asemic horizon :: asema chromata :: casino rhizome

Those tarred as the “woke right” have spent about a week protesting their dissimilarities with the “woke left”; these protests have, however, pretty much cemented the idea that their emergent ideology is, indeed, emergent and “woke“.

It wouldn’t be counterintuitive to characterize “the Right” as the thought that imagines itself not to be “thought”; or at least, not to be “transcendental thinking” but, instead, derivative from “plain fact”. This would (more or less) pin the birth of “the Left” on Kant. Perhaps more clearly put: the secret name of “the Right” is qualunquismo. “The Left” has no such secret name because it identifies itself with broad tropes it managed to paint as equivalent to civilization itself: enlightenment, progress, reason. This is why the final boss for the Left is l’uomo qualunque; and that, in turn, is why it keeps getting tangled in morally abhorrent causes (for example, in sexual issues as it pertains to children). Si, il gramigna è anch’esso rizoma.

Whence, then, the “woke right”? Well, the more extreme views of “the woke left” have nothing to do with “woke” — they’re just generic left-wing positions (not everyone in “the Left” is, however, required to hold all possible left views). What’s notable about the woke left is its quickness to arrive and adopt certitudes. Their “ideas” are, therefore, hardly ideas at all — they’re obstructions. Take the Climate Rebellion’s signature tactic of gluing themselves to works of art: the worldview they want to highlight is actually the generally accepted worldview — the only novelty is in the urgency they want to convey.

Leave a Comment