Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth paced the stage at the Marine Corps Base Quantico. He summoned the military leaders to Virginia for an unprecedented meeting. Eight hundred top U.S. military brass and civilian leaders sat poised as he addressed issues facing our nation. “Underneath the woke garbage is a deeper problem and a more important problem that we are fixing and fixing fast. Common sense is back in the White House.” Hegseth stressed the importance of dismantling what he calls the department of woke, referring to the Department of Defense, I mean, the Department of War. The President, greeted with silence, followed the defense secretary. He proposed using American cities as “training grounds” because “that’s a war too. It’s the war from within.”
Merriam-Webster defines woke–adjective: “aware of and actively attentive to important societal facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social injustice).” The word creates division between Americans. Coined as a term used to describe progressive beliefs, mainly in a negative manner, the description loosely ties to its literal definition which has roots in social justice movements. This distortion of meaning leads to polarizing definitions that make it harder for people to connect. Unfortunately, this is nothing new. The word centers the wide circle of political discourse as the current administration drives a wedge between the political parties.
The origin of the term traces back to 1940, during the early stages of the Black Power Movement. The term was used to spread awareness about racial injustice, but was also subject to usurpation. In 1962, writer William Melvin Kelley published “If You’re Woke, You Dig It” in the New York Times. The piece covers African American slang and appropriation. Kelley discusses language used by black communities; addressing how words are stripped of their nuance when adopted by others. He acknowledges the deep cultural history of manipulation of words like woke or dig and how groups abandon the term after it has been influenced by outside parties.
Woke has been electrified in the 21st century. Its meaning expanded as it circulated back into the mainstream media in the midst of Covid-19 and the Black Lives Matter movement. The media’s continuous coverage of events, like Secretary Hegseth’s Quantico meeting, keep the term in the headlines, and further divides Americans. Then you have the New York Times claiming “The Right has Gone Woke,” comparing how the left and the right use the word to attack the other. Political factions hurl the term like a hand grenade. The Conversation proves the phrase “Go woke, or go broke” to be false; the news outlet reports numbers that negate any truth surrounding the claim that many Republican politicians use. Reporters do their best to regulate the chaotic discussion, but reaching beyond the target audience is a difficult task. Americans struggle to find common ground on this topic, which raises the question: what does woke really mean today and why does this loose string have an infinite pull?
“There’s nothing in the world that’s linear… words never die.”
Dr. Helen Koulidobrova is a linguistics professor at Central Connecticut State University. We spoke about what this word means and how it’s dividing communities. Her research focuses on indigenous and marginalized languages, but we had a Zoom conversation about the chaos surrounding the woke phenomenon and the ideological war it stokes.
When I asked her about early uses of the word and how it functioned in society, she lifted her black glasses from her blonde hair, resting them on the bridge of her nose, and took a sip from her coffee mug. “I know that it came into my radar about six years ago, when it became more widely used; with the kind of overt attempts to change some of the climates that exist around oppression, both linguistic, racial, class and so forth.” With its comeback, the term seemingly lost its connection with racial and social injustice.
The misuse of a word like woke is not surprising when looking at history and the appropriation of words within the Black community. Kelley mentions this in his New York Times article, where he identifies two ways language is modified. The first gives the word the opposite meaning of its original connotation and the second changes the word completely, meaning the word takes any route people want it to. Kelley knows how words are easily manipulated; he understands language on a more fluid level, and much like Koulidobrova, he doesn’t believe language is inherently formalized.
“Go woke, or go broke”
Words are more alive than one may think. The more they are used the more they breathe through people and become alive, having its own identity, yet people strip it from its origins. Dr. Koulidobrova notes that power influences and redefines words like “woke.” Political organizations “use this as a label in order to scapegoat or ostracize, and then the crowd listens.” An influential figure, say, a president, might decide to strip the word of its meaning in order to control or manipulate his followers.
Words stray from their path, and are placed in new ones, something that happens quite often. When Koulidobrova and I discussed the appropriation of words like woke, she noted that this is common in American history. When a dominant group takes control of a word like woke, which holds a cultural importance, it is usually a deliberate manipulation driven by a particular agenda. The goal in this case may be to further separate parties that are already facing chilling polarization. The media highlights the most controversial stories on purpose to create clickbait and stir controversy.
“Woke” remains at the center of this tornado. Conflicting definitions stunt the term within society, but this doesn’t mean it can’t circle back to its original definition. It can zigzag at any moment. As Dr. Koulidobrova puts it, “there’s nothing in the world that’s linear.” She predicts the cycle will continue to shift. She knows this from first hand experience. “I grew up in the Soviet Union, I’ve seen this happen before. People resist and the words bounce back, and they mean what they mean next.” Just like us, words carry on.
Secretary Hegseth seems determined to maintain the administration’s anti-woke agenda. He used the word five times within the first thirty-minutes of his speech, and now demands our 2.1 million troops to watch that war on woke speech as homework. With rapid use comes swift change, as the life of a word is limitless and unpredictable. According to Piers Morgan’s latest book Woke is Dead the word lays on its death bed, but Dr. Koulidobrova reminds us, “words never die.” So it’s not a question of whether the word will keep changing, it’s who will define it next.
Featured Image: Pro-Palestine rally and march, New Haven, CT, October 4th, 2025 / Photo Credit Ahella Bedir
OMG what a great topic! Extremely difficult to have balance on a topic like this.
Class comment: very professional–love photos. Appreciate discussion on weaponizing words!