Woke and Wokeness, Ever-Changing Connotations

By Talia Perlstein ‘24
Meriam Webster defines ‘woke’ as someone who is “aware of and actively attentive to important societal facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice).” While the phrase's definition perfectly depicts someone in tune with the prevalent bigotry ingrained in today’s society, the word has lately faced some criticism. 

Recently, the term ‘woke’ has been misconstrued to describe someone or something as almost too socially aware, making their consciousness seem extreme. It has grown into this notion that nobody can do or say anything without being interrogated by the ‘woke police.’ 
Much of the retaliation that wokeness has faced also comes from cancel culture's concurrent rise. As people develop greater recognition of systemic racism, antisemitism, xenophobia, etc., the more they have also been quicker to “cancel” celebrities for doing or saying something that may not align with their concrete values of social justice and equality. 
One’s definition of cancel culture seems to vary significantly based on political alignment. Pew Research Center interviewed individuals with different political beliefs and how that impacts their view on cancel culture. One respondent, a female liberal democrat, defined cancel culture as “a movement to remove celebrity status or esteem from a person, place, or thing based on offensive behavior or transgression.” Alternatively, a male conservative Republican described cancel culture as: “trying to silence someone that does not have the same belief as you. Basically, [it’s] taking their First Amendment rights away. It violates affected people’s civil rights.”
The more people have become part of this ‘woke’ movement, the more cancel culture has expanded. Celebrities' pasts are being dug into, uncovering previous racist remarks they tweeted or anti-semitic characters they played in a movie. While holding people accountable for their actions is important, it also poses the interesting follow-up question: if the bigoted thing they said was deemed appropriate at that time, should it be canceled?
As the years have progressed, more things have been placed under the umbrella of bigotry, forcing people to be more conscious of what they say in fear of not being sensitive to a specific group of people. Today, people should be aware of the weight of their words and actions as we live in a more modern, progressive time. However, in the past, many things that would not be considered socially acceptable today were the norm at that time. 
A prime example of this is Disney. Disney has a history of antisemitism and racism, portraying different races in a caricature-esque way, cartoonishly emphasizing various features. Disney’s 1933 release of the film “Uncle Tom’s Cabin” is a prime example, playing into many racist stereotypes of African Americans. While this is an ignorant and unacceptable display from Disney, many argue, primarily individuals from the right, that this production was appropriate for the time. 
People and franchises such as Disney deserve to be held accountable for their actions, hopefully continuing to learn and improve from them. However, there is a significant difference between holding someone accountable and canceling them. To hold someone accountable is to make them aware of their wrongdoings and force them to face the consequences of their actions. However, it does not completely strip them of their voice, misconstruing the facts, as cancel culture often tends to do. Accountability allows the individual to speak their truth and have a productive conversation to learn from their wrongdoings. Cancel culture simply prevents the individual from stating their perspective, why they said or did that particular thing, rendering them unable to grow or develop. 
Maintaining that differentiation between holding an individual accountable and canceling them is important. By keeping them accountable, we better understand their actions, why certain people feel the way they do, and what can be done to help prevent this bigoted mindset from spreading. While there are always exceptions, rather than being quick to cancel people, it might be more productive to question them on why they did or said the thing they did and to open up the floor to a discussion where that individual can learn from their mistakes and why the thing they did is wrong. If that individual continues not to listen and remains ignorant, that is their fault and a testament to their negative character, but at least the conversation was there.
While it is important to be woke and understand the different tribulations that varying groups experience in society, it is also essential to hold these people accountable rather than be quick to cancel and silence them. Cancel culture only arouses anger creating more significant divides. Instead, it is necessary to come together to have those tough conversations so that we can understand each other a little bit better.