One of the main issues I see in the “woke vs anti-woke” discourse is that the discussion is not grounded in a shared vision, since the understanding of the issues by each side differs so much as to seem to be about something else. 1/

Instead, the discussion tends to on the different interpretive mechanisms utilized (categories, values, vocabularies, prejudices) by which the issue is given significance. 2/

We can continually try to convince one another of the validity of our own interpretive metric, however this is true as well in the reverse. 3/

The fact is that our commitments differ from each other, and no amount of pontificating by “classical liberals” or anyone else to the contrary will suffice to change this. 4/

So, we are left in a position in which we lack mutual frameworks, and common understandings. This allows each side to critique the other for failing to sufficiently respect or account for those issues and elements they see as fundamental, 5/

or grasping points which they take as self-evident.

This doesn’t even touch on the issues of bad actors, misinformation &c. That further complicate things. 6/

Thoughts @rasmansa, @roderickgraham, @conceptualdoc, @jstevewhite, @alsoacarpenter, @SamRochadotcom.