Debating wokeness
Joseph Reagle
Our question(s)
What can we learn from this debate (in substance and style)?
Oxford Union
Since 1823
Oxford Union’s
notable speakers
audience consists of invited speakers, guests, and members (Oxford residents, especially students paying £270–£340 for terms or lifetime)
1 minute ring from start and before end; double ring at tend
between bells, members (£270–£340) can make
point of information
to ask or clarify an issue, which speakers can accept or reject
“points of order” objections to rules violations (e.g., slander and time)
audience exit via “aye” or “nay” doors as a vote (like House of Commons).
“This House believes woke culture has gone too far.”
Benjamin Butterworth (journalist)
Reaction
Was this an effective speech?
What
stylistic
and
substantive
things did you notice?
Substance (time stamps)?
opponents
long history of regressive ideas with a new label “woke”
critics are hyperbolic; asking for kindness & respect
“too far”
like legal rights of other groups (women, black, gay)
and those who opposed those now regret it
cancel culture
JK Rowling still has prestige, power, and money; it’s “accountability culture”
anti-woke brigade cancel people (like Vladimir Putin)
it’s about power
and asking for accountability of those that punch down
Style (time stamps)?
humor: self-deprecating
anecdote: early gay rights march
language: “not too far, but so (so) far to go”
James Lindsay (author)
Reaction
Was this an effective speech?
What
stylistic
and
substantive
things did you notice?
Substance (time stamps)?
satire (
argumentum ad absurdum
)
references (Habermas, Freire, Marx, Halperin, Foucault)
woke/academic jargon (appropriation, privilege, critical consciousness, estrangement)
analogy
Marx’s “socialism” to “social equity”
“dictatorship of proletariat” to “dictatorship of anti-racism”
(satirical) embrace of Ibram X. Kendi
Federal Bureau of Anti-Racism
cannot go too far: “must be perpetual, otherwise becomes the status quo” – Freire
Style (time stamps)?
humor
Hogwarts reference
satirical(?) self-deprecation: “looks great in tuxedo”
autobiographical
authority: book critical of CRT and “groomer” behavior
quod erat demonstrandum (Q.E.D., “which was proved”)
Conclusion
Wrap up
Did you see anything today that you’d likely
do or avoid
in your debate?
Review
↑