And then there are simply people like me who at the end of the day after the debate is over can say "Think what you will but every night I look in the mirror and I am still white" hows about you?
Aug 21, 2023·edited Aug 21, 2023Liked by Woke Watch Canada
An excellent post James, well written. Kaufmann is an important analyst I would say. At times, it is difficult to determine whether the author is offering an intellectual endorsement of the phenomena of shrinking white populations, but I think that, on the balance, he is recognizing that it is happening, is basically unstoppable at present, and then proceeds with the questions of how and why and what is the best policy to adopt in the face of the inevitable. As for the idea of keeping "white myths and symbols" alive in an increasingly multi-ethnic society, if we are talking about the underpinnings of personal liberty, then we ought to resist the Boasian (from Franz Boas) cultural relativists who insist that no culture is better than any other. There is a culture that happens to be white in origin that is better because it is the only one historically to have brought about personal liberty in the societies which it shapes. If ethnic citizens like Vivek Ramaswamy want to embrace and partake of that culture and value system, they are at liberty to do so! The illiberals are not those who recognize that the culture is white in origin while simultaneously appreciating the liberal vision to its fullest: as a universalist system that extends its values and rights to all citizens. The illiberals are those who denigrate and disparage the liberal vision because it is white in origin, while simultaneously positioning other, non-liberal, value-systems as policy and law-making alternatives.
“There is a culture that happens to be white in origin” and “ethnic citizens like Vivek Ramaswamy”... there are two phrases that need some clarity. What culture is a “white” culture; how is it that “Vivek Ramaswamy” is “ethnic” unless you mean “not white skinned”? This sniffs of racialism big time, M.
Row your canoe, that's what you're good at. You're an SJW lmao you really have no place here. Embarrassing. You display every pseudo-intellectual trope devised by what —in the above piece— is described as "anti-majority adversary culture." Every like on this piece is a vote against canoe man, let's be clear about that.
Another interesting piece. I am unclear about the importance of the “white” within “the customary norms and traditions associated with white ethnicity”. What traditions are “white” as distinct from, say, “Western” or enlightenment values. Given the conclusion in your piece (and Kaufmann’s thesis) that we all expect a gradual evolution towards “mixed racial” societies over time, (better than abrupt change seems to be the primary argument) why term the traditions as “white” at all. The skin tone seems immaterial to the concept at best, even if many (although not all) have European roots.
I think it comes down to the terms people actually use. "White" and "black" are commonly used as descriptors. Both when self-describing and describing others. I decided long ago that these are just words (descriptors) that carry no hidden agenda or antipathy. They are simply how we both see and describe each other.
If you are questioning the validity of "white" as it refers to the racial category of modern day majority populations of Western democracies who have their roots in Europe, are you also questioning the validity of "black" as it refers to the racial category of modern day diaspora with origins in Africa?
Mixed raced societies in the west are an inevitable future outcome. There is no stopping them. But it is not inevitable that the current culture be replaced (or obliterated). It is likely that these future mixed raced societies will be made up of people (of all races) who take up white myths and symbols, practices, traditions, accents, customs, etc etc., becuase that is the natural pattern of assimilation that occurs all over the world. However, todays woke left is trying to prevent this.
Everything that Canada is, comes overwhelming from people who are white. The core of them, and the original tribe, were the Anglo-Saxons. Later, when other white European groups immigrated to North America, the process of assimilation/integration (whiteshift) made people who at first were at odds with the WASPs to later be absorbed by them, whereupon it became common for everyone to self-describe as "white" instead of "Anglo-Saxon" "Jewish" "Catholic" "Polish or German diaspora" -- that is white ethnicity!! It is a deeply rich story of European tradition and migration.
I question the concept of race being a coherent concept to begin with but in the current context it is very unclear why you would link “white” to the cultures we celebrate. There is no distinct “white culture” that I know of, just as there is no “black culture”. There are ethnic and geographically based and national cultures. We refer to “Western” culture(s) to distinguish it/them from “Eastern” (also very plural) etc but both these are far too wide ranging as terms to be very helpful. Nonetheless there is some coherence to “Western” as short form for enlightenment values (democracy, liberties, science etc) that are shared now around the world but to a large extent originated within the diverse cultures of Europe, or even Indo-European. There is disagreement about which nations populate the “West” and some of the elements of this culture originated separately or concurrently elsewhere. Putting all that aside, we mostly know what we are talking about when we refer to “the West”. My complaint is with the “whiteness” added on. It isn’t required to project or to define what are “western values” but it also implies a skin context rather than a geographical or cultural origin. Referring to skin colour in this framework is highly questionable and rejected by most scholars as an anachronistic racialized approach from another time. This is the corollary of the DiAngelo and I X Kendi “anti-whiteness” forms of tribalism. As the clever Douglas Murray stated, we should avoid that trap -- “the re-racialization that in the name of anti-racism is now being fostered upon us all.”
A the run-of-the-mill social theorist's ploy to "challenge" us about our thinking, as if we wouldn't have been able to break white down into Anglo-Saxons, Italians, Germans etc. etc. without their special insight. Oh wait guys, I've got a social theory critique - did you ever realize not all whites come from the same place? 0_0
James Pew dares to write about subjects most other journalists cower from. I see “a model in which today’s white majorities evolve seamlessly and gradually into mixed-race majorities that take on white myths and symbols.” I think western society has proven itself as the best project for humans to date and that it won’t continue to get better if we pretend that it should be wholly deconstructed.
What are these originating “white myths and symbols”? What makes them “white” and not universalist? Surely the observation that they are being incorporated into multiethnic societies is evidence of their broad (universalist) application.
Robin Collins - you're a Marxist, supposedly former Marxist, who thinks that woke comes from the right. Why would anyone make the mistake of thinking that you want to have a non-rhetorical, non-subversive, intellectual exchange about the nature and the values of liberty?
So am I a Marxist or a former Marxist? Which is it? I note that you have never engaged in a solid discussion but only launched ad hominems. What is it about my postings that so gets your goat? Could it be I know the landscape of this topic and challenge your stereotypes? So, what makes enlightenment values “white” in your view… the ostensible topic we should be discussing.
White European in origin, universal in application. Buy a clue - I don't respond in depth to certain people here because it isn't worth it to me to do so.
And then there are simply people like me who at the end of the day after the debate is over can say "Think what you will but every night I look in the mirror and I am still white" hows about you?
An excellent post James, well written. Kaufmann is an important analyst I would say. At times, it is difficult to determine whether the author is offering an intellectual endorsement of the phenomena of shrinking white populations, but I think that, on the balance, he is recognizing that it is happening, is basically unstoppable at present, and then proceeds with the questions of how and why and what is the best policy to adopt in the face of the inevitable. As for the idea of keeping "white myths and symbols" alive in an increasingly multi-ethnic society, if we are talking about the underpinnings of personal liberty, then we ought to resist the Boasian (from Franz Boas) cultural relativists who insist that no culture is better than any other. There is a culture that happens to be white in origin that is better because it is the only one historically to have brought about personal liberty in the societies which it shapes. If ethnic citizens like Vivek Ramaswamy want to embrace and partake of that culture and value system, they are at liberty to do so! The illiberals are not those who recognize that the culture is white in origin while simultaneously appreciating the liberal vision to its fullest: as a universalist system that extends its values and rights to all citizens. The illiberals are those who denigrate and disparage the liberal vision because it is white in origin, while simultaneously positioning other, non-liberal, value-systems as policy and law-making alternatives.
“There is a culture that happens to be white in origin” and “ethnic citizens like Vivek Ramaswamy”... there are two phrases that need some clarity. What culture is a “white” culture; how is it that “Vivek Ramaswamy” is “ethnic” unless you mean “not white skinned”? This sniffs of racialism big time, M.
Row your canoe, that's what you're good at. You're an SJW lmao you really have no place here. Embarrassing. You display every pseudo-intellectual trope devised by what —in the above piece— is described as "anti-majority adversary culture." Every like on this piece is a vote against canoe man, let's be clear about that.
Did I poke the bear? :-) …paddle a canoe, row a boat, where you from?
Another interesting piece. I am unclear about the importance of the “white” within “the customary norms and traditions associated with white ethnicity”. What traditions are “white” as distinct from, say, “Western” or enlightenment values. Given the conclusion in your piece (and Kaufmann’s thesis) that we all expect a gradual evolution towards “mixed racial” societies over time, (better than abrupt change seems to be the primary argument) why term the traditions as “white” at all. The skin tone seems immaterial to the concept at best, even if many (although not all) have European roots.
I think it comes down to the terms people actually use. "White" and "black" are commonly used as descriptors. Both when self-describing and describing others. I decided long ago that these are just words (descriptors) that carry no hidden agenda or antipathy. They are simply how we both see and describe each other.
If you are questioning the validity of "white" as it refers to the racial category of modern day majority populations of Western democracies who have their roots in Europe, are you also questioning the validity of "black" as it refers to the racial category of modern day diaspora with origins in Africa?
Mixed raced societies in the west are an inevitable future outcome. There is no stopping them. But it is not inevitable that the current culture be replaced (or obliterated). It is likely that these future mixed raced societies will be made up of people (of all races) who take up white myths and symbols, practices, traditions, accents, customs, etc etc., becuase that is the natural pattern of assimilation that occurs all over the world. However, todays woke left is trying to prevent this.
Everything that Canada is, comes overwhelming from people who are white. The core of them, and the original tribe, were the Anglo-Saxons. Later, when other white European groups immigrated to North America, the process of assimilation/integration (whiteshift) made people who at first were at odds with the WASPs to later be absorbed by them, whereupon it became common for everyone to self-describe as "white" instead of "Anglo-Saxon" "Jewish" "Catholic" "Polish or German diaspora" -- that is white ethnicity!! It is a deeply rich story of European tradition and migration.
I question the concept of race being a coherent concept to begin with but in the current context it is very unclear why you would link “white” to the cultures we celebrate. There is no distinct “white culture” that I know of, just as there is no “black culture”. There are ethnic and geographically based and national cultures. We refer to “Western” culture(s) to distinguish it/them from “Eastern” (also very plural) etc but both these are far too wide ranging as terms to be very helpful. Nonetheless there is some coherence to “Western” as short form for enlightenment values (democracy, liberties, science etc) that are shared now around the world but to a large extent originated within the diverse cultures of Europe, or even Indo-European. There is disagreement about which nations populate the “West” and some of the elements of this culture originated separately or concurrently elsewhere. Putting all that aside, we mostly know what we are talking about when we refer to “the West”. My complaint is with the “whiteness” added on. It isn’t required to project or to define what are “western values” but it also implies a skin context rather than a geographical or cultural origin. Referring to skin colour in this framework is highly questionable and rejected by most scholars as an anachronistic racialized approach from another time. This is the corollary of the DiAngelo and I X Kendi “anti-whiteness” forms of tribalism. As the clever Douglas Murray stated, we should avoid that trap -- “the re-racialization that in the name of anti-racism is now being fostered upon us all.”
A the run-of-the-mill social theorist's ploy to "challenge" us about our thinking, as if we wouldn't have been able to break white down into Anglo-Saxons, Italians, Germans etc. etc. without their special insight. Oh wait guys, I've got a social theory critique - did you ever realize not all whites come from the same place? 0_0
And yet you insist they are white at every turn. Why use the term if it is flawed. Step up.
All people come from the same place. Not just the pale ones.
James Pew dares to write about subjects most other journalists cower from. I see “a model in which today’s white majorities evolve seamlessly and gradually into mixed-race majorities that take on white myths and symbols.” I think western society has proven itself as the best project for humans to date and that it won’t continue to get better if we pretend that it should be wholly deconstructed.
What are these originating “white myths and symbols”? What makes them “white” and not universalist? Surely the observation that they are being incorporated into multiethnic societies is evidence of their broad (universalist) application.
Robin Collins - you're a Marxist, supposedly former Marxist, who thinks that woke comes from the right. Why would anyone make the mistake of thinking that you want to have a non-rhetorical, non-subversive, intellectual exchange about the nature and the values of liberty?
So am I a Marxist or a former Marxist? Which is it? I note that you have never engaged in a solid discussion but only launched ad hominems. What is it about my postings that so gets your goat? Could it be I know the landscape of this topic and challenge your stereotypes? So, what makes enlightenment values “white” in your view… the ostensible topic we should be discussing.
White European in origin, universal in application. Buy a clue - I don't respond in depth to certain people here because it isn't worth it to me to do so.
Why “white” European? Why not “European”, although enlightenment values were not exclusive to that region either.