The Resentment And Fragility Of Anti-Racism

Freedom Trucker Convoy in Ottawa, Canadian Legacy Media Spin False Narrative, Joe Rogan Hunted, Whoopi Speaks Dumb and Crusty Old Woke Hippies Embarrass Themselves

On the morning of February 3rd 2022, Jerry Agar, host of AM radio (CFRB) NewsTalk1010’s weekday morning talk show conducted a call-in interview with Rumina Morris, London Ontario’s director of anti-racism and anti-oppression. During the first half of the interview, anti-racism and an initiative targeting Islamophobia was discussed. But things went off the rails when Jerry’s audience, prompted by the peculiar way Ms. Morris framed the topic of racism/anti-racism, sent in multiple text messages asking “What about anti-White racism?”

Ms. Morris had been explaining how Islamophobia was a form of racism in what sounded like the typical word salad found in those of woke and anti-racist ilk. Contained somewhere in the final movement of her single-breathed diatribe were the words “embedded in the values of whiteness.” This was Jerry’s cue to pose the question so many listeners were asking. Her answer was disappointing - “There is no such thing” as anti-White racism.

What unfolded was a study in the Motte & Bailey rhetorical technique- a common practice deployed often by the woke. Simply put, a person hides what they are really saying using a clever trick of holding two simultaneous threads of argument, but only showing the one they think they can get away with. The first thread of argument is non-controversial and most often consistent with universally held beliefs. The second adds a controversial component and is most often at odds with universally held beliefs. The “Motte” is the non-controversial. The “Bailey” is the controversial.

For the first five minutes of the interview Ms. Morris was fully inside the Motte position. At the moment she uttered “embedded in values of whiteness,” we had a first glimpse of the Bailey. An interesting aspect of the Motte & Bailey is that although the non-controversial Motte is a well enforced impenetrable position, it is considered “stuffy and uncomfortable” making it simply not the desired place to be. The controversial Bailey on the other hand is outside in an open orchard. It is the desired place to be, but also where assertions are most open and vulnerable to challenge and examination. 

When Ms. Morris asserted that there “is no such thing” as anti-White racism; she moved further into the exposed and vulnerable Bailey. Jerry, understandably, informed her that she had lost him. She lost me too. Upon being told her position was ridiculous and itself a racist one she began weaving verbal yarns and back-pedaling to the safety of the Motte. She did this by employing another common technique of the woke; Polylogism or multiple logics.

The multiple logic utilized refers to an expanded (less known) woke definition of racism, involving the separation of the standard definition from words like bigotry, discrimination and ignorance. According to Ms. Morris, you can hold ignorant or bigoted ideas about White people, but not racist ones. She asserts that racism is “rooted in power at the systemic level.” She claims “racism is those who have the power to impact the lives of those in different bodies,” and that “racialized bodies don’t have the power to do racial harm.”

I think it's safe to assume that Ms. Morris is an acolyte of Ibram X. Kendi, author of “How To Be An Anti-Racist.” Kendi asserts “the only way to combat racism is with more racism,” so apparently, Ms. Morris’s double standards are consistent with Kendian anti-racist doctrine.

On January 8th, 2022 the talented young essayist, Rav Arora, published a piece in the New York Post called, ‘Minority privilege’ now more common amid the growing ‘war on whiteness’. In it Rav notes that “Minorities are increasingly becoming privileged while growing numbers of white people face discrimination.”

He goes on to provide a number of examples of not just double standards or the privileging of racialized minorities, but of systemic discrimination against White people. White discrimination runs the gamut from access to life saving medical treatment, University admissions, preferential hiring, exclusive access to key career opportunities (like Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot stating she will only give interviews to “journalists of color").

On January 31st, 2022 journalist Jonathan Bradley published a piece in Canadian independent media outlet True North entitled “Government report shows white Canadian males earn less than visible minorities.” From this piece:

“Visible minority Canadian men earn as much as a tenth more than white Canadian men, according to a report from Statistics Canada obtained by Blacklock’s Reporter on Thursday.” 

The reality of racial issues is shifting quickly, but with so much money and resources invested into both anti-racism and Diversity, Equity and Inclusion initiatives, it is unlikely that the woke “race hustlers” will concede that perhaps their methods are no longer needed. In fact, a doubling down on their agenda and narrative is much more likely. From the True North piece:

“The findings of the report – which seem to counter claims of predominant “white privilege” in Canada – also come after a poll in June 2021 suggested that the majority (66%) of Canadians do not believe Canada is a racist country. This compared with 34% of respondents who agreed or strongly agreed that it was. 

The poll also found that “equity and anti-racism advocates” were more likely to suspect racism than visible minorities themselves.” (Of course they were).

Defining Racism/Anti-Racism

Since 1987 I’ve been the owner of a large hardcover “analog” volume  - “The New Lexicon Webster's Dictionary Of The English Language.” Even though I use the internet most often (Google, Dictionary.com and others), I like referring to this trusty old English Language tomb from 1987 to better understand the evolution of words and language (especially when comparing to new definitions found on digital platforms, because we all know big tech is super woke right?)

Definitions for both racism and anti-racism from that “analog” volume follow. I refer to these as the Motte position standard definitions - notice the concision and absence of the word power:

Racism

1. The assumption that the characteristics and abilities of an individual are determined by race and that one race is biologically superior to another.

2. A political program or social system based on these assumptions.

Anti-Racism

1. Being opposed to racial discrimination.

If we fast forward to 2022, Merriam-Webster’s online dictionary has evolved the definition of racism slightly and provided several telling examples. See for yourself. Note how the examples of racism are of the kind perpetrated by Whites against either Black or Indigenous victims. Interestingly, their definition of anti-racism doesn’t deviate from the standard definition. But when you consider the implications of Merriam-Webster’s definition of racism (specifically their second meaning, included below, which invokes white supremacy), the net result is a conception of racism/anti-racism that is consistent with woke rhetoric and Kendian strictures (relying on false assumptions of a simplistic victim/perpetrator dichotomy mixed with a narrow view of history).

Words like racism/anti-racism, filtered through the anti-reason of postmodern polylogic, have built-in Motte & Bailey aspects. The Motte is the standard well known definition, and the Bailey is the Kendian version (reflected in the updated “second meanings” found in new definitions of racism, steeped in the postmodern identity politics only recently gaining wide acceptance).

Merriam-Webster's second definition of racism (the first fits the standard definition) reads like so:

The systemic oppression of a racial group to the social, economic, and political advantage of another - specifically : WHITE SUPREMACY. 

ie. One of the many ruses racism achieves is the virtual erasure of historical contributions by people of color. — Angela Y. Davis

That Merriam-Webster feels the need to state “White Supremacy'' is “specifically” associated with the second definition of racism and provide only examples of white-perpetrated oppression, it seems, wilfully constructs a picture wherein white ethnic majorities hold monopoly on both historical and present day oppression. This is ahistorical ideological nonsense that doesn’t even attempt to hide it’s blatant one-sided race essentialism and bigotry. It is typical for platforms controlled by Big Tech to embrace and echo fallacious woke sentiments.

In woke circles, Whiteness, - and it is not clear if the Caucasian race or the majority European ethnicity is intended - through a polylogical process involving, among other things, postmodern relativism is being (re)defined to be all the things the woke claim society cannot eradicate fast enough. Imagine asserting that the qualities and characteristics of Black-ness or Indigenous-ness or Asian-ness must be eradicated before diversity, inclusion and a true commitment to anti-racism can occur.

Dictionary.com’s first definition is consistent with the standard definition. But, similar to other modern sources, their second definition veers off into the territory of postmodern identity politics with - “institutional racism…that favors members of the dominant group…” Presumably the dominant group holds the power (which is what the woke obsess over and desire most).

Here is Dictionary.com’s definition of racism. Notice the ballooning amount of words (as compared to the concise economy found in my “analog” copy of Webster’s Lexicon):

1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human racial groups determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to dominate others or that a particular racial group is inferior to the others.

2. Also called institutional racism, structural racism, systemic racism. a policy, system of government, etc., that is associated with or originated in such a doctrine, and that favors members of the dominant racial or ethnic group, or has a neutral effect on their life experiences, while discriminating against or harming members of other groups, ultimately serving to preserve the social status, economic advantage, or political power of the dominant group.

It is these postmodern definitions that pave the way for analysis that correlates racism with disparity (only from the dominant group of course). Consider the interpretation of situations where Black or Indigenous people receive less benefit, promotion or advantage, or receive more fines, punishment or incarceration than the dominant group (whites). Any departure from an equitable and proportionate outcome (by racial group), if it is seen as impacting Black or Indigenous negatively, is automatically considered racism. Any departure from an equitable and proportionate outcome that is seen as negatively impacting whites, its just fine and not worth mentioning.

Google's definition - “Prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against a person or people on the basis of their membership in a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized." - seems to fit the standard definition but asserts that racism is directed  - “typically (at) one that is a minority or marginalized.”

By claiming that racism is experienced by minority groups only, the implication being because of the inherent power imbalance between majority and minority groups, this creates preconditions considered necessary in order for any racism to occur. It collectivizes racism and privileges racialized individuals, who may be found guilty of bigotry or discrimination, but can never be considered racist. That title reserved for White bodied individuals exclusively.

I argue that these definitions, while containing aspects of truth, have evolved through a poisoned lens of postmodern identity politics. The net result contributes to the systemic dehumanizing and othering of the ethnic White majority, or as the woke like to say - “folks with White bodies.” Can the woke not accept any plausible scenario in which an individual from a majority group can be marginalized?

Recent events have escalated the controversy around these issues to the point where it now feels many from the left are actively creating and contributing to an environment increasingly hostile to the White majority- specifically those with traditional and/or conservative values.

In his book, “White Shift: Populism, Immigration, And The Future Of White Majorities,” political scientist Erik Kaufmann describes a Western tradition of opposing one’s own culture held by the lyrical left (today we call them the woke- those who make up the “anti-majority adversary culture”). From the book,

“Today, the anti-majority adversary culture operates on a much larger scale, permeates major institutions and is transmitted to conservatives through social media and right-wing media. This produces a growing culture war divide between the increasingly insecure white conservatives and the energized white liberals…This process has shut down many democratic norms - like discussing questions of national identity and immigration”

The majority working class (who’s ethnic identity is inexorably tied to the national identity) are looked down upon with disgust by a segment of resentful woke progressives (the lyrical left). They see this unwashed mass of Canada’s ethnic national majority as less than human, not deserving of freedom of speech or choice on many contentious issues of personal or religious significance. The divide in Western countries is palpable and can be illustrated by a number of still unfolding concurrent events. More on this below, but first let’s take a look at one final online platform that offers a definition/conception of racism: Wikipedia.

The Wikipedia definition seems fairly consistent with the standard definition. However, being an encyclopedia it includes more detail and historical examples. In one paragraph it admits - “According to a United Nations convention on racial discrimination, there is no distinction between the terms "racial" and "ethnic" discrimination. The UN Convention further concludes that superiority based on racial differentiation is scientifically false, morally condemnable, socially unjust and dangerous. The convention also declared that there is no justification for racial discrimination, anywhere, in theory or in practice.”

In my view, it is essential that White ethnic majorities (who have just as much of a right to protect and celebrate their ethnicity as any other ethnic group) ensure these UN pronouncements apply equally to them as well. Woke ideas of “eradicating Whiteness” are at odds with decency and need to be exposed as the race essentialist and bigoted double standards they are.

The statement that “there is no distinction between the terms "racial" and "ethnic" discrimination” is interesting and relevant to the “Whoopi affair” discussed below. But first let's focus our attention on this sentence, worth pointing out because - “19th and 20th century racism in Western culture is particularly well documented and constitutes a reference point in studies and discourses about racism.” Could this have something to do with the widely-held assumption that oppression is a White thing?

If the vast majority of Western scholarship on oppression (especially the canon influenced by postmodernism) is focused on oppression inflicted by European colonizers, it’s not much of a stretch to imagine the widespread adoption of a common impression where only Europeans enjoyed, and continue to enjoy, a proprietary hold on the tool of oppression.

The West, generally speaking, is captured by the postmodern ideas of postcolonial theory, which are rooted in an ahistorical retelling of history wrung through a reductive process, unique to Western nations, whereby a victim/perpetrator dichotomy is established and race essentialism deployed to repeat and exaggerate the “well documented” fairly recent (approx. the last 200-300 years) historical wrongs of White Europeans. Painting a picture where White Europeans have a unique historical monopoly on oppression, which of course, is itself a racist assertion, and patently false.

These 4 volumes from Cambridge books surveys the world history of slavery from antiquity to the present day offering a material and historical perspective (instead of an ahistorical one cherry picked for woke identitarian purposes).

In his book “Black Rednecks and White Liberals,” Thomas Sowell, commenting on the history of slavery points out,

“no other other historic horror is so narrowly construed…why this provincial view of a worldwide evil? …Why would anyone wish to arbitrarily understate an evil that plagued mankind for thousands of years, unless it was not this evil itself that was the real concern, but rather the present day uses of that historic evil? Clearly, the ability to score ideological points against American society or Western civilization, or to induce guilt and extract benefits from the white population today are greatly enhanced by making enslavement appear to be a peculiarly American, or a peculiarly white, crime.”

The Whoopi affair

On February 2nd, the day before Jerry Agar’s interview with London’s “race hustler,” Whoopi Goldberg was suspended from her co-host position on the ABC talk show “The View.” Told to “take a two-week break ‘to reflect and learn about the impact of her comments.’” - Comments she had made on air in which she claimed the Holocaust was not about race but instead a White-on-White conflict. Considering that the Nazi’s thought of the Jews as an inferior race, many Jews were deeply offended by what they characterized as Whoopi’s insensitivity.

However, confusion has surrounded the issue with many people sympathizing with Whoopi claiming similar confusion around questions of Jewish racial and ethnic identity. Considering the widespread western media bias against the Jewish state of Israel, it’s not surprising so many hold insensitive and reductive opinions about Jewish racial/ethnic identity.

Joseph Nicole in commenting on the “Whoopi affair” in The Times Of Israel points out that - “Jews are often excluded from the umbrella of protection and sympathy that progressives extend to other minorities.” He quotes author David Baddeil from his book Jews Don’t Count:

“…the progressive consensus has failed, in a time of deep intensification of concern about discrimination faced by minorities in general, to apply that concern to Jews, and the discrimination they suffer.” 

Postmodern identity politics is not color blind. Jewish people get included in the White category because it is incorrectly assumed that all Jews have white skin.  Not only does this erase the Jewish racial/ethnic group (and their minority status), but it does a similar disservice to the majority racial/ethnic group of European descendents. We are generally less concerned with perceived threats against majority groups simply because majority groups remain secure in their numbers. Secure or not, the woke push for the erasure of Whiteness is a very real concern with attempts to dissolve Jews into the white group as a recurring theme. 

Consider the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. As White bodied people, some Jews fit the perpetrator side of the victim/perpetrator framework consistent with the White bodied oppressors under European colonization. The woke attempt to link the Whiteness of Jews with the history of European colonization by falsely characterizing the Jewish role in the middle east as colonizers of Palestinian lands. In other words, according to the woke, Whiteness is inextricably linked with oppression and colonization. 

Antagonizing and disrespecting the national ethnic majorities in North America is wrapped up in the woke progressive agenda. As is equating the Zionist movement with European colonization and casting Jews as oppressors and Palestinians as oppressed. The Jewish peoples historical claims to Israel, the universal support that Zionism received in the post World War Two era, and Israel's present day right to defend itself and its people are rarely recognized or discussed. This leads to a one-sided over simplification of a vastly complicated issue serving to prop up the woke progressive narrative which sees Whiteness as a scourge.

Freedom Truckers, Spotify, Old Woke Hippies and Joe Rogan

Just days before the “Whoopi Affair” rumblings from the North began to be heard. On January 29th a “Freedom Convoy” of thousands of Canadian truckers (and their trucks) descended on Canada’s capital city of Ottawa in protest of Covid/Vaccine mandates, lockdowns and restrictions. They have one demand; Lift all restrictions.

As I write this on February 6th, the truckers are still in Ottawa fighting for the freedom of all Canadians. 

The Freedom Convoy is relevant for my purpose here because of the blatant mischaracterization and outward resentment of the protest event by Canada’s shameful mainstream legacy media and the woke virtue signaling progressive types who hold nothing but disdain for the traditional values of Canada’s working class majority. 

Without going into too much depth, let me explain that I have several groups of friends who were in Ottawa (some still there) participating in the protest including both filming and live streaming. I have viewed hours of footage, received first hand detailed accounts from several friends, watched all the video streamed by the Rebel News journalists and followed the discourse on Twitter and Facebook obsessively (at least for the first three days). 

I compared what I saw from live streams on social media and heard directly from friends (who were embedded eyewitnesses to the event), with the mainstream media coverage in real-time. Let me tell you, I have never seen the media so blatant and desperate in their attempts to, at first downplay, and then delegitimize the Freedom Truckers and the now nationwide movement they inspired. 

Ottawa Trucker Protest of January 2022

This shameful dishonest conduct originates from the top. Canada’s Liberal Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, referred to the truckers as a “small fringe majority with unacceptable views.” He later made comments associating the protestors with white supremacists, misogynists, bigots and transphobes. But it was the NDP leader Jagmeet Singh who took the prize when he tweeted -"…Conservative MPs have endorsed a convoy led by those that claim the superiority of the white bloodline and equate Islam to a disease.” In 2022, it is commonplace for left wing Canadian politicians to direct these types of fallaciously deplorable and divisive statements at conservatives and working class Canadians.

The elite political class and the legacy media’s accusations of racism, bigotry, White supremacy, misogyny, transphobia, etc. have no bearing in reality and absolutely no place in the discourse for anyone being serious. But that is just it, no matter how absurd their claims, they pursue them shamelessly. They insult the intelligence of reasonable people across the entire country, while at the same time flattering the resentfully hollow egos of the do-nothing complainer class we call woke liberal progressives (the Lyrical Left).

Enter the Crust

Then out of the blue, crusty old woke hippie Neil Young declares he is unhappy with American podcaster Joe Rogan's free speech and wants his (Young’s) music removed from Spotify unless they are willing to censor Rogan. Young’s music has since been removed and a bunch of other crusty washed up old woke hippies not worth mentioning followed in the pathetic footsteps of that authoritarian grump. I hope you get the sense I’m disgusted by these so-called liberal hippies who once claimed to be champions of free speech. Because in clown world, where men dominate women's sports and Canadian truckers (who pick up garbage and shovel snow) are White supremacists, it’s easy to be disgusted.

Crusty Old Woke Hippie

Some of my readers might know that I spent over twenty years in the Canadian music business. I still have ties with many musicians and Canadian music industry stakeholders. I am connected to thousands of Canadian musicians on social media. I can say unequivocally that these people suck just as much as the washed up hippies do. Instead of using their platforms and artistry to support the truckers and their struggle for the freedom of all Canadians, they, generally speaking, chose to echo the mischaracterizations of the legacy media in denouncing the truckers as white supremacist, and spent their time and effort removing their music from spotify in solidarity with that living wrinkle of a burned out old liberal hippie whose signature sound is singing out of tune. 

Then on February 6th, the organized effort to cancel Joe Rogan escalated when a disingenuous loser pieced together an out-of-context montage video of instances of Joe uttering the un-unutterable; the forbidden word. Instead of saying “the N-word” he said the actual word - not with hateful intent, but that doesn’t matter to the fragile woke who were most certainly harmed and traumatized upon hearing so many edited together repetitions of the unspeakable (only if you’re White) and eternally forbidden word to end all words.

Why do we humor this insane charade? Why do we act like the mere utterance of this forbidden “N-word” by anyone who doesn’t have Black skin will cause the forests of the globe to erupt in fires and the oceans to spontaneously explode in cascades of world destroying tsunami waves. It’s dumb. We need to get over it.

And more importantly we need to realize that this charade, as ridiculous as it is, actually causes real harm to White people who, regardless of intent, occasionally slip up and say it. It’s a trap, one of many that targets White people. It’s about holding power over them. What else could it be? Cue the word salad explanation informed by Critical Race Theory.

What other word, when spoken by any other person, of any other race could potentially result in the loss of that person's ability to support his/her family? You have to really hate someone (or the group they belong to) to think that the enunciation of these two syllables (without a doubt two hateful syllables) deserves irredeemable and irrevocable life destroying punishment. But yes, this is the level of intolerance the woke are operating at.

American Podcaster Joe Rogan

In conclusion, it is worth pointing out that all of the events discussed in this essay occurred over a seven day period. Some of course, are ongoing so it remains to be seen where things will land. But it certainly does feel as if the winds have shifted and more people are catching glimpses of the post-George Floyd “clown world” some of us have been preoccupied raising alarms over.

We need to stop playing along with woke nonsense. The new oppressors are the “race hustlers” like Rumina Morris, Justin Trudeau and Jagmeet Singh. And racism is now directed, systemically at Whiteness; at Joe Rogan, at the Freedom Protestors, at outspoken university professors who dare to challenge woke narratives, at anyone who holds conservative or traditional values, and most obviously, the unwashed masses of the working class not sophisticated or cosmopolitan enough to hold the “morally superior” woke progressive ideals.

I recommend being an unapologetic monster in rejecting this nonsense. If you can. Reasoning with the woke is a waste of time. Apologizing never works. The woke are bullies caught up in a divisive ideology attached to postmodern identity politics. The illegitimate relativism and race essentialism of postmodernism is easy to reject, and to deal unapologetically with progressive bullies is to deny the credibility of woke ideology. This demonstrates strength and shows no mercy. Don’t give them an inch.