Scott Alexander, curated
← Back to curation

Highlights From The Comments On "The Origin Of Woke"

Quality
71
Strong
Claude Shift
48
Moderate
RWI
2
of 10

Follows up on

Book Review: The Origins Of Woke — Book review · May 2024

Summary

Rich (very long) companion to the Origins-Of-Woke review: Hanania's author response, fact-checks (Diaz, Yale administrators, the Freeman/EEOC case), the Griggs/disparate-impact legal back-and-forth (civil-rights lawyers say courts are hostile to disparate-impact; the merit-test question), sharply contradictory personal testimony on affirmative-action-in-hiring (same industries/employers!), origins-of-modern-woke theories (Tumblr/Racefail vs academic-radicalism vs civil-rights-law), other countries, and EEOC-lawsuit-frequency math. Scott's honest conclusion: can't reconcile the contradictory testimony.

Why this score

Quality 71 · Strong. Top of the companion band: genuinely substantive (the legal back-and-forth + the well-surfaced merit-testimony contradiction), capped below the 78 parent (ACX-582); mostly aggregating others' testimony/analysis rather than Scott's own synthesis.

Claude’s paradigm shift 48 · Moderate. Notable: surfaces and structures the competing origins-of-woke theories, though little original synthesis.

Real-world impact 2 · Minor. Within-discourse companion; no material effect. =2.