions as harmful or offensive. Uses cancel culture or shaming tactics against those who express different beliefs, thus stifling open discussion.
- Example: Publicly calling for boycotts or social ostracism against individuals or organisations or countries based on dissenting opinions, such as rallying against a restaurant due to its owner’s political views.
Moderate Wokeness (2 points): Shows defensiveness in the face of opposing views but may occasionally engage in discourse. Can express frustration with differing ideologies without shutting down the conversation entirely.
- Example: Responding passionately to criticism but leaving space for some dialogue, such as arguing passionately in a forum while still responding to counterpoints.
Low Wokeness (1 point): Encourages respectful discourse and appreciates differing viewpoints, viewing disagreement as an opportunity for growth and understanding.
- Example: Engaging constructively with those who disagree, facilitating dialogues that lead to shared learning experiences, like hosting a panel discussion that includes representatives from all parties.
3. Use of Language:
High Wokeness (3 points): Embraces overly politically correct language and engages in ‘newspeak’ that can limit meaningful communication. This approach may obscure actual meaning in favour of conforming to ideological norms.
- Example: Using convoluted jargon that alienates individuals who may not be familiar with the terminology, such as relying on technical terms in conversations about mental health that confuse the audience.
Moderate Wokeness (2 points): Strives for inclusive language, but often falls into the trap of excessive terminology or jargon. While the intent is positive, the execution can hinder clear communication.
- Example: Choosing complex phrases to describe simple ideas while sometimes losing the audience’s understanding, like using the term ‘intersectionality’ without clearly explaining it.
Low Wokeness (1 point): Prioritises clarity, straightforwardness, and accessibility in communication, ensuring that messages are understood by a wide audience, regardless of their background or beliefs.
- Example: Using plain language that conveys messages effectively without unnecessary complexity, such as explaining planning issues in straightforward, truthful terms during council meetings.
4. Victimhood Mentality:
High Wokeness (3 points): Promotes a pervasive victimhood narrative, often blaming systemic oppression for personal or societal shortcomings. This approach can foster a sense of helplessness among individuals or groups.
- Example: Advocating policies that emphasise victim status over personal responsibility, such as supporting initiatives that solely focus on historical injustices without encouraging personal agency.
Moderate Wokeness (2 points): Occasionally adopts a victim perspective but recognises the need for personal accountability as well. This duality can create a mixed message about empowerment.
- Example: Identifying systemic issues while also acknowledging individual efforts to overcome challenges, such as discussing social inequalities while highlighting success stories of individuals who have navigated their circumstances.
Low Wokeness (1 point): Emphasises personal agency and responsibility, encouraging individuals to take ownership of their circumstances rather than blaming outside forces for failures or hardships.
- Example: Promoting self-empowerment initiatives that focus on individual capacity to effect change, such as offering mentoring programmes that encourage personal goal-setting and achievement.
5. Response to Accountability:
High Wokeness (3 points): Engages in performative allyship, focusing on appearances rather than genuine understanding or commitment to social issues. This often results in actions that lack meaningful impact and may be more about social validation.
- Example: Participating in social justice events solely for social media visibility rather than investing time in deeper community engagement, like attending protests for the sake of posting on Instagram without following up on the issues addressed. More bothered about social credit than social progress.
Moderate Wokeness (2 points): Supports social change but often lacks a deep understanding or consistency in their commitment. These individuals may engage in activism but can be selective in their participation based on trends or peer influence.
- Example: Supporting movements on social media without taking substantial actions that demonstrate true commitment or understanding of the issues, such as sharing posts about Labour’s farm inheritance tax rip-off but not attending marches.
Low Wokeness (1 point): Advocates for meaningful action that is rooted in a genuine understanding of social issues. Engages in consistent, substantive efforts to effect change, prioritising results and community impact over appearance.
- Example: Committing time and resources to local organisations, participating in discussions that deepen understanding, and fostering lasting relationships within the community, such as volunteering regularly at a rugby club and developing partnerships for long-term sponsorships.
6. WWV Scoring System:
- Each criterion can be rated on a scale from 1 to 3 (1 being low, 2 moderate, 3 high).
- The total score can categorise individuals on a scale that reflects perceived levels of problematic wokeness:
- High Wokeness (13-15 points): Strongly aligns with divisive concepts; fosters social fragmentation and intolerance. This category is considered deeply problematic due to the behaviours and beliefs identified.
- Moderate Wokeness (7-12 points): Some acknowledgment of issues with occasional promotion of divisive narratives; has potential for re-evaluation but currently contributes to ambiguous discussions.
- Low Wokeness (3-6 points): Advocates for unity, open dialogue, and personal responsibility; poses a more constructive approach to social issues.
*The science of calculating the amount of woke should really be called triggernometry but some bright sparks already came up with that name and run a successful podcast using it.
Dominic Wightman is the Editor of Country Squire Magazine and the author of Dear Townies, Arcadia and Truth among other books including ‘Conservatism’ which publishes later this month.