Recent reflections by esteemed journalist and author Lionel Shriver, published originally in Spiked, (Dec. 20th) and also in The Times (Dec. 30th), encapsulate a growing sentiment that the cultural phenomenon commonly referred to as “wokeism” may have peaked.
Across various non-left media platforms, there is a burgeoning belief that Donald Trump’s emphatic electoral victory marks a watershed moment, signalling the waning of “progressive” excesses that have dominated public discourse for nearly a decade. This sentiment, while cautiously optimistic, prompts a deeper examination of whether the so-called “woke wave” has truly crested, or if it remains a pervasive force in society.
For years, critics of woke ideology have been asking, with increasing exasperation, whether we have reached “peak woke.”
This ongoing cultural battle has been defined by contentious debates over topics that many find self-evident, such as the biological definition of gender, the role of racial discrimination in combating racism, and the merits of meritocracy versus identity-based advancement. Such debates have often felt disconnected from reality, consuming vast amounts of time, energy, and attention that could arguably be better spent addressing tangible societal challenges.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
David Brooks
“The problem with wokeness is that it doesn’t inspire action; it freezes it. To be woke is first and foremost to put yourself on display.
“To make a problem seem massively intractable is to inspire separation — building a wall between you and the problem — not a solution.”
David Brooks, Opinion Columnist at the New York Times (
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Shriver’s critique highlights the absurdity of some of these discussions. Questions like whether women can have penises or whether racial discrimination can solve racism have, for many, seemed to stretch the boundaries of reason.
Similarly, debates over whether Western civilisation—with its remarkable contributions to science, art, and technology—should be entirely dismissed as a disgrace due to the fact that many Western nations were historically involved in the slave trade, or whether extreme obesity should be celebrated as healthy, have left many feeling alienated.
Such controversies, Shriver argues, have been driven by a minority of ideological zealots who have monopolised public discourse, forcing society to grapple with questions that should never have warranted such prolonged attention.
However, Shriver’s optimism about the decline of woke ideology is tempered by a recognition that this cultural shift will not be swift or easy. She draws parallels to stubborn infections like athlete’s foot, which, despite aggressive treatment, often resurfaces. The analogy underscores the pervasive nature of woke ideology, which has infiltrated institutions across the board: universities, museums, NGOs, the legal and medical professions, cultural organisations, and even corporations.
The presence of “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (DEI) initiatives, once heralded as progressive advancements, is now being scrutinised for prioritising ideology over merit and shareholder interests.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Jay Sophalkalyan, via Twitter/X
“The first problem with woke ideology lies in its failure to take its theoretical assumptions to their logical conclusion and accept that every person is endowed with a spectrum of advantages and disadvantages from birth.
“These factors are infinite and boundless in scope. Take, for example, the unspoken privilege of being raised in a household with two supportive parents—a facet conspicuously absent in the discussions promoted by proponents of woke ideology.”
Jay Sophalkalyan, Perspective: The Moral Myopia of Woke Culture (March 25th, 2023).
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Encouraging signs do exist, states Shriver. Preferred pronouns are quietly disappearing from email signatures, she notes.
Furthermore, major institutions like the University of Michigan are scaling back DEI initiatives, and corporations like Walmart are dropping the term altogether.
Investors are challenging businesses that prioritise ideological commitments over financial performance, as seen in lawsuits against Target for its emphasis on DEI and environmental, social, and governance (ESG) goals.
In the media landscape, there is a noticeable shift: podcasts are becoming more permissive spaces for real humour (that is, jokes that involve people as their subject), and channels like MSNBC are experiencing declining viewership as audiences grow weary of hectoring rhetoric.
Legislative changes also signal a pushback against woke excesses. Red states in the U.S. are enacting laws banning gender-transition procedures for minors, and these laws are likely to withstand judicial scrutiny in the Supreme Court. Meanwhile, the language of public discourse is shifting, with terms like “retarded” re-entering casual usage as a form of rebellion against perceived linguistic policing. These developments suggest that the pendulum is swinging back toward a more balanced cultural landscape.
Yet Shriver warns against premature celebration. The ideological underpinnings of woke culture remain deeply entrenched, with many individuals and institutions having a vested interest in its perpetuation. For example, entire academic and professional roles are predicated on “decolonising” curricula or ensuring diversity quotas in hiring.
The resistance to change from these quarters will likely be formidable. Shriver points to the example of Claudine Gay, the former president of Harvard University, whose appointment was criticised as a product of box-ticking diversity practices. Such appointments, she argues, are emblematic of a broader “fungal” mindset that prioritizes identity over competence.
Looking ahead, Shriver remains cautiously optimistic. She believes that the inherent contradictions of woke ideology will ultimately lead to its collapse. The unsustainability of its principles, coupled with growing public fatigue, suggests that reason and balance may eventually prevail. However, this outcome will require sustained effort from those who value merit, logic, and genuine social progress.
As society navigates this cultural transition, the key question remains: “how will future generations perceive this era?” Will it be dismissed as a quaint period of overzealous social justice advocacy, or will it be remembered as a cautionary tale of ideological overreach, akin to historical episodes of collective madness like Mao’s Cultural Revolution or Stalin’s show trials?
While the stakes may not be as high in terms of human cost, the cultural and intellectual toll of woke ideology has been significant.
The battle against woke culture is clearly far from over. While there are promising signs of a cultural shift, the deeply rooted nature of this ideology means that it will take time and persistence to fully overcome.
For now, those who oppose its excesses can take heart in the knowledge that reason and sanity appear to be gaining ground. But the fight for a more rational and balanced society is one that will require vigilance and resilience in the years to come.
Main Image: By John Englart from Fawkner, Australia – Stay woke Bin off this bloke – Climate crisis rally Melbourne – IMG_7724, CC BY-SA 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=87536767
