Why Have Academics Failed To Study Social Justice Ideology?

This is a guest post by Thomas Prosser (who writes at The Path Not Taken) and Edmund King (who writes at Paroxysms) about their very interesting new book, Beyond Woke and Anti-Woke: Explaining the Rise of Social Justice Ideology.

---

Photo by Sacha Verheij on Unsplash

Does ‘wokeness’ exist at all? And if it did, why on earth would anyone get worked up over it? Over the past decade, many mainstream British liberals have reacted to the rise of ‘wokeness’, or what we prefer to call social justice ideology, by denying that anything of note is occurring. These kinds of denials have taken many forms. Among those we could affectionately term ‘centrist Dads’, there has been a rich seam of indignation that these sorts of questions are being raised at all. ‘Why do you care?’ ‘Why are you so obsessed with this?’ ‘Stop spending so much time on the internet!’ We have heard many responses along these lines.

On a more intellectual level, liberal objections have sought to characterize social justice ideology as just a particularly earnest and sincere form of liberalism. Surely, we hear, now is not the right time to look into this issue, given the very real threat of radical right populism? At worst, the desire to ask these questions at all is seen as alarming evidence of authoritarian tendencies. ‘It’s just idealistic kids’, we are told. Ignore it. It will all pass over in time. In academia, this has engendered a curious phenomenon: a near dearth of accounts which examine social justice ideology through an analytic lens.

In our new book, Beyond Woke and Anti-Woke: Explaining the Rise of Social Justice Ideology (Bristol University Press, 2026), we examine the seeming inability of liberals to describe their left flank in accurate terms (or even to admit that it exists at all). Over the past decade, liberalism has palpably lost ground to ‘woke’. Both are progressive ideologies but, in contrast to liberalism, social justice ideology emphasizes the overriding importance of identity and direct action. It extends the concept of harm far beyond previous limits, concerning itself particularly with the threats of emotional harm and harmful speech. These developments have brought social justice advocates into conflict with older liberal tenets: individualism, legalism, and freedom of speech and association.

This conspicuous gap in the scholarship is curious because, in academia, analytic approaches to ideology are common. To give a well-known example, there is an extensive literature on radical right populism which, over thousands of studies, examines the origins and trajectories of this ideology. Admittedly, many who are interested in the study of social justice ideology have not helped their cause. Since the mid-2010s, a self-described ‘heterodox’ movement has arisen that has sought to investigate the topic. This movement has produced some important works, yet has ultimately failed to grasp the social justice nettle. We have seen a great many polemical trade-press books and podcast episodes and many ‘free speech’ festivals at which speakers celebrate their ability to tolerate robust disagreement (but at which no one seems to disagree at all). Despite their initial energy and sense of purpose, many in this ‘heterodox’ space have ultimately abandoned all pretence of academic rigour. While surrendering to the temptations of audience capture might be good for Substack subscriptions, it makes it easier for liberals to dismiss these kinds of interventions. No smoke; no fire; nothing to see here.

What, ultimately, explains the reluctance of liberals to acknowledge the existence of social justice ideology? We can think of some potential reasons: a certain hesitancy to expose the fractures in progressive movements, an unwillingness to be seen siding or affiliating with conservatives on certain issues, and (perhaps) fear of attack from radical activists. Sometimes, these kinds of motivations seem to be accompanied by the notion that progressive ideologies do not need to be explained. As classic theories of ideology contend, the ideologue regards their own worldview as an accurate depiction of reality and, therefore, without any need of further explanation. The overt similarities between liberalism and social justice ideology, and the obvious differences that separate them from conservative ideologies, encourage such thinking.

We find this state of affairs unfortunate, and it is what moved us to write our book. Just like radical right populism, we believe that social justice ideology should be studied with an analytic approach. Since the 2010s, social justice ideology has been the major newcomer in progressive ideological space and is notably different from liberalism. This development is fascinating and, rather than unevidenced polemics, the ideology deserves a serious programme of academic study, just like other ideologies.

In Beyond Woke and Anti-Woke, we explain the emergence of social justice ideology using statistical analysis of multiple surveys of UK and US public opinion, institutional theories of the political economy and morphological theories of ideology. Rather than having one cause, social justice ideology in fact reflects a wider demographic revolution. Mass higher education has transformed societies and, as women have entered public life, feminine-coded values of care and equality have become increasingly influential.

In particular, the crises of capitalism after the 2008 financial crash acted as catalysts for ideological change, giving social justice ideology mass appeal. Though our statistical analyses cast doubt on there being any direct relationship between adherence to social justice ideology and individual economic precarity (contrary to popular theories), we argue that economic crises helped discredit liberalism among younger groups. For corporations, the embrace of social justice ideology provided renewed legitimacy. By the 2020s, social justice ideology had become a major rival to liberalism and, notwithstanding the attacks of the second Trump administration, it remains a major force in progressive politics.

Of course, any such interpretations must be provisional. Beyond issues with replication, the lack of prior research on this topic makes conclusions unusually precarious. Will this change in the future? Though proponents of a spatial hypothesis expect that academic supply will inevitably meet any gaps that appear in the intellectual market, we are less optimistic. Academic fields are path dependent and, therefore, tend to follow their own logic. If they have been closed off to certain lines of inquiry in the past, there is a certain inevitability that they will continue to be so. Moreover, we know from survey data that progressives are numerically predominant in universities. Inevitably, this will create pressures from within fields and disciplines to maintain existing path dependencies.

Perhaps there is need for a cultural change in this area. Contrary to the fears of some, analysing progressive ideologies does not imply that one regards them as a problem to be solved. Instead, this sort of investigation should be entirely conventional in academia; one identifies a gap in the research and, using established theories and methods, arrives at findings. In the case of social justice ideology, its crucial influence on institutions and policymaking adds to the justification for such a research agenda.

This, we argue, would not only lead to a healthier academia; it would lead to a healthier liberalism.