A question I won't be able to read about because the FTs boundary defeats my usual archive.is wall jumping.

The tl;dr here would be "it's blindingly obvious they don't have to be", and many aren't especially older ones like me who have different ties to an older world feminism, and anti racism world view which clashes with the current ones.

Hitchens (Chris, not Peter) said things in a very unwoke manner, which despite his clear non socialist world view, many on the left agree with. Of Peter his brother, the less said the better.

Can't read the article, but I hate the title framing. Like, what do you mean by woke? If I'm against misogyny, racism, homophobia, etc, is that woke? Or does it require something special I don't know about?

I know it wasn't originally so, but nowadays it seems to be just thrown around as a generic insult.

These terms are effectively dogwhistles, with whatever meaning du jour the propaganda machine decides.

A large number of people simply use words as weapons, for effect. Expletives detached from meaning.

If you asked one of them for a meaning, you might get a real word salad, concealing the unspoken meaning basically: "someone who supports Foreigners, Minorities, Women, Socialists, Gays and Liberals" [0]

Since the Lee Atwater "Southern Strategy" days the poor have been conned into supporting the very oligarchs who take away their health care, education, jobs and opportunity.

[0] https://i.ibb.co/JtSWj63/Voterep-1.jpg