The Origins of Woke

1. Wokeness is rooted in specific legal and policy changes, not just cultural shifts.

No act of Congress or federal regulation technically requires one to express the belief that differences in income between men and women are due to sexism, but expressing the opposite view as a corporation can be extremely costly, and not just because of any potential public relations backlash.

Beyond aesthetics. The book challenges the common perception that wokeness is primarily a cultural phenomenon stemming from college campuses and social media. While cultural and aesthetic elements are important, the author argues that wokeness is deeply embedded in American law and government policies. This legal foundation has been largely overlooked in mainstream discussions.

Legal mandates. The author contends that many of the beliefs and practices associated with wokeness are, in fact, mandated or incentivized by law. Corporations and institutions are often compelled to adopt certain positions on race, gender, and sexuality to avoid legal repercussions, regardless of their genuine beliefs. This creates a system where compliance, rather than conviction, drives behavior.

Focus on policy. The book emphasizes the need to understand the specific legal provisions that have led to the rise of wokeness. By identifying these legal mechanisms, the author aims to provide a roadmap for activists, journalists, and policymakers who want to reverse the cultural trends they dislike. This approach prioritizes legal reform as a necessary step toward reshaping the culture.

2. Civil rights law has been reinterpreted to mandate identity-based consciousness.

Since at least the 1970s, major corporations have been forced to be highly conscious of race and sex and on the lookout for practices and behaviors that may have a “disparate impact,” which the law has considered a sign of discrimination.

Beyond color-blindness. The book argues that the original intent of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which aimed to promote color-blindness and equal opportunity, has been subverted by subsequent interpretations and policies. Over time, civil rights law has evolved to emphasize race- and sex-consciousness, requiring institutions to actively seek out and address disparities between groups.

Disparate impact. A key concept in this evolution is the doctrine of "disparate impact," which holds that practices with a disproportionately negative effect on protected groups can be considered discriminatory, regardless of intent. This has led to a system where employers must constantly monitor and adjust their practices to avoid potential legal liability.

Affirmative action. The book also highlights the role of affirmative action policies, which, while ostensibly designed to promote diversity, have often resulted in "soft quotas" and other forms of preferential treatment based on race and sex. These policies have further entrenched identity-based consciousness in American institutions.

3. Government actions have standardized workplaces and universities.

Civil rights law involves constantly nudging institutions in the direction of being obsessed with identity and suppressing speech, all while it speaks in the language of freedom and nondiscrimination.

Homogenization of institutions. The author argues that civil rights law has led to a standardization of practices and beliefs across American workplaces and universities. Institutions, fearing legal repercussions, tend to adopt similar policies and procedures related to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). This homogenization stifles innovation and limits the range of perspectives and values represented in these institutions.

Rise of HR bureaucracy. The vagueness and complexity of civil rights law have fueled the growth of human resources (HR) departments and the DEI industry. These bureaucracies are tasked with interpreting and enforcing often ambiguous regulations, leading to increased costs and a chilling effect on speech and conduct.

Outsourcing enforcement. The government has outsourced much of the enforcement of its mandates and regulations to the private sector, particularly trial lawyers and the HR industry. This has created a self-financing system where institutions are incentivized to comply with woke ideology to avoid costly lawsuits and regulatory scrutiny.

4. The government has created artificial racial and gender categories.

The state has been the “invisible hand” molding and shaping institutions toward the collection of values that we now identify with the far left.

Social construction of race. The book examines how the federal government has played a role in constructing and reinforcing racial categories. By requiring institutions to collect and report data based on these categories, the government has legitimized certain identities and encouraged tribalism.

Inventing "Hispanic" and "AAPI." The author highlights the artificiality of categories like "Hispanic" and "Asian American Pacific Islander" (AAPI), which group together diverse populations with little in common. These categories were created for bureaucratic convenience and political expediency, but have come to have a significant impact on how Americans perceive themselves and others.

Gender ideology. The book also critiques the government's role in promoting a particular vision of gender and sexuality. Civil rights law has been used to enforce a radical understanding of heterosexual relations on higher education and to promote the idea that gender is a social construct, rather than a biological reality.

5. Social engineering causes stagnation, ennui, and social strife.

Civil Rights Law Is Why We Hate Each Other.

War on merit. The book argues that the focus on achieving equality between groups has led to a "war on merit," where objective standards and measures of achievement are viewed with suspicion. This has resulted in the elimination of gifted programs, the de-emphasis of standardized tests, and the promotion of subjective measures that are often biased and unfair.

Cultural homogenization. By promoting a narrow set of values and beliefs related to race, gender, and sexuality, civil rights law has stifled cultural diversity and limited the range of perspectives represented in American institutions. This has led to a sense of ennui and alienation among those who feel excluded or marginalized by the dominant ideology.

Social strife. The book contends that civil rights law has contributed to increased social strife and polarization. By emphasizing group identity and disparities, it has exacerbated tensions between different groups and created a climate of resentment and division.

6. Republicans have historically been divided on civil rights law.

Electoral victories have not made conservative activists and intellectuals happy or satisfied.

Three eras. The book identifies three distinct eras in the Republican Party's approach to civil rights law:

• Bipartisan Cartel (1964-1980): Republicans largely went along with the expansion of civil rights law.
• Republicans Divided (1981-2009): The party was split between those who supported and opposed civil rights initiatives.
• Conservative Neglect (2010-present): Civil rights law fell off the radar as conservatives focused on other issues.

Missed opportunities. Despite controlling the White House and Congress at various times, Republicans have failed to enact significant reforms to civil rights law. This is due to a combination of factors, including internal divisions, media pressure, and a lack of understanding of the issues involved.

Need for unity. The author argues that Republicans must unite around a clear and consistent message on civil rights law. By presenting a coherent alternative to the current system, they can appeal to a broader range of voters and create a more effective political movement.

7. A clear political path exists to reverse the effects of wokeness.

This book provides the road map to legal reform, seeing it as a necessary, even if not fully sufficient, step to ultimately remaking the culture.

Focus on legal reform. The book emphasizes the need to focus on legal and policy changes, rather than simply complaining about cultural trends. By targeting the specific provisions in civil rights law that have led to wokeness, opponents can create a more lasting and meaningful impact.

Executive action. The author highlights the power of the executive branch to unilaterally change regulations and policies related to civil rights. A Republican president can amend executive orders, reinterpret existing laws, and issue new guidance to federal agencies.

Judicial appointments. The book also stresses the importance of appointing conservative judges who will interpret civil rights law in a way that is consistent with its original intent. By selecting judges who are committed to principles of individual liberty and limited government, Republicans can shape the direction of the law for decades to come.

8. Amending Executive Order 11246 is a crucial first step.

Affirmative action is anything you have to do to get results.

Targeting government contractors. Executive Order 11246, which mandates affirmative action for government contractors, is a key target for reform. A Republican president can amend this order to prohibit the use of quotas, goals, and timetables based on race and sex.

Promoting color-blindness. The amended executive order should emphasize the principle of color-blindness, requiring contractors to treat all individuals equally, regardless of their race or sex. This would help to dismantle the system of preferential treatment that has become entrenched in American institutions.

Reducing bureaucracy. The amended executive order should also streamline the compliance process for government contractors, reducing the burden of paperwork and reporting requirements. This would free up resources for businesses to focus on their core missions and promote economic growth.

9. The disparate impact doctrine should be abolished.

Disparate impact “makes almost everything presumptively illegal.”

Challenging Griggs. The disparate impact doctrine, which holds that practices with a disproportionately negative effect on protected groups can be considered discriminatory, is a major source of wokeness. The book argues that this doctrine should be abolished, either through executive action or judicial decision.

Restoring intent. The author contends that discrimination should be defined as intentional discrimination, rather than disparate impact. This would require plaintiffs to prove that employers or institutions acted with discriminatory intent, rather than simply pointing to statistical disparities.

Protecting merit. Abolishing the disparate impact doctrine would help to protect merit-based hiring and promotion practices. Employers would be free to select the most qualified candidates, regardless of their race or sex, without fear of legal repercussions.

10. Title IX needs to be reined in to protect freedom and fairness.

Under the rubric of preventing sexual violence, school mini-bureaucracies within federal bureaucratic oversight are engaged in a normative program of good-sex education, couched in views about good relationships in which that good sex should be had.

Ending social engineering. The book critiques the use of Title IX, which prohibits sex discrimination in education, as a tool for social engineering. The author argues that the Department of Education has used Title IX to micromanage campus life, regulate sexual behavior, and promote a particular ideology about gender and sexuality.

Restoring due process. The author calls for reforms to Title IX enforcement procedures to ensure due process for accused students. This would involve raising the standard of evidence required for disciplinary action and protecting the rights of the accused to a fair hearing.

Protecting freedom of association. The book also argues for protecting the freedom of association on college campuses. This would involve allowing single-sex organizations and activities, as well as protecting the rights of students to express their views on controversial topics without fear of censorship or punishment.

11. The anti-woke movement must prioritize political action.

The political entrepreneur is more important than the essayist.

Beyond intellectual arguments. The book emphasizes the need for political action, rather than simply relying on intellectual arguments to combat wokeness. While ideas are important, the author argues that they are not enough to change the legal and institutional structures that underpin wokeness.

Building a political movement. The author calls for the creation of a broad-based political movement that is committed to rolling back the excesses of civil rights law. This movement should include activists, journalists, policymakers, and others who are willing to challenge the status quo and advocate for change.

Seizing opportunities. The book argues that the current political climate presents a unique opportunity to push back against wokeness. With a conservative majority on the Supreme Court and a growing backlash against woke ideology, opponents of wokeness are in a better position to effect change than they have been in decades past.

Last updated: April 13, 2025