«By mixing with capitalism, wokism has become unstoppable»

Vivek Ramaswamy is one of the best-known opponents of the new corporate moralism. The entrepreneur and candidate in the 2024 US election explains the economic reasons for the triumph of identity politics in the US.

L’original article is published in German in Schweizer Monat.

When Vivek Ramaswamy recounted on stage at this year's Swiss Economic Forum (SEF) that more and more companies are pushing identity politics and imbuing their employees, customers or consumers with this ideology, the moderator signaled that she disagreed with what he was saying and asked the audience about it. Sixty-seven percent of those present agreed that the major groups had by no means become «too woke», prompting frenzied applause in the journalists' corner. We then spoke to the entrepreneur.

Schweizer MonatWho do you think are the worst woke ideologues in the U.S. today?

BlackRock Chairman Larry Fink, Vice Chairman Kamala Harris and the «Squad» members of Congress around Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, as well as most of Silicon Valley's top executives.

An interesting choice given the debates of recent years, which have focused mainly on universities and the cultural sector. You, on the other hand, focus on political and economic decision-makers.

Absolutely. I make this choice because they are the ones who hold the key to the funds that drive the agenda of non-commercial players and universities.

Your first book, Woke, Inc., describes the destructive effects that ideologues dedicated to so-called «social justice» have on everyday American life. As you explain, they feed a culture of fear. How did it spread so quickly?

The culture of apologetics - apologizing for inalienable characteristics or for one's own social position - emerged in the USA after 2008. The financial crisis played a decisive role in this development. Those who had succeeded thanks to American capitalism and had become heroes were transformed into thugs. And to make amends, they had to inject money into a trend that had emerged precisely from the left. The old left had a wing that said, «We need to focus on redistribution, taking money from the big bosses and giving it to the poor». But then a new faction emerged with the woke theory, claiming that the problem wasn't economic inequality or poverty, but inequality between skin colors, misogyny, bigotry and climate change. Big business jumped on board, thinking, «It's not as threatening as the old left, we're just saying what they want.» This is what provided the kerosene for the woke culture.

Were there other factors, less taken into account until now, that contributed to the success of this ideology?

Yes, and in particular the generation gap. We are witnessing the greatest intergenerational transfer of wealth in the history of mankind - earned money passing from baby-boomers to millennials to Generation Z, via Generation X. Ludwig von Mises once wrote that a son has two ways of surpassing his father. One is to do everything like his father - which is by definition difficult for sons who want to be extraordinary. The other is to display moral superiority as a son, which is much easier, because morality is subjective. And what's happened in recent years is that this moral superiority among millennials and Generation Z stemmed from a feeling of inferiority. Companies have succeeded in exploiting the moral insecurity of an entire generation in today's America - in the same way that cigarette manufacturer Virginia Slims succeeded in exploiting the insecurity of the teenagers for whom this product was designed.

You call it the «woke industrial complex». How has this American identity movement come to represent migrants and people of color?

First of all, it's worth remembering that the idea of being able to infer a person's beliefs from the color of their skin is the very definition of racism. Congresswoman Ayanna Presley - a member of the «Squad» - once said, «We don't want any more black people saying they don't want to be a black voice. We don't want any more brown people saying they don't want to be a brown voice.» Think for a moment about what's really being said here. In this logic, a speaker is always associated with his or her skin color. And if you disagree with that statement, you're automatically branded a racist. In the USA, there is no greater condemnation than to be publicly called a «racist». Faced with the choice of converting to this new woke religion or wearing the scarlet letter, average Americans preferred to bow out. That's why a culture of fear has spread like wildfire - because it's asserted in this movement that one's own «race» is more an opinion than a skin color.

How is it, then, that this has spread so quickly to the economy, so that major corporations today operate in an increasingly targeted way with identity politics symbols and concerns, i.e. the targeted use of minorities in series or the rainbow flag in advertising, for example?

Because an economic opportunity presented itself. Millennials and Generation Z were searching for meaning because they had lost all understanding of patriotism, faith, hard work and family. While these values are all a thing of the past in society, these two generations still felt a strong need for something meaningful. So companies filled the moral vacuum that had been created, commercialized the need of young people and thus made a profit from the consumers to whom they sold woke content. Added to this were state actors in the USA and China, who exploited this situation to the benefit of business. It was by blending in with capitalism that wokism became truly unstoppable.

Do you think the Liberals and Conservatives have underestimated the problem?

Yes, both Liberals and Conservatives should have been concerned. Whether or not you agree with a certain corporate policy that wants you to behave in an identity-based way, as a citizen you should be able to publicly express your disagreement, instead of letting some CEO emperor, sitting in the corner of his office, make woke declarations.

Read also | Liberal critique of wokism

Aren't those who reject the entertainment industry's self-adaptation to identity politics a potential market themselves?

There are hundreds of millions of people in the West today who want to hear something different. And in many ways, the entrepreneurs who recognize this are behaving in a conformist way, simply giving in to identity politics. If they sent out a different message from the woke, it wouldn't be long before they attracted new consumers. That's the bet I've made, and we'll soon find out. Since I think this problem originated in American culture, I'd also like to see it solved in our culture first.

What advice do you have for entrepreneurs of small and medium-sized businesses who want to counter these trends?

Be brave and give your customers a message that many of them don't hear anywhere today.

Your latest book, Nation of Victims, was published in September last year. What is its main thesis?

I explain that the culture of victimization plays a key role in America's decadence, and that today we applaud victimhood, vulnerability and defeat more than we celebrate unabashed success. This creates a serious moral vacuum at the heart of America. One way to fill it is to renew the quest for excellence that was once part of the American national identity. It's something that has been lost, but it can be revived. I believe that a return to performance culture could be a unifying force, not just for the United States, but for all Western democracies.

Vojin Saša Vukadinović is a historian and cultural editor for the Swiss monthly Schweizer Monat, whose articles we have been translating since this month.

You have just read an article from our WOKISME folder, published in our print edition (Le Regard Libre N°95)