【推文】Yuri Bezmenov's Ghost - 37 words definition for Woke

連結

• 原推文1 - x.com/Ne_pas_couvrir...

• 原推文2 - x.com/ne_pas_couvrir...

原文及個人翻譯

推文1 - 簡短版

Woke describes a collective awakening in which a group becomes aware of its perceived victimization by systemic conditions, real or imagined, motivating purposeful action toward teleological goals aimed at transforming society in accordance with its ideological vision.

「Woke」描述了一種集體覺醒，其中群體意識到他們受到系統性條件的迫害，無論是真實的還是想像的，這激勵了他們為了實現改變社會以符合其意識形態願景的終極目標（teleological goals）而採取有目的的行動。

推文2 - 長文版

The magical sauce of a collective awakening grants real institutional power, so once one group uses it, others must mobilize or fall behind. This creates a game‑theory spiral: every bloc joins in, trust erodes, & the classical liberal system collapses under rising fragmentation.

集體覺醒的魔幻醬汁賦予了真正的制度權力，所以一旦一個群體利用了它，其他群體必須動員起來，否則就會落後。這會形成一個博弈論螺旋：每個派系都加入其中，信任感流失，古典自由主義體系在越來越碎片化的情況下崩潰。

Collective identity gives groups power by uniting members around a moral cause, letting them act in sync (i.e. voting, protesting, pressuring institutions.) Loose individuals can't compete because they lack coordination, shared goals, or narrative leverage. In a system built for individuals, organized blocs win outsized influence by exploiting that imbalance.

集體身份通過團結成員圍繞道德事業賦予群體權力，使他們能夠協調行動（例如投票、抗議、向機構施壓）。鬆散的個人無法競爭，因為他們缺乏協調、共同目標或敘事優勢。在為個人設計的體系中，有組織的派系通過利用這種不平衡獲得了過度的影響力。

The game theory spiral happens when more and more groups gains power through collective mobilization, prompting others to do the same to avoid falling behind. As more groups join in, trust in neutral rules breaks down, & society shifts from individual-based fairness to zero-sum group competition, essentially accelerating divisions.

博弈論螺旋發生在越來越多的群體通過集體動員獲得權力，並促使其他群體為免落後而採取相同行動時。隨著更多群體的加入，對中立規則的信任度下降，社會從以個人為基礎的公平轉變為零和遊戲的群體競爭，這基本上是加速了社會分裂。

In other words, people are compelled to collectivize not just for strategy but survival. They feel if they dont, they risk being sidelined & losing resources to more organized rivals. In a system shifting toward group power, staying individualist feels like voluntary disarmament.

換句話說，人們不僅出於策略考慮，還為了生存而被迫形成集體。他們覺得，如果不這樣做，他們可能會被邊緣化，並失去資源給更組織化的競爭對手。在一個向群體權力轉移的體系中，保持個人主義就像自願解除武裝一樣。

The liberal system relies on individuals treating each other as equals under shared rules. Once group identity overrides fairness & merit, that foundation crumbles. Trust fades, rules feel partisan, & institutions shift from neutral arbiters to battlegrounds for group advantage.

自由主義體系依賴於個人在共同規則下平等相待。一旦群體身份超越了公平與功績，這個基礎就會崩潰。信任度下降，規則似乎變得有黨派色彩，機構從中立的仲裁者轉變為群體爭奪優勢的戰場。

The trend outlined above drives leftist praxis toward the goal depicted in the meme below. By intentionally shifting society from individualism to collectives, it morally polarizes people into in-groups, allowing collectives extra power over individuals to reshape institutions. The use of this power breaks down the classical liberal system, which relies on individuals treating each other equally under universal rules, because group loyalties override impartiality & fairness. Collective in-groups do not treat out-groups fairly by definition. As this shift deepens, individuals feel existential pressure to mobilize within identity groups. If you don't, you risk marginalization, resource loss, & powerlessness, leaving little choice but to join in. In practical terms, it's basically US prison politics. It's forcing you to tribe up or be in for a world of hurt.

上述趨勢推動左翼實踐（praxis）朝著以下迷因（meme）中描繪的目標發展。通過有意地將社會從個人主義轉變為集合體們，它將人們道德上極化為內群體（in-groups），使集合體們在重塑機構方面獲得比個人更大的權力。這種權力的使用破壞了古典自由主義體系，因為群體忠誠超越了公正性和公平性。根據定義，集合體內的成員不會公平對待集合體外的個體。

隨著這種轉變的加深，個人會感到存在性的壓力，需要在身份群體中動員起來。如果不這樣做，他們可能會面臨邊緣化、資源損失和無力感，幾乎別無選擇地加入其中。

在實際層面上，這基本上與美國監獄政治相似。它迫使你加入群體，否則將面臨痛苦的世界。