In brief

• X user Tim Heaton gives a useful and easy to follow description of wokeness as neo-Marxism, highlighting power dynamics, identity politics, and equity.

• Wokeness focuses on “oppressors” and the “oppressed”. Performance gaps within identity groups are seen as evidence of oppression.

• The revolution to dismantle societal structures often results in poverty, corruption, and tyranny.

• Public understanding of terms like “equity” is lacking. Even asking about these terms can lead to being criticised..

Defining “Wokeness”

“Wokeness,” as defined by X user Tim Heaton, is neo-Marxism. It emphasises power dynamics, identity politics, and equity outcomes, distinct from mere political extremes.

He dissects the core principles of wokeness, especially its emphasis on power dynamics, identity politics, and equity-driven outcomes. 

Heaton’s structure of wokeness

This worldview is one where power serves as the primary societal organising principle. These power dynamics are filled with bigotry, bias, prejudice, and self-interest between oppressors and the oppressed. 

Individuals are perceived and addressed solely through their membership in identity groups (IGs), which are continually expanding and demanding allegiance. 

This ideology not only obscures individual differences, which challenge the legitimacy of IGs, but also establishes a rigid social hierarchy where each IG is oppressed by those above it, with intersections between IGs facing heightened oppression. 

Perceived performance gaps within IGs are deemed conclusive evidence of oppression, fueling the weaponisation of empathy to enforce submission from higher IGs to lower IGs.

Furthermore, wokeness propagates the idea of what Heaton describes as a coalition of the oppressed (COO), comprising everyone except the top identity group (TIG). This group consists of white, male, heterosexual individuals primarily from the western world. 

COO prioritises “lived experience” as the sole legitimate basis for discourse, effectively silencing the TIG and advocating for the overthrow of TIG-controlled “systems” by force. 

This movement rejects equality of opportunity and merit-based advancement, branding them as tools of oppression perpetuated by the TIG, and instead champions equality of outcome, termed “equity,” pursued through initiatives such as DEI, CRT, social justice, and anti-racism efforts.

Perfect equity, as envisioned by wokeness, necessitates a total systemic revolution led by COO against TIG, aiming to dismantle existing societal structures deemed irredeemably contaminated by the TIG influence. 

This restructuring extends to fundamental concepts like truth, goodness, knowledge,  traditional family structures,, scientific methodologies, , logical reasoning, and various fields of study and cultural expressions. 

The envisioned outcome of this revolution is the dissolution of the TIG’s power, returning it to an undifferentiated collective termed “the people.” This heralds the onset of a utopian society, in theory. However , from the perspective of those who are more right leaning, the utopia is elusive and thereal-world consequences are often marked by widespread poverty, corruption, incompetence, and tyrannical leadership. 

Added insight 

While we agree with Heaton’s general thrust, we suggest a few points are missing from the analysis. For instance. rallying words and terms like “equity” and “systemic racism” are not well understood by the public. It is our observation the media does a very poor job in explaining what these “woke” terms mean. 

In regards to “equity”, most assume it is the same as “equality”. When asked “Do you agree with ‘equity’ in the workplace”, for example, many, if not most, will likely agree. 

A more fulsome explanation of the term, which says that identity trumps merit, often triggers scepticism in many who may not otherwise have been aware of the stark difference between equity and equality. 

Offering any critique or analysis of these terms and concepts will often result in you being labelled as a hater or bigot by society’s self appointed intellectual gate-keepers.