Deprogramming from Leftism for Anglo Canadians

Part One - The Majority People Group and the Ethnic Archetype of the Great White North

Image from the Canadian Encyclopedia

Woke Watch Canada is a reader-supported publication. Please consider becoming a paying subscriber or making a one-time or recurring donation to show your support.

By

James Pew

I promise that only in the first essay or two, as loathsome as it may be perceived to be, I will often use the term “white people.” But soon afterwards will switch to “Anglo- Canadians” (referring to “old stock” English speaking Canadians of European descent) – which is whom I ultimately wish to focus on. Either way, it’s fine. Deep breath. Oh, and before I forget, for the record, I am an Anglo-Canadian…a white man.

Usually, when a white man, Anglo-Canadian or otherwise, declares his skin tone, like I have, what comes next, or is expected to, is an apology. White men mostly, but white people generally, are by leftist folks expected to atone for nothing more than being born with white skin. These folks don’t care about a white mans story, or the history of his people. They are not interested in his customs, myths or religious traditions. But hold that thought…way too heavy for introductory paragraphs. We’ll get there…

Ethnic People Groups and Groups Generally Speaking

When it comes to groups, either ethnic groups or national groups, or even knitting groups full of old ladies for that matter, there almost always exists a tendency where we treat these collectives as if they were either a personified individual with a single set of attitudes and values, or an unrealistically cohesive coterie where members agree about everything and are forever in perfect harmony and lockstep synchronization with one another.

Have you ever said white people do this, or Jewish people do that, gay people do this, or police officers do that? Have you ever attributed an attitude of moral superiority to Christians or misogyny to men? The truth is that all the groups mentioned, and most other groups with rare exception, are full of individuals who disagree and argue passionately about what it means to be a member of their group.

It is true that the overwhelming majority of Jews are Zionists – as they should be, since Zionism simply means that Jews should be permitted to continue to peacefully exist in the tiny little reconstituted nation of Israel that is located in their indigenous homeland. On this particular question of Jews and Zionism, it really is one of those rare cases where an exceedingly few Jews disagree with the premise of Zionism. Most other group issues of social, national, and ethnic concerns – including Jewish issues – do not enjoy such a clear majority consensus. This is so because groups are dynamic and unity is fickle.

Returning to white people. I’ve never met two white people who were the same. However, for the sake of this exposition, let’s pretend that white people fall hard into one of two groups: Neutral/pro-white white people, and anti-white white people. We can extend this dichotomy to include non-white people as well, and pretend they also fall into one of the two groups: Neutral/pro-white non-white people, or anti-white non-white people. It should be pointed out that anti-white people, whether they are white or not, are most likely leftist people.

(Note: the last sentence of the paragraph above, where I wrote “most likely.” The reader does realize that actually means “every single time,” right? This type of coding — one thing said, some other similar thing meant — that everyone implicitly gets, is everywhere and all the time. It can often be exceedingly difficult, even practically impossible, for white people in particular to speak frankly on these matters. So we code. We know it, and we know it’s known we know it).

Is Pro-White Alright?

In defining pro-white in the terms that I intend, allow me to first say that pro-white is the love of white people, our beautiful countries, and our rich cultures. It says nothing of non-white people. And it absolutely should not be assumed that a pro-white person is an anti-non-white person. In many cases, such as mine, pro-whiteness has not grown out of some intrinsic white people love that I feel powerfully moved to speak on. On the contrary, the love of my “macro” people group was born out of concern over the vast unfairness that lurks ever-presently in the guise of critical social justice identity politics, and that has been unexpectedly thrust upon, for the most part, this inherently good, and exceptionally generous people group that I am a part of.

It’s not clear that the white people are ok. So I’m going to write about them (us), regardless of who attributes ill-intent, misunderstands, or thinks I’m racist.

Why would this exercise be racist? Would it be racist if I changed the wording of the essay so that up to this point, every instance of “white people” was replaced with “black people”? Is that not what I’m doing: speaking about white people in a similar way that we commonly speak about black people? I think so.

I consider both black people and white people to be macro ethnic groups. When we say black people we are referring, for the most part, to African people and the diaspora. There are fifty-four countries in Africa. People from Uganda are a variety distinct from Nigerians, and Kenyans. When we say white people we are referring, for the most part, to European people and the diaspora. There are at least forty-six European countries. People from Britain are a variety distinct from the French, and the Dutch.

I am not trying to be pedantic. But I felt the above was a good and sufficient way to set up the following point, which I feel is of Brobdingnagian importance: All people are ethnic (including white people), and many of those in every people group wish to fall into, study, celebrate and honour their ethno-cultures and traditions, be they religious or otherwise. What more loving, just, and universal condition could we possibly advocate to all humanity, than love yourself, your people, your cultural heritage, your ancestors, your country, your ethnic myths and symbols and stories. I declare that all people (including old stock Anglo Canadians), if they so desire, should explore the depth and richness of their history and cultural heritage, without the depressing intersectional nonsense or oppressor/perpetrator false binary which pervades all things leftism.

If it’s not your thing, don’t bother, what I’m suggesting should not be mandatory. I suspect though, there are many people, perhaps the majority of people, who would love the fog of leftism to lift, so we can all re-examine in peace who exactly it is we are, and what makes us so, and learn or relearn where exactly it is we came from, and what makes us unique. It is true that all people groups are unique (this should go without saying). But pointing out the special uniqueness – the exceptional and prolific scale of achievement– of Western civilization should not be seen as a micro-aggressive racist shot taken at the non-Western world. If it were, scholarship and knowledge production generally, would have regressed to the maturity level seen among North American teenagers (yuck!).

The only way in which ethnic promotion, celebration, and advocacy becomes problematic is when it deliberately promotes hatred and violence against other groups. I don’t support violence or the hatred of any group. Full stop. This includes the group that I am most critical of: Islam. I hate terrorists. But I do not hate cultural Muslims. I disagree with Islam, I think it’s impossible to be a moral person and not. I think Islam should be banned in the West. If Islamic leaders in the West can’t organize around an updated Islam sans the hatred and calls for Sharia Law and violence, then mosques should be shut down and converted into affordable housing. If Islamists refuse to revise it to reflect a non-hateful message, the Koran should be outlawed. This is fundamentally different from racism, hatred, or calling for violence. It is none of those things. My opinions are widely shared by people of all colours. However, it should come as no surprise that white people are typically the most reluctant to express similar sentiments regardless of how strongly they feel them.

Also, it is well known, but still worth restating. Islamophobia is the unfair and manipulative charge that shuts down normal processes whereby people would otherwise express their concern about something that has repeatedly erupted in violence (seen most shockingly, in the lion share of global terrorism).

Again we return to the white ones. I have such an urge right now to go off on an extended exposition about the similarities between practically all of the white people groups in Europe, North America, and Oceania. While it may be slightly beyond the scope here, it's also really important and compelling information. In fact, it’s unprecedented. White people should not be ashamed of this pattern where almost all of the disparate European groups with different languages and cultural features also share many powerful and uncanny similarities. Similarities which in many cases happen to be the consequential factors that led to their abundant and continued prosperity. Did I mention that white majority Christian countries are the most liberal and democratic, as well as the most peaceful and prosperous? Well, it should be mentioned often. Anti-white detractors should be forced to contend with the fact that for over a thousand years white people have been the upholders of the world’s most moral religion: Christianity (which later they secularized as liberalism). White people indeed have been the custodians and the inspired architects of liberalism and democracy. And for centuries they have been the drivers of exploration, invention, innovation, human rights and global prosperity.

So why are so many white and non-white people down on whiteness? Jealousy and resentment is part of it. Perhaps even a big part. But that only explains non-white anti-whiteness. The bigger and more obvious reason in my view is simply that, in the modern Western world, an ascendent set of social ideologies (critical social justice) have been vehemently promoted through Western institutions for decades. The tenets of critical social justice have nothing positive to say about white people: whites are considered responsible for creating and upholding power structures that continue to oppress non-white people. Notice how, as discussed above, framing it this way treats the macro white people group as if it were a singular persona with a serious personality disorder. This is not the way. This is unfair. It is an inversion of the truth. When you notice this kind of thing happening you have noticed the anti-white program of critical social justice in action.

Ongoing Oppression

The language of “on-going” is always made abundantly clear. As if it were not bad enough that whitey has been historically assumed guilty of constructing the instruments of colonial oppression, like Indian Residential schools for the purpose of genociding indigenous kids, it is also assumed that these “horrendous crimes” (unsubstantiated) of the distant past were so evil that they continue to cause devastating intergenerational trauma. And dastardly white people of the present age continue to deliberately uphold the same old oppressive structures causing the on-going indigenous harm (which only repartitions and financial windfalls seem capable of soothing, albeit always in a temporary fashion).

The anti-white nature of this ascendent critical social justice philosophy makes it so that any implausible or outright sensational claims, as long as they function to further stigmatize white people as colonizing awful-tons, are believed unquestionably, while recommendations and calls-to-action aimed at ameliorating the “on-going” devastation of white people perpetrated oppression are immediately incorporated into the plans and policies of activists and their partners in government, media and the education system.

Exceptional Uniqueness

In 2011, Dr. Ricardo Duchesne wrote an excellent book called The Uniqueness of Western Civilization. Much of the spirit of the present essay series on Anglo-Canadians, in part by revealing the illustrious pattern of our history and traditions, has already been aptly conjured by the incredible scholarship of Dr. Duchesne. I will refer to his work often, and I highly recommend readers take some time to contend with it.

The final thought comes here for no other reason than my self-imposed word limit is about to be breached. However, this is some fascinating food for thought to close with. However, for some, what I’m about to write is so obvious it might lead them to believe that I’m a fraud, a complete joke, a pedantic loser. But here goes anyway…bottoms up: white Anglo Canadians are a unique people group. In all the world there is no other group like them. Only they are them. Period. They are, in fact – and I can anticipate this notion may not be well-received in some quarters – the ethnic archetype of the nation known all over the world as Canada. Gasp!

European descendent Anglo-Canadians are the majority AND the ethnic archetype of Canada. In terms of ethnic groups, and how they relate to nations, you don’t get much more special than that. The ancestors of Anglo-Canadians are the founders of the nation. This fact alone makes them exceptional, even before we discuss any of the unique qualities and characteristics of Anglo-Canadians, or what it means to be an ethnic archetype. This is a historical truth which sets them apart from non-Anglo Canadians. Does or should it mean Anglo-Canadians by law or otherwise be advantaged over non-Anglo Canadians? No, and nothing written should lead one to such an ungenerous conclusion. In fact, if one does reach that conclusion, it might be them, not me, who is the racist. If one cannot interpret the words and actions of white people with the same generosity of spirit extended to other people groups — and yes this disingenuous lacking is a thing I observe over and over — then one is living the leftist anti-white program of critical social justice. Knock it the hell off!

Future essays in this series will delve deeper into the uniqueness of Anglo-Canadians, the process of migration and ethnogenesis that led to them, and how their place in the nation is undermined by the uninspiring stupidity of leftism. I’ll say something about indigenous Canadians (as first inhabitants of Canada) and something about French Canadians, who I’m sure are pissed for not having their historical founding contribution mentioned in todays essay, but more importantly, who absolutely have a stake, although a regionally specific one, as a Canadian ethnic archetype.

Stay tuned! There is going to be so damn much more of this series, your socks are sure to be knocked completely off and rendered unrecognizable! Count on it!

---

Thanks for reading. For more from this author read The Catholics Strike Back.

Follow Woke Watch Canada on X - @WokeWatchCanada

Support Woke Watch Canada by upgrading to a paid membership:

Or, by contributing to our Donor Box: