I could not help thinking that if you changed "white" with "non-woke (Afrikaner)", and "black-agenda" with "woke-agenda", in the passage below from a recent Forever Yena News post on Facebook, the observations will be pretty much applicable to the kind of tired "dom boer" theory still being pushed by the Super Woke Afrikaners like Tristán Kapp et al.
"It's a familiar, frustrating scene that plays out across our media. Whenever a politician from a white-led party enters a public forum, the atmosphere crackles with intensity. The interviewer transforms into a fierce advocate, armed with sharp questions about the "black agenda," and the audience leans in, demanding answers and accountability for decades of inequality. It’s a performance of righteous anger, and for a moment, it feels like the system is being held to account.
But here’s the sickening part of the show: that same fire, that same demand for justice, almost completely vanishes when the cameras turn to the ANC. The very party that has held power for thirty years, the one whose members have been accused of stealing from hospitals and schools meant for the poor, largely escapes this kind of brutal public interrogation. The "black agenda" suddenly stops being a principle and becomes a weapon, conveniently used only on political outsiders while the alleged insiders get a pass.
This leaves us with a painful, unavoidable question. If we can be so bold and courageous in confronting those we see as outsiders, why does our voice falter when the leader, the one who is supposed to represent us, is the one accused of the betrayal? The real, gut-wrenching silence isn't in the shouted questions, but in the quiet acceptance of corruption from our own. Perhaps true empowerment won't come from winning a debate against an opponent, but from finally finding the courage to demand better from those we elected to be on our side."
Ai tog, nog een van daardie suggereerders van die onbewese "teorie" dat almal wat Afrikaans is, maar nie "woke" nie, bloot "dom boere" is. Dis dieselfe soort psigose wat die meeste ondertekenaars van die "Nie In Ons Naam Nie"-opstooitjie in gemeen het. Hoe verlang hulle nie terug na die "goeie ou dae" toe hulle nog daardie soort Afrikaners bloot as rassiste kon etiketteer het nie; en daarmee dan hul eie supeurioriteit kon probeer "bewys" het. Jammer, maar ons "selfondersoek" oor 30 jaar het JUIS bevestig wat ons altyd geweet het, maar wat die "Nie-In-Ons-Namers" nooit wou erken nie - en nog steeds nie wil erken nie: boetedoening vir sondes het 'n einddatum en daarná het mens die volle reg om kop omhoog voort te stoom sonder om deur middel van "wokeness" te probeer om permanente martelare te wees ten einde vir ewig vir sondes van die verlede te boet. Eintlik pateties...
Ek kan dit nie self beter opsom as wat Grok dit gedoen het nie. (Sien hieronder.) Dit behoort duidelik te wees dat ek persoonlik 'n kleinjie dood het aan die bewapening van 'n denkrigting wat met goeie intensies afgeskop het. Ek vind dit net jammer dat dit ook ingespan word teen nie-woke Afrikaners. Al wat ek vra is dat ons (nie-woke Afrikaners) ons huidige geleentheid om 'n plekkie van gelykheid in Suid-Afrika te vind, gegun word. Ek dink werklik dat dertig jaar se gewillige "verbanning" tot stilswyende aanvaarding van ons sondes van die verlede, nou genoeg boetedoening is. Ek hoor nie by die redelike stemme uit konserwatiewe kringe dat ons méér as net gelykheid wil hê nie. Net gelyke geleenthede en gelyke behandeling. Ongelukkig word daardie redelike verwagting egter afgemaak deur stemme soos díé van die "Nie-In-My-Namers".
Grok:
"Wokeness" is a term that originated in African-American Vernacular English in the 1930s–1940s, meaning staying "awake" (alert) to racial injustice and systemic discrimination, notably popularized in the phrase "stay woke." It re-emerged prominently around 2014 during the Black Lives Matter protests following the police killings of Michael Brown and Eric Garner, where it described heightened awareness of racial bias, police brutality, and social injustice more broadly.
By the late 2010s and early 2020s, the meaning expanded significantly and became heavily politicized:
### Core contemporary meaning (neutral description)
"Wokeness" now refers to a progressive ideological framework that emphasizes:
- Acute sensitivity to systemic inequalities and historical oppression based on race, gender, sexuality, disability, and other identity categories.
- Belief that language, symbols, institutions, and everyday behavior can perpetuate subtle ("micro") or structural forms of discrimination, even unintentionally.
- Advocacy for active intervention (speech codes, diversity training, content warnings, deplatforming, corporate DEI initiatives, etc.) to correct these perceived injustices.
- A moral worldview that often categorizes people and ideas into oppressed/oppressor binaries and prioritizes equity (equal outcomes) over strict equality of opportunity or color-blind/meritocratic approaches.
### Positive framing (used by its proponents)
- A moral awakening to injustice; empathy and inclusivity elevated to a primary social virtue.
- Necessary corrective to centuries of discrimination and lingering power imbalances.
- Evolution of civil-rights consciousness for the 21st century.
### Critical framing (used by its opponents)
- An authoritarian, performative, and dogmatic ideology that polices speech and thought.
- Prioritization of identity politics over class, individual rights, or universal principles.
- Tendency toward moral purity spirals, cancel culture, and institutional capture (universities, media, corporations, government agencies).
- Often accused of being a secular religion complete with original sin (e.g., "whiteness" or "privilege"), confession rituals, and excommunication of heretics.
### Current status (mid-2020s)
The term is now predominantly pejorative in mainstream discourse outside progressive strongholds. High-profile backlash (from figures like Elon Musk, Bill Maher, and politicians such as Ron DeSantis) and electoral rejection of certain "woke" policies (e.g., in education and corporate America) have made it a cultural third rail. Many institutions that aggressively adopted woke frameworks in 2020–2022 (Disney, Bud Light, various universities, etc.) later scaled them back after consumer, legal, or shareholder pushback. Yet the underlying ideas remain influential in academia, certain activist circles, and parts of the professional-managerial class.
In short, "wokeness" began as a slogan of racial awareness and evolved into a broader, contested worldview about power, language, and justice—one side sees as enlightened social progress, the other as coercive ideological overreach.
Pragtig verwoord en goed nagevors
I could not help thinking that if you changed "white" with "non-woke (Afrikaner)", and "black-agenda" with "woke-agenda", in the passage below from a recent Forever Yena News post on Facebook, the observations will be pretty much applicable to the kind of tired "dom boer" theory still being pushed by the Super Woke Afrikaners like Tristán Kapp et al.
"It's a familiar, frustrating scene that plays out across our media. Whenever a politician from a white-led party enters a public forum, the atmosphere crackles with intensity. The interviewer transforms into a fierce advocate, armed with sharp questions about the "black agenda," and the audience leans in, demanding answers and accountability for decades of inequality. It’s a performance of righteous anger, and for a moment, it feels like the system is being held to account.
But here’s the sickening part of the show: that same fire, that same demand for justice, almost completely vanishes when the cameras turn to the ANC. The very party that has held power for thirty years, the one whose members have been accused of stealing from hospitals and schools meant for the poor, largely escapes this kind of brutal public interrogation. The "black agenda" suddenly stops being a principle and becomes a weapon, conveniently used only on political outsiders while the alleged insiders get a pass.
This leaves us with a painful, unavoidable question. If we can be so bold and courageous in confronting those we see as outsiders, why does our voice falter when the leader, the one who is supposed to represent us, is the one accused of the betrayal? The real, gut-wrenching silence isn't in the shouted questions, but in the quiet acceptance of corruption from our own. Perhaps true empowerment won't come from winning a debate against an opponent, but from finally finding the courage to demand better from those we elected to be on our side."
Ai tog, nog een van daardie suggereerders van die onbewese "teorie" dat almal wat Afrikaans is, maar nie "woke" nie, bloot "dom boere" is. Dis dieselfe soort psigose wat die meeste ondertekenaars van die "Nie In Ons Naam Nie"-opstooitjie in gemeen het. Hoe verlang hulle nie terug na die "goeie ou dae" toe hulle nog daardie soort Afrikaners bloot as rassiste kon etiketteer het nie; en daarmee dan hul eie supeurioriteit kon probeer "bewys" het. Jammer, maar ons "selfondersoek" oor 30 jaar het JUIS bevestig wat ons altyd geweet het, maar wat die "Nie-In-Ons-Namers" nooit wou erken nie - en nog steeds nie wil erken nie: boetedoening vir sondes het 'n einddatum en daarná het mens die volle reg om kop omhoog voort te stoom sonder om deur middel van "wokeness" te probeer om permanente martelare te wees ten einde vir ewig vir sondes van die verlede te boet. Eintlik pateties...
Wat beteken “wokeness”?
Ek kan dit nie self beter opsom as wat Grok dit gedoen het nie. (Sien hieronder.) Dit behoort duidelik te wees dat ek persoonlik 'n kleinjie dood het aan die bewapening van 'n denkrigting wat met goeie intensies afgeskop het. Ek vind dit net jammer dat dit ook ingespan word teen nie-woke Afrikaners. Al wat ek vra is dat ons (nie-woke Afrikaners) ons huidige geleentheid om 'n plekkie van gelykheid in Suid-Afrika te vind, gegun word. Ek dink werklik dat dertig jaar se gewillige "verbanning" tot stilswyende aanvaarding van ons sondes van die verlede, nou genoeg boetedoening is. Ek hoor nie by die redelike stemme uit konserwatiewe kringe dat ons méér as net gelykheid wil hê nie. Net gelyke geleenthede en gelyke behandeling. Ongelukkig word daardie redelike verwagting egter afgemaak deur stemme soos díé van die "Nie-In-My-Namers".
Grok:
"Wokeness" is a term that originated in African-American Vernacular English in the 1930s–1940s, meaning staying "awake" (alert) to racial injustice and systemic discrimination, notably popularized in the phrase "stay woke." It re-emerged prominently around 2014 during the Black Lives Matter protests following the police killings of Michael Brown and Eric Garner, where it described heightened awareness of racial bias, police brutality, and social injustice more broadly.
By the late 2010s and early 2020s, the meaning expanded significantly and became heavily politicized:
### Core contemporary meaning (neutral description)
"Wokeness" now refers to a progressive ideological framework that emphasizes:
- Acute sensitivity to systemic inequalities and historical oppression based on race, gender, sexuality, disability, and other identity categories.
- Belief that language, symbols, institutions, and everyday behavior can perpetuate subtle ("micro") or structural forms of discrimination, even unintentionally.
- Advocacy for active intervention (speech codes, diversity training, content warnings, deplatforming, corporate DEI initiatives, etc.) to correct these perceived injustices.
- A moral worldview that often categorizes people and ideas into oppressed/oppressor binaries and prioritizes equity (equal outcomes) over strict equality of opportunity or color-blind/meritocratic approaches.
### Positive framing (used by its proponents)
- A moral awakening to injustice; empathy and inclusivity elevated to a primary social virtue.
- Necessary corrective to centuries of discrimination and lingering power imbalances.
- Evolution of civil-rights consciousness for the 21st century.
### Critical framing (used by its opponents)
- An authoritarian, performative, and dogmatic ideology that polices speech and thought.
- Prioritization of identity politics over class, individual rights, or universal principles.
- Tendency toward moral purity spirals, cancel culture, and institutional capture (universities, media, corporations, government agencies).
- Often accused of being a secular religion complete with original sin (e.g., "whiteness" or "privilege"), confession rituals, and excommunication of heretics.
### Current status (mid-2020s)
The term is now predominantly pejorative in mainstream discourse outside progressive strongholds. High-profile backlash (from figures like Elon Musk, Bill Maher, and politicians such as Ron DeSantis) and electoral rejection of certain "woke" policies (e.g., in education and corporate America) have made it a cultural third rail. Many institutions that aggressively adopted woke frameworks in 2020–2022 (Disney, Bud Light, various universities, etc.) later scaled them back after consumer, legal, or shareholder pushback. Yet the underlying ideas remain influential in academia, certain activist circles, and parts of the professional-managerial class.
In short, "wokeness" began as a slogan of racial awareness and evolved into a broader, contested worldview about power, language, and justice—one side sees as enlightened social progress, the other as coercive ideological overreach.