The Un-Woke and the Anti-Diversity Crisis

PUBLICATION SERIES: Cultural Complications of the Progressive West.

Read-time: 6 minutes.

BLOG TITLE: The Un-Woke and the Anti-Diversity Crisis

In this article, my attention centres on addressing the concept of ‘unconscious bias’ within the ‘woke’ community. Their focus is on combatting systemic injustice, and to promote inclusivity by challenging those who hold privilege and power. However, I argue that their actions inadvertently perpetuate their own biases, which stems from their own privilege and significant political power and influence. The issue arises from the inability to recognise their role as political power-holders in shaping the social narrative through the expectation of compliance. They aim for diversity and justice, but I see the movement as a threat to diversity.

It is also an antithesis to intellectual progress, as intellectual advancements are built on the foundation of open-mindedness, diverse perspectives and critical discourse.  

In a paradoxical turn of events, what is particularly worrying is that they are unwittingly contributing to the very issues they aim to resolve. Despite a subjectively assumed moral conviction, I believe there is a gross lack critical self-analysis, which is imperative to reduce bias, foster empathy and raise objectivity.  

This written piece sheds light on the idea that people who believe themselves to be politically and ethically virtuous, too can unintentionally perpetuate cultural chaos and disunity through exclusionary practices.

Wokeness

Being truly 'woke' requires profound self-awareness of the philosophical and political implications of words and actions including consciousness on how one’s beliefs and behaviours impact broader societal issues particularly in the context of social justice and equity. This includes their own words and actions first, not just of others. People in this category perceive themselves to be victims of various issues but often overlook their own subjective biases. Translating the definition of wokeness into practice, means you should be able to recognise yourself as having the capability to also become potentially oppressive. The complexity of bias lies in its subtle nature making it challenging to recognise. Only the truly intellectually ‘woke’ are capable of addressing this, and for those in the ‘woke’ community achieving this level of self-awareness is an honourable challenge. The ability to even be ‘woke’ is only a position that can be held by the most privileged members of the world and with privilege comes the exercise of power.

If, as a self-labelled ‘socially conscious individual’, you employ oppressive tactics and moral punishments like cancel culture and public shaming, you are not demonstrating political wokeness in the spirit of democracy. Philosophically, rather, you are shedding light on the human being’s propensity for hypocrisy, corruption and the desire for power which acts out quite ignorantly once given the chance. If you are forcing speech, de-platforming, and blocking public discourse to enforce the acceptance of what you think to be better thoughts, you embody the very characteristics you criticise. If you cannot recognise this, you lack the intellectual skill of critical thinking and analysis required for true liberation and leadership.

Unwoke

I prefer to use the term un-woke to refer to those who represent the characteristics of social and political unconsciousness defined in this article.

The activism of the un-woke is instead reducing tolerance for diverse views and opinions. We witness this phenomenon daily as our capacity for mutual tolerance diminishes. Friction arises among family, friends, colleagues, and anyone who dares express ideas that deviate from the prevailing political narrative of the moment. This is not good. It is especially bad for diverse people who share space in the same communities, for cohesion and for social well-being. Diversity is on a trajectory. From diverse perspectives and ideas, to diverse cultures, diverse ethnicities and diverse practices.

To provide an illustration, it is highly likely that a progressive Western woman with privileged access to Western ways of thinking would have markedly distinct social and political perspectives compared to a more recently arrived migrant woman, from a more traditional society. Are they able to share their diverse stories openly without fear of cancellation or social rejection? Given the wide trajectory of the diversity of views, in this case, who gets to say that their reality and perception of truth is more valuable than the other? If it is the non-migrant or progressive-Westerner, which is likely, given the socio-political power dynamics of Western society, then are they not being anti-diversity, culturally insensitive, or even racist? And if the self-titled more progressive woman believes their perceptions warrant more moral value, then the only outcome for the migrant woman, is silence and self-censorship. This is anti-diversity.

This narrow-minded approach disregards unique individuals and unique viewpoints by people born from differing life experiences. We cannot learn from diverse life experiences without tolerance for diversity despite the possibility to offend. Philosophically, there are some universal truths - we are the same because we think differently.

The outcome, is that the diversity-tolerance pendulum will swing right back to the beginning. This is the opposite of what un-woke-folk intend, hence the seriousness of this problem. Exclusionary practices are antithetical to inclusivity and pose a potential threat to the foundations of the progressive democracies we have been fortunate to enjoy thus far. This is a political disaster for a members of a progressive society, and instead can lead to renewed suppression and marginalisation.

Social Power and Bias

While the existence of bias is widely recognised, research analysing push for diversity and inclusivity through bias reduction training across workplaces, yields mixed results. Paradoxically, it may lead to decreased tolerance for diverse opinions and ideas, undermining the intended goals of promoting diversity and inclusiveness. Recent literature has shown widespread forced implementation diversity, equity and inclusion training has not witnessed the intended success. In essence, people adapt their behaviours in society, often to mirror the culture they perceive as contributing to their advancement in social hierarchies.

Human rights scholars, like myself, and many other ethical social scientists are dedicated to mitigating socio-political disadvantages through academically organic approaches rather than imposing our perspective as authoritative.

While it has become a trend to label those with uninformed views as privileged Westerners, diverse perspectives often come from diverse communities and the less privileged within the Western societies. So, it really becomes yet another movement by the most privileged within society controlling the narrative for the most vulnerable and marginalised. The world is ever-evolving, and right now it seems the pendulum has swung past the sweet spot of advantageous democratic progressivism. Thus, the issues raised in this article underscores the critical need to keep talking about the pervasive projection of unconscious bias in the Western world for two key reasons…

1.     Diminished Tolerance

Paradoxically, as our progressive communities and societies advance in multiculturalism and diversity, we seem to be growing less accepting of diversity, that is diversity of views, ideas and behaviours which do not meet our sense of acceptable. This alarming trend contradicts the significant strides we've made in enhancing the quality of life for individuals throughout history in the Western World.

2.     Intellectual enrichment and bias mitigation

To augment our intellectual capacity, and refine our critical thinking skills, we must conscientiously acknowledge and reduce our biases. Engaging in profound reflections on how innate biases can obscure the path to truth is a fundamental aspect of sound scientific or healthy interpersonal practice. These entrenched biases impede our ability to genuinely listen to the perspectives of others and embrace a multi-cultural and diverse society.

Conclusion

The exploration into unconscious bias and the paradox of ‘wokeness,’ and its potential ramifications of oppressive tactics to compel speech, sheds light on the complex dynamics of modern society. It underscores the pressing need for us to confront our hidden biases, not only to promote fairness, diversity, and equity but also to uphold the principles of a true democracy—one that embraces the richness of diverse perspectives despite the potential for offence.

To truly thrive intellectually and mitigate bias, we must engage in profound self-reflection and acknowledge the diversity of thought that brings such richness to our lives. A more inclusive and equitable future demands a commitment to open dialogue, vulnerability, and intellectual courage. Only then can we bridge the gap between the privileged and the marginalised, foster genuine acceptance of diverse viewpoints, and uphold the democratic ideals that have shaped our societies throughout history. 

TEST

How to know if you are problematically biased. It is important to recognise where your biases lie as your judgements are likely to be clouded when discussing certain topics. Unquestioned biases are inherently problematic.

Ask yourself:

Do you become emotional when the topic arises? (Angry, worked up, upset, anxious).

Does your heart start to beat more than usual?

Are you feeling nervous?

Are you rapidly planning your argument response instead of listening presently to what the other person’s ideas are?

Do you judge others harshly without the same judgement on yourself?

Are you trying to say what you want and talking over the other person?

HOW THE WOKE ARE BIAS

They achieved vocal freedom because of the ability to speak freely, and yet they are silencing the speech of those they do not agree with.

They think their thoughts and ideas are more important than other peoples thoughts and ideas.

They believe themselves to be morally superior because of the issues they support, yet they try to make their thoughts known by shouting, yelling, screaming and ordering silence.

Dr Esha Lovrić.

 I am an independent academic social scientist and social constructionist scholar in the field of sociology. I reject scientific dichotomies and all ethical scientists should.