What is Woke? What is Equity? I can tell you for certain that neither of those terms includes the traditional American ideals of meritocracy, equality before the Law, and equal opportunity—YOU get to decide how far in Life you can go and what you can achieve. Woke and Equity are Marxist foundational concepts that are antithetical to our norms.
And while Equity has a lot of nuance beyond what one might think in coming across “equity” for the first time, it’s a head fake. Quick – equality and equity – the same? Nope, not at all. But that’s EXACTLY the Left’s intent. That you won’t even bother to think, “What, there’s a difference? Aren’t they the same”? If you DON’T think, they win. And, if it has to be said, they’ve wrapped a bunch of other words around it to support THEIR definitions so as to get you to ingrain THEIR concepts with THEIR verbiage so as to dislodge YOUR beliefs without you knowing it.
Is this the end-all be-all discussion of this issue? Absolutely not – while I know some, James Lindsay is the expert. We’ve covered Lindsay before. What I’m trying to do here is go from his short form to his long-form on the topic.
Let’s get started with the short coverage by Dave Rubin at Blaze Media (Reformatted, emphasis mine):
Ever wondered where the word ‘equity’ comes from? Well, here’s your answer. The left loves nothing more than to throw the word “equity” around, especially when addressing the ever-growing list of alleged inequalities in our society. But where does the word equity actually come from? American author James Lindsay — who Dave Rubin calls one of the best explainers of “the connection between [woke ideology] and Marxism” — told the European Parliament about the history of the word:
So, here’s the definition of equity, and see if it sounds like a definition of anything else you’ve ever heard of. The definition of equity comes from the Public Administration Literature. It was written by a man named George Frederickson, and the definition is:
an administered political economy in which shares are adjusted so that citizens are made equal.
Does that sound like anything you’ve heard of before? Like socialism? They are going to administer an economy to make shares equal. The only difference between equity and socialism is the type of property that they redistribute; the type of shares. They’re going to redistribute social and cultural capital in addition to economic and material capital.
And so this is my thesis when we say, ‘What is woke?’: Woke is Maoism with American characteristics.
Ok, so the idea is that Marxism was really an economic way of redistributing everything that “everyone would be equal. But “everyone’s not equal. There’s always the layer [of people] that has all of the stuff, and everyone else gets sort of nothing, and that creates ‘equity’ amongst the people.
The reason why I wanted you to see that clip is because now what we have seen out of the Democrats is not only that want to redistribute money” — we’ll take from them and give to them and giant government programs that create the cycles of poverty and all that. But they want redistribution when it comes to health. They want redistribution to virtually every part of your life, that they want equity at the end. So we want health equity, we want education equity, all of these things but you’re going to have to kill a lot of people to accomplish all of that.
We’ve already seen that in the Biden Administration by installing race quotas or priorities in different areas. Remember when Gov Sununu started the prioritization of COVID vaccine shots for Blacks over others? In fealty to Critical Race Theory, resources will not be earned but “managed,” and that management, in no small measure, will be in terms of your membership in a given DEI group as determined by “them.” We see schools that are dumbing down their curriculum as they know that certain “marginalized groups” (as a cover) aren’t achieving at the same student achievement levels as Whites and Asians, so they are getting rid of Advanced Placement Classes and erasing the idea of (and I’m dating myself here) Basic, Standard, Honors, and Advanced classes that stress academic rigor and the pace of coverage of materials (e.g., math, history, physics, English, et al).
Here as well (this sophomore Engineering student should be an an SJW concentration instead). Equity once again rears its ugly visage:
A second-year engineering student at Princeton University recently argued that since everyone’s high school experience is not the same, the Ivy must implement “equity-oriented solutions” to correct the situation. Yushra Guffer’s Daily Princetonian op-ed opens by stating an obvious truth: “[W]hile the University’s high standards of excellence and fast-paced environment may be valid goals to strive for, not all students are able to keep up with the pace.”
If you can’t keep up but demand that others “give you” an equal outcome, that should instantly be a message that you aren’t cut out to be an engineer. But this mid-wit can’t cast off her SJW outlook.
But her solution isn’t that students should buckle down and work harder if they want to continue with an Ivy League science-centered education. No, Princeton must accommodate those who can’t hack it.
The author has it exactly right – the newest generation has been so pampered and coddled that they EXPECT everyone to cater to their needs, thoughts, and whims.
“Princeton needs to re-evaluate the difficulty of the STEM introductory courses and implement equity-oriented solutions that directly address the different levels of student preparation,” Guffer writes. “After all, the level of academic rigor at Princeton can only be truly effective if all students are first able to work on a level playing field.”
And there you go – everyone MUST be evaluated and assumed to be at the same level – no matter how low that must be. So, you want this Engineering class to be designing your next plane?
Equity – everyone must be equal. That includes, for our kids anyway, making them all stupid at the same level. They are erasing meritocracy; they are erasing ability; they are erasing motivation, persistence, and everything else that makes us what our Declaration of Independence says is true:
…that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…
All of that adds up to Individuals having a Government—these American Maoists are attempting, like the Regressives before them, to reinstitute Rulers from the top so that we would be mere subjects and serfs. This is their process of recreating Feudalism (as in “a rose by any other name is still a rose”).
Here is another Lindsay intro to this topic:
And a long form intensive dive into it:
And remember, the MAIN idea of Communism is this: from “The Squatters’ Rights Concept Is a Marxist Attack on Property Rights.”
“The theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property.” – Manifesto of the Communist Party
And the modern version of this, thanks to “the Davos People”?
You will own nothing but be happy. Steve summarizes that up wonderfully:
