top of page

The 'War on Woke': the most woke thing in politics right now.

It’s genuinely hilarious seeing Conservative politicians throw this word around, not realising they’re the most woke people in politics by their definition.

There seems to be an extra stigma attached to anything they brand as ‘woke.’ A proper sneer, screw yer face up type of stigma. Preposterous by any stretch of the imagination.

Anything that encourages someone to alter their language and be a bit more cautious about what they say or do is stubbornly dismissed as utterly ridiculous.

And as I’ll explain, it’s basically become an excuse to be a bawbag.

But what actually is woke? Where did it come from?

‘Woke’ is defined simply as being cautious or alert to social injustice and discrimination. It’s been used for many decades, stretching back as early as the 1930s from an artist-led movement standing up to racial prejudice in Africa.

‘Woke’ evolved from ‘wake,’ as folk singer-songwriter Marcus Garvey encouraged Ethiopians to “Wake up!” and “Let Africa be the constellation of nations”… or blues singer Lead Belly, who encouraged people to “stay woke” when recording his song ‘Scottsboro Boys’ – a landmark court case dealing with racism and right to fair trial, setting legal precedence for years to come.

In modern times, ‘woke’ initiatives can be found in mental health protection. Encouraging people to be kind, accepting people for who they are, and thinking carefully before you say something about someone that’s potentially hurtful.

‘Woke’ in action can be found in the leadership of the movement to tackle violence against women and girls. You might be aware of the ‘Don’t Be That Guy’ campaign in Scotland, urging men to call out sexist and misogynist language that their mates use. It encourages men to be alert and conscious of the societal injustices that women face on a day-to-day basis and, by doing so, altering their behaviour to create a wave of meaningful societal change; one that respects women and makes them feel safe.

You might see campaigns at the football in the hope of stamping out racial discrimination in Scotland… like when teams line up before a match once a year, right across Britain, and hold up a big red card in symbolic support of the ‘Show Racism the Red Card’ campaign. This is woke in action as well.

All positive messaging… and yet there’s an increasing stigma attached to being cautious and alert to being woke or, by definition, social injustices and discrimination in our society. Part of this came from the feeling that it’s an attack on comedy and that people aren’t allowed to make certain jokes any more, even if they aren’t ill-intended.

Years ago this was called ‘political correctness gone mad,’ used by those who felt a sense of injustice that they can’t say anything they’d like. It often follows with a claim to ‘free speech’ and the wars that our forefathers fought for us to have a truly democratic state.

They’re just having a laugh, as many would say, and that comedy has an important role in a happy society. If we don’t have humour and entertainment then our lives would be miserable.

All to an extent though… most of us also believe that some things simply demand caution. Racism, for example, is the most striking example of something that people find too far now. Calling out a racist joke is now entirely uncontroversial.

This development isn’t a distant memory but… and being in such a raw era of a developed society, I do sense danger in this rapidly emerging phenomenon that demonises people who keep in line with it.

Because those who enjoy discrimination are finding ways to dismiss this development – with the most effective tool right now being the ‘woke’ card.

Why’s it so effective? Well, the definition of woke has broadened significantly.

Take the messaging at the Conservative Party Conference for instance. The term was chucked around a lot despite a lack of clear understanding of what it actually means.

Michelle Donelan MP, who talked a lot about the “slow creep of wokeism,” was all over the place in her definition when asked by Sophie Ridge on Sky News.

She first admitted it could be interpreted differently on many accounts and that there are multiple definitions of the word. This is the first tell of deliberate deception.

She then went on to explain what hers was:

“I think of it in two buckets if you like. The first bucket is the denial that facts are facts. The idea that facts are open to interpretation… I think we should be sticking up for scientific facts and rigour. Then there is the movement that their values and opinions are above everybody else’s. And they can enforce them and silence out other people’s views.”

First of all, you’d think someone who is championing unquestionable accuracy and “rigour” would be clear on what the definitions of terms in question are accurate.

Imagine saying to someone that we need to have absolute precision and logical thinking in politics, only to then make your point on something that’s completely ambiguous. That’s like being at the pub when your mate suggests bringing along a pal you don’t really know… in the hope he’ll swerve it you go on about how much you don’t like them because of how bitchy and judgemental they are. You’ll then supplement the case for patching by slagging off their patter and talking about how annoying they were that one time you met them briefly.

In other words, being incredibly bitchy and judgemental about them.

Then we come to the ‘denial that facts are facts’ part of her definition… which even aside from this having absolutely nothing to do with the actual meaning and origins of the word, is also absolutely hilarious coming from the cohort of political thinkers that are in denial about how pressing the climate emergency is despite decades of scientific research pointing unequivocally to urgent action.

Just like her pals at Talk TV, the major anti-woke proponents, who shrug their shoulders at videos of the planet burning and tell us to get over it.

“It’s just the weather,” as was often claimed on the hottest year on record.

Giving Donelan the benefit of the doubt, I don’t think she actually believes this is the definition of woke… I’m sure she’s referring to the conversation surrounding the policy proposal of gender Self-ID and its mere association with the word ‘woke.'

Although relevant in the conversation of modern wokeism, its citation is a bit disjointed in how we actually define the word.

Does woke mean… taking a stance on whether Trans people exist? Denying that humans can be non-binary? This would at best be incredibly reductive.

Where its mention does come into accurate effect is with the cultural tensions that came with this conversation. It lead to an rise in people thinking we’ve overstepped the mark in how sensitive we are to certain types of discrimination. There’s been a pushback in the upward trajectory of cautiousness in the language we’re using.

The Equality Act in Britain sees gender identity as a protected characteristic in terms of what we can’t discriminate against… so now that has been called into question (evidenced by many requests by politicians and members of the public to reform the Equality Act), it’s opened the door to interpretation on all the other protected characteristics as well. Discrimination against foreigners, people of certain religions and many other things has become more normalised (at least from what I can see on media platforms).

I couldn’t believe what I was hearing when I turned on the news around the time of that same conference and people were genuinely defending the words of Enoch Powell in that infamous ‘Rivers of Blood’ speech all those years ago. One of the most openly unapologetic declarations of racism resurfaced 50 years later and justified on many fronts by people in our day and age. Incredible.

A speech that, by the way, should’ve been buried deep in our memory out of shame.

The second part of the Conservative ‘woke’ definition is the most ridiculous though.

They’ve become so accustomed to vehemently attacking the idea of wokeness that they’re trying to force everyone else to believe anything associated with it is total nonsense. They often use patriotism as a justification, like saying something woke is a betrayal of ‘British values.’

…and they genuinely cannot see that this is exactly the same thing their accusing ‘woke’ others of. Mind-boggling levels of lacking self-awareness.

A reminder, the second condition of Donelan’s woke reads: “…the movement that their values and opinions are above everybody else’s. And they can enforce them and silence out other people’s views.”


The same Government removing long-preserved democratic pillars, appointing an ex-Prime Minister who isn’t accountable in Parliament, arresting young people for campaigning against new oil and gas fields, ignoring internationally binding treaties to protect human rights, branding peace-seekers in the Middle East as hate-filled lunatics, encouraging the likes of Tommy Robinson to fight people they don’t like on Remembrance weekend, stoking up cultural tensions by demonising migrants… that couldn’t be closer to the Conservative definition of woke.

A messed up, gut-wrenching parallel version of woke.

Its meaning has been tossed about like a wet trackie and nobody knows what it actually stands for anymore… but this authoritarian approach to governing the country undeniably comes under the exact definition they give to what they’re claiming to be fighting against. It’s literally bonkers.

And I’m sorry… this new role they’ve conjured up does the icing for me. Esther McVey has been appointed as the new ‘Minister for Common Sense,’ aiming at realigning the minds of the British people to more traditional values. That is the most ridiculous and, more importantly, woke thing I’ve ever seen by their understanding of it. It’s parallel universe woke.

They should rename it ‘boke,’ cos everything the word has become is making everyone constantly fighting a horrific whitey.


bottom of page