The implication of this fascinating but curiously confused article is apparently that we must distinguish populist and ‘woke’ language and avoid activist rhetoric. Apparently, that rules out socialist activism as ‘woke’ rhetoric. The working class ‘bloke’ is now too stupid and/or too middle class for the real McCoy of a communist postcapitalism.
It is hard to think that this is anything but class arrogance expressing behind a ‘neutral’ sociological gibberish mode a total contempt of that working-class as unintelligent.
At least ‘woke’ rhetoric might show the old brand of respect for the working class: the working class was a revolutionary spearhead. If that is no longe true then the left needs to try something different and stop hand-wringing over Trump’s base.
Surely the point is that socialism is the last thing left that can deal with bread and butter issues in question and do that right where the broader pseudo-left is trying to get votes for, evidently, the democratic party in the great breakthrough of middle-class utopia. Should we suppose that the middle class is beyond this mindset? Because of Bolshevism, the left confronts a working class that doesn’t trust socialism anymore where once the left energized millions as a revolutionary proletariat, bread and butter issues indeed. The problem is to show clearly that capitalism is the issue behind the problems suffered by the working class. The working class would respond to real leftist issues if they could hope that they could really succeed.
This puzzling article must be right-wing propaganda trying to close the deal at the hoped-for end of the left would can be allowed such ‘woke rhetoric’ as socialist clarification. Live mummies must be walking dead of the murky chambers of that morgue, the Democratic party.
Blue-collar workers are especially sensitive to candidate messaging — and respond even more acutely to the differences between populist and “woke” language. Primarily manual blue-collar workers, in comparison with primarily white-collar workers, were even more drawn to candidates who stressed bread-and-butter issues, and who avoided activist rhetoric.