“Woke” politics is a kind of retracing of the progress of philosophy

 “Woke” politics is a kind of retracing of the progress of philosophy.  So where should philosophy “go to” - where should it “progress to” - from here?

A lot of talk has been talked out about what it looks like to be “woke”, but not a lot about what it takes to be so woke.  A big part of the technique is to know certain techniques for education, to do them, and then to acknowledge that it is not that technique in itself, but rather what it does for you and wha is behind that technique, that is beneficial.

Do the writing, do the research, put yourself in the best social position, and know when to do what.  But realize none of those are in themselves the “secret” (although none of those “secrets” can be got except for doing those techniques.)  And be careful not to lean too hard on the concept of “bio-politics” - like, you don’t do one technique as a child and one as a teenager and one as an adult, etc.  You do whatever you need to do, but you do practice whatever technique you haven’t yet learned until you learn it, and you never stop.  But your technique at the moment is not decided by the maturation of your body.  One thing has to be acknowledged for sure: you have to know it is not about you.  

But we have to acknowledge, also, that just like we needed to “get over” object fetishism - Marx is correct on that point, and it’s not so different from common wisdom - we do also need to acknowledge that there is a “technique fetishism” as well.  Although we have raised the bar from an oral society to a written society, again and again people have shown that they can master whatever technique is imposed on them as the necessity of the times.  

-But certainly we must acknowledge that there is something beyond technique that can be said to be another property of understanding.  This is the Form, but that is the thing that is talked about by not talking about it, because talk has been set at the level of the technique.  Generally we talk about things like this most properly in terms of “thing” and consequence.  “Object” consequence is practice, but practice is pain.  (I.e. “Oh you have a nice pen; what are you going to do with it then?”)  Technique fetishism is actually fetishism of this pain and the consequence of the technique is certain secrets.  But over time the concept of the Form (that written philosophy was perhaps always trying to put off) re-emerges.  And that is the old concept with the oldest consequence.  As you develop a preference for how you use a technique, this has an effect on your audience, and if you share or don’t share it, the reaction from the audience is that people want you gone.  So, of course, go.  Because let’s not go back to classical Antiquity, but take our chance at fetishizing the next negative and/or painful thing, in order to unlock something else that is positive.  What is next, and where we should be in getting over the baggage of Antiquity is caring about what is “essential”.