John McWhorter

Is This An Overview?
Race in the United States is a sensitive topic, and there are many different ways to approach race topics, specifically about black individuals. There are policies and claims that would benefit black individuals. This book is about the views that hurt black individuals. The ideas are considered Woke, and the author terms their supporters as the Elect. The ideas are considered to be a religion, for their contradictions and methods are exactly the same. Alternative ideas to the Woke, are unacceptable. Anyone who raises different ideas is meant to be shamed and persecuted.

How racism is responded to impacts outcomes. The response does not need to be hostile. Dismantling racist structure, does not need to harm the black individuals living within those structures. Woke ideology tries to manage America’s race relations, in which they seek to create a special status for black individuals. To get more black individuals into employment, they create policies that reduce the standards needed for black individuals to enter employment. But these policies actually hurt black individuals, because it makes black individuals appear inept. Black individuals are not less capable. Black individuals have just as much capabilities as everyone else. Racism does not explain all disparities.

How Did Antiracism Change In The U.S.A.?
First Wave of Antiracism was against slavery and legalized segregation. Second Wave of Antiracism during the 1970s and 1980s was against racist attitudes. Third Wave of Antiracism is about teaching that racism is the totality of experience, and to lower standards of achievement and conduct for black individuals.

This wave of Antiracism is making innocent people lose jobs, and preventing constructive public discussions on urgent issues. People have lost positions because they were insufficiently antiracist. Pride goes into shaming everyone, including black individuals, for not being offended enough at those portrayed as racist.

The Third Wave Antiracism makes many contradictory claims. The contradictions are excused, for their purpose is to designate people as bigots. They claim that they are pursuing social justice, which makes everyone else appear that they are resisting social justice. Society is changing, into accepting their ideas not because of moral sophistication, but out of fear.

The Woke claim that no progress is has been made on racism, because they would lose their sense of purpose. While in reality, a lot of progress has been made on racism. Progress on race is avoided rather than celebrated.

Is Woke A Religion?
Woke is not like a religion, it is a religion. They require a suspension of disbelief. They are as self-contradictory as religions of the past. The original sin in this religion is white privilege. People accept the racist charge and commit self-mortification to become cleansed. They retain followers by claiming an idealized past, providing a fantastic future, and a polluted present.

Much like religions of the past, Woke people are persecuting other people for not adhering to Woke religion. Woke people consider their views to be above politics, not subject to disagreement. They do not permit alternative views. Woke need to punish and eliminate anyone who disagrees with them. Critiquing them is not enough. Although the Woke support cancel culture, they claim that canceling something was not the intent but to speak out against what they disagree with. Even though speaking out to the Woke includes punishing the people they target. The people of the Elect ideology are unreachable to other people’s views.

What Are Some Social Controversies?
Black individuals have different views on race, making Woke mindset not universal among black individuals.

Woke makes the case for black individuals to be seen as perpetual victims. Black individuals apparently need to be taught that they are being stigmatized. The more educated a black individual becomes, the higher chances of them making claims that they are being stigmatized. They are taught what to say, rather than how they actually feel. There are cases in which black individuals even pose as being frightened, rather than actually being frightened. They demonstrate the violence of views with their poses. The exaggerated victimhood is needed to compensate for a lack of legitimate reason for being special.

Black individuals are killed not just by cops, but because of other black individuals as well. The outrage is usually only about cop activities, not community member activities.

Woke ideas claim that black individuals are meant to represent the diverse perspectives within institutions. But not all black individuals want to be the representative for the diverse view.

To the Woke, there will always be a racist bias that is an obstacle to black success. Even though, other groups that have been persecuted have never made that claim. Unequal outcomes do not necessarily come about because of unequal opportunity. But for the Woke, it is.

Black individuals supported the war on drugs because it was supposed to make their communities safer, even though the war on drugs has become seen as racist.

Black individuals appear to be falling behind in academic studies. While embracing school for black students can be seen as acting white.

Caveats?
This book deals with a very sensitive topic. The way in which the book is written can further antagonize people. The author acknowledges the antagonism, and wrote this book to help everyone navigate the contradictions that the Woke claim about race. The author does not address values used by the Woke that can contribute to bettering the lives of black individuals.

The author does not believe there is a need to attempt to discuss race relations with the book’s antagonists, because they do not listen to others. The author does defend that claim, but that does use the same tool as the antagonists. In contrast to this view, a lack of willingness to hear out the opposition comes from all sources. Even within very divergent views, a discussion can be possible but does need to be considerate of the alternative views.… (meer)

Begins with "oohs" and "aaahs", but when the book gets down to business there are fewer thrills. The author is making an assertion and has to back up the theory and proposition with ample evidence and plausible arguments. It reads a little funner than an academic paper, but he builds his case with more than enough examples. I guess I'm too easy— I was convinced he was right a third of the way through! The rest of the exposition was a little tiresome, but I'm sure, necessary.
The author's voice is unique and I really enjoy his style. I'm going to check out more of his books.… (meer)

A linguistics book for the lay reader, it is like listening to an excellent lecturer argue his opinions on his subject of expertise at a casual get-together with friends who are not in academia. McWhorter here takes on what he calls the "official history" of English, which in his persuasive view has made significant mistakes.

Whereas the "official history" decided that the Celtic languages had little to no impact on English, McWhorter argues that speakers of Welsh and Cornish changed English grammar to a significant degree, applying the very different grammar rules of their native tongue to the new Old English tongue they learned from the Anglo-Saxon invaders. This explains why “Said she to my daughter that my father alone come is and himself better feels” makes no sense in English, whereas a similar construction would in any other Germanic language. It's the Celtic grammar making our English sentence construction so different from our language cousins. This happened because the native Celts were likely to have hung around as a majority of the population rather than being comprehensively slaughtered as the "official history" has it, so their changes to Old English stuck. Celtic also gave to English the "meaningless 'do'", as in "Do you want it?" instead of just "You want it?" This makes me want to start a band and name it Meaningless Do...

When the waves of Vikings invaded centuries later, these people spoke Old Norse. McWhorter argues that an effect of all these adult males learning the language spoken in this land they'd just settled in, and taken wives from, is that they simplified it a lot, ie, spoke it "wrong". Thus English dropped a lot of features such as gendered nouns and case endings in the mouths of the "English Vikings", and they passed this battered language down to their children. These changes from Old English to Middle English are evident first in North England and gradually spreading southwards, which corresponds with the fact that the Vikings concentrated in the North.

Aside from other arguments in the book, McWhorter makes a plea I'm very sympathetic to: we shouldn't fret over our language continuing to evolve and change. Language always has. There is no such thing as "pure" English; it has been beaten up and changed massively already. No one would argue that we shouldn't speak this "perverted" modern English and go back to Old English. So if people start saying "who" when they 'should' say "whom"... eh, so what. English has lost lots of case markers already.

Entertaining and informative.… (meer)