Yascha Mounk, political scientist and author, discusses the rise of wokeness, the influence of Foucault, the paradoxical beliefs on gender and race as social constructs, intersectionality and integration, the intellectual history of the right, and the importance of free speech in society.
Foucault's skepticism of truth claims and focus on discourses challenge traditional ideas of political power.
Said and Spivak's contributions to identity politics have shaped contemporary activism and emphasize the power of language and discourse.
Foucault and Orwell's critiques of language provide valuable insights into today's language-focused activism and debates over cancel culture.
Foucault's skepticism of moral progress and focus on critiquing dominant power structures contrasts with Orwell's belief in achieving moral progress and improving society.
Deep dives
Foucault's Influence and Critique of Grand Narratives
Foucault rejected grand narratives like Marxism and liberalism, emphasizing a skepticism of truth claims and political values. He argued that power is diffused and manifests through discourses, challenging traditional ideas of political power. However, his skepticism about moral progress and his belief in constantly critiquing without building limits his ideology's ability to effect change.
The Influence of Edward Said and Ghatri Spivak
Said and Spivak played crucial roles in the synthesis of identity politics. Said's critique of Orientalism highlighted the power of language and discourse in justifying colonialism. He argued for redefining language and categories to empower marginalized groups. Spivak introduced the concept of strategic essentialism, acknowledging the limitations of essentialist identities while recognizing their political utility. These ideas have shaped contemporary activism that emphasizes changing language and using identities for political solidarity.
Critique of Language: Foucault vs. Orwell
Both Foucault and Orwell critiqued the power of language, but approached it differently. Foucault saw language as a tool to reshape society and challenge oppressive discourses, while Orwell emphasized the importance of clarity and calling out euphemistic language used by totalitarian states. Both critiques are relevant in today's context of language-focused activism and debates over cancel culture.
Difference in Views on Moral Progress
Orwell believed in the potential for moral progress and improving society by calling out euphemistic language and oppressive systems. In contrast, Foucault was skeptical of the possibility of achieving real moral progress and instead focused on critiquing dominant power structures. This fundamental difference in belief informs their approaches to activism and social change.
Understanding the Core Principles of the Identity Synthesis
The identity synthesis is based on three core principles. The first is that race, gender, and sexual orientation are the key prisms through which society should be understood. The second is that universal values and neutral principles are meant to perpetuate discrimination, and therefore need to be discarded. The third is that particular identity groups should define how we treat each other in society, replacing universal values. To counter these principles, it is important to acknowledge the significance of race and gender without making them the sole perspectives through which we view the world. We should also recognize that inclusivity and progress have been achieved by advocating for universal principles, and that further progress can be made by holding on to these values rather than discarding them.
Defending Free Speech
Free speech is often under scrutiny in the face of hateful or offensive speech. However, it is crucial to understand the importance of free speech, especially in times of high political stakes. One key argument in favor of free speech is that those in power will be the ones deciding what speech is acceptable if restrictions are put in place, and this could lead to further discrimination and repression. Additionally, free speech serves as a safety valve against bad policies, allowing for self-correction and the ability to challenge and debate government decisions. It is crucial to recognize that free speech has historically played a vital role in advocating for progress in society.
The Path Forward
To counter the influence of the identity synthesis, it is necessary to engage in a battle for hearts and minds, using rational arguments to challenge the core principles of this ideology. While opposing unfair enshrining of these ideas and coercive forces in institutions is important, it is essential to avoid substituting one set of liberal norms with another. Instead, reclaiming the moral high ground and proudly representing our values allows us to fight for a better world while engaging in the genuine debates needed to challenge and progress society.
A few episodes ago, I had Christopher Rufo on the podcast to discuss his analysis of why wokeness came to dominate so many institutions. Yascha's asking the same question in this book, but he's coming to a different answer. Yascha focuses less on people like Herbert Marcuse and more on intellectuals like Michel Foucault, Edward Said, Derrick Bell, and Kimberlé Crenshaw. We also talk about why there are so many former Marxists in the writing world, but so few people who convert into Marxism later in life. We talk about how Foucault's critique of language differs from George Orwell's critique of language, and much more. I hope you enjoy this conversation as much as I did.
Remember Everything You Learn from Podcasts
Save insights instantly, chat with episodes, and build lasting knowledge - all powered by AI.
