The New Racists

Racism's new favourite Anti.

Just when you thought the world couldn't get any worse, and humanity's depravity was maybe beginning to ebb; just when you thought we might actually be making some strides in the racism department, everything has come crashing down around us. Yes, once again everything is meaningless.

If you've been paying attention, you'll no doubt know that over the last few years, a new ideal has come into vogue - the Antiracist. No, this is not the uncouth spouse of your favourite Uncle Racist, but rather the dubious contribution of Ibram X. Kendi who would love for us all to understand that regardless of what we really believe or do, we are in fact all racist to the core by nature (but only if we're white).

I used to have conversations with people on social media about this topic, but as one would expect, they usually ended up being a complete waste of everyone's time. Maybe that's not quite true because if nothing else, it at least gave me something to talk about (and write about) afterwards.

Rather than get into the whole concept of antiracism here (there's lots online and you can look it up if you really want to), it's perhaps easier to look at one of these conversations, since all these people use the same talking points anyway. The following is from a discussion on a Facebook group regarding something I wrote called The Big, Bad Three (which you can read here if you want to find out how racist I am) where I was talking about certain people calling me a racist without any justification.

Antiracist person:

Ken, “racist” isn’t a “name”, it’s a description of behaviour. Racism and racist behaviour depend on the belief that groups should be treated differently based on their perceived ethnicity or skin colour.

Ok, now this I actually agree with. The thing that amused me about this statement, however is that even though almost everyone can agree with this definition of racism, and also that it's generally not proper to treat people differently based on their skin colour, it is the “progressive” position to constantly advocate for this very thing. Think “affirmative action” in regards to hiring practices or college admissions.

Antiracist person again:

The difference between the way the cops are treating the “freedom fighters,” who are primarily white, and the way they treat “water protectors,” who are primarily indigenous, for example, is rooted in racism.

Really? You mean those “racists and misogynists” in Ottawa? The group that was probably the most multicultural and diverse protest in our mation’s history? And the protest that eventually got the Emergencies Act invoked by our Prime Minister? The fact that the vast majority of Black Lives Matter protesters were white was evidently lost on this person, but I digress…

After schooling me on the difference between “white privilege” and “white supremacy”, this person then offered a word of encouragement:

Antiracist person once more:

Feel free to do your own research, or I can provide you with some resources I’ve found helpful when I’ve been unpacking my white privilege (because guess what, I have it too) and trying to learn from BIPOC individuals how to be anti-racist.

She then went on to explain that “none of this is name-calling”, but simply “calling out behaviour and welcoming self reflection”. So, someone literally calling me a racist, is not technically “name-calling", but simply stating a fact that should inspire self reflection. Well, that's much nicer then, isn't it?

Here's the thing - most of the time this word is used these days, it really is just name calling because it’s usually based on very shallow interpretations and vague and ambiguous extrapolations of something that was said.

While it’s nice that this person is “unpacking her white privilege” and “trying to learn from BIPOC individuals how to be anti-racist”, what she fails to realize is that when the whole point of your ideology is specifically looking for racism - guess what it is you're going to find… This is akin to looking for witches in the 1600s. Evidently there were lots of them at the time as well.

This is so classic because it goes right to the point I was making. It's basically saying that, no longer is it sufficient to just not be racist (because let's face it, there's probably a lot less racism now than some would have us believe). Now you have to be anti-racist because if you're not, well then you may as well just be racist, which in turn makes it that much easier to call everyone racist, which is really the point of this whole business.

The funny thing about antiracism (if one could really laugh at such a thing) is that it actually seems to be more racist than simply minding one’s own business, and apparently, its very liberal practitioners are also more likely to harbour racist attitudes.

A 2018 study¹ published by the American Psychological Association found that white liberals dumb themselves down when speaking to black people. It makes sense, if you really believe that blacks can't get into college on their own merit, or get a job without the employer specifically passing over more qualified white folks. And if you think "affirmative action” is the only way for people of colour to get a leg up, then that is exactly what you believe. So of course you're going to dumb down your language when speaking to people like this.

Now, this study doesn't specifically mention “antiracism”, but as I said, if your whole raison d'être is finding and pointing out racism and racial discrepancies (and this is a decidedly “liberal” persuasion), then it shouldn't be at all surprising when it shows up in your life.

Another study² in the British Medical Journal found that as more suicides were mentioned on the news, suicide rates due to “copycat effect” went up. The study found that it was the quantity and the manner of reporting suicides that caused a greater incidence of copycat suicides. It also found that the greatest reduction in copycat suicides may sometimes come from simply reducing the sheer quantity of news on suicide. Huh. You don't say?

Might the same principle not apply to incidents of racism (not to mention a whole host of other crime stories we’re inundated with on a daily basis)? When Mike Wallace asked Morgan Freeman, “How do we get rid of racism?”, his response was an immediate, “Stop talking about it.”

When all we hear about is racism, colonialism, and white supremacy, is it any wonder that we see more instances of this happening? This is especially true when the bar to call something racism is set so low.

When every little thing you don't like becomes a racist act, it's pretty easy to forget what real racism looks like. When we constantly berate ourselves with the need to be so careful to not break all the rules around what is racist and what is not; when we tiptoe around anyone who is a different colour than ourselves because we're convinced we’re going to somehow offend them, it's no wonder that things get messed up. Everything becomes so calculated to make sure a rule isn't broken that nothing is natural and it all comes off as insincere. I believe this is the very reason we now have "micro aggressions". Behaving this way towards people who should just be treated normally should be offensive to everyone.

During the height of the Black Lives Matter movement in the summer of 2020, someone in our town took it upon themselves to start a local BLM Facebook group.

I joined the group, mainly out of curiosity, and because I sensed there might be a bit of a disconnect between their stated goals and reality. Turns out it was a very self-congratulatory group. Everyone was grateful to be in the company of other white saviors, as most of the members were white (of course) and it was, as I suspected mainly an attempt to get on the BLM bandwagon. Now, I'm not saying we don't have racism in our town, but the way this group was styled, you'd think we had George Floyd himself hiding out for his life in one of these people’s basements.

One of the most telling comments came from one of the few black people in the group. He started off by saying, “Oh boy, this is going to be awkward, but…”

He then pointed out that there are two kinds of racism - Active racism (verbal and physical attacks), and passive racism (laws, stereotypes, inaction). He said that having experience both types of racism, he could say with a fair degree of certainty that our town is “nowhere near actively racist”.

He talked about those who came before him who had lost so much and worked so hard so that he was able come as far as he has. He talked about his goal of inspiring and empowering youth so that race relations will improve, but that in his journey to do that, he has to work with white people. He was willing to acknowledge the past, but more importantly, his desire was to move forward by engaging in meaningful conversations with white people, but he said he couldn't do that by calling them all racists and never giving them room to make mistakes.

His post was quite long and very eloquent and I believe it was largely responsible for shutting down that toxic group. He said everything I was already thinking. Of course, I'd never dare say any of it because it would've gotten me instantly banned from the group and hey, I have to work with white people here too. Thankfully it had way more value coming from him anyway.

He ended off by saying this:

There is a saying back home that goes,

“People always ask Bono what Africans want, instead of asking Africans what Africans want.”

Today this page has become my Bono.

I guess when you think you know best what someone else needs, there's only one person who can argue with you. A great example of how this kind of thinking works is what happened with the Freedom Convoy in the beginning of this year. Unlike a typical BLM rally, the Freedom Convoy was very representative of every racial group in the country. And yet, progressives (none of whom were actually there) continually tried to paint it as a racist, white supremacy event. Then if anyone dared to point out that there were in fact lots of participants who weren't white, they would immediately be accused of “tokenism”. That's right, if you are white and you happen to mention that a person of colour agrees with your stance - you are simply using that person to advance your own agenda. Huh. That's not paternalistic at all…

The National Observer provided a great example of this. They even quoted an “expert” to make their point.

Here's Irfan Chaudhry, a “hate crime researcher” and director of the Office of Human Rights, Diversity and Equity at MacEwan University in Edmonton. (Those credentials alone are likely worth another couple hundred words, but seriously, this has gone on long enough already):

“(Protesters) claiming they're not being racist or discriminatory actually are by tokenizing people in communities of colour to highlight this and other racist protests.”³

He also said that highlighting BIPOC participation in the protests to avoid being called racist is discriminatory tokenism. Riiiight. It's a good thing he's not minimizing the views of these BIPOC people because that would almost seem… racist.

The fact of the matter is that there was significant “BIPOC participation” in the protest, regardless of whether that fits with your preferred narrative or not.

One of the things these progressives like to do to signal their virtousness to others is to flaunt their self-flagellation - “Oh yes, I've come to realize that I have racist tendencies as well…”

Please understand, if you really want to live your life beating yourself up about what a terrible person you are - have at 'er. It's a relatively free country after all. The thing that's concerning to me is when these views enter public policy and academia, because let's face it - if the current crop of antiracists isn't bad enough, let's not fool ourselves into believing that the new up and comers in our universities will attempt to set things right. More fantasy for you right there.

So, in light of all of this, is anyone really surprised that when our government (the leader of which is the undeniable poster boy for all things sanctimonious and antiracist) hires a company to teach it's media (yes, I say “the government's media” because at this point, that's exactly what it is) - is anyone at all surprised that the company hired by our government to teach media how to be "antiracist” is in fact headed by none other than (wait for it) - an ACTUAL RACIST⁴? This may in fact be the absolute best evidence to date of real systemic racism in Canada's government. Weird how things rarely look the way they're supposed to look, eh?

And is anyone surprised that the mere suggestion of disagreement with any of these principles in academia has resulted in hundreds of bannings, shunnings, and outright dismissals, not to mention militant rabid persecution of entities not even affiliated with the university? This is admittedly worse on the American side of the border, but if you want to see Canada in 10 years, just look south. Besides, we have our own growing cohort of cancelled academics, many of which appear on this list.

I mentioned “systemic racism” earlier. I used to like to ask people who talked about this to name one racist law on the books in Canada right now, because you know, if the system is racist, then surely it's our laws that would tell the tale since we are founded on the rule of law. I don't think anyone I talked to ever came up with any current racist laws, but with the influence of antiracist ideology on government policy and our institutes of higher learning, there may finally be some merit to that one after all.

Make no mistake - racism hasn't changed. It's still exactly what it's always been, regardless of what some may try to tell you. It's not “more sophisticated” now than it was then, and the “modern” version really is no different than the old one. It has always been a power play and it still is, so the answer is not to try to add more things under that umbrella. It's really not that complicated, but the more complicated we try to make it, the more it seems to ooze into every area of life. It's like while we were trying to shoo that wasp out of the house, a whole hornet's nest moved in.

So, though the racism itself is not new, the racists themselves are a bit of a new breed and these new racists (the ones sanctioned by our governments and universities) seemingly would like nothing better than to bring back the segregation that minorities fought so hard to end.

Let's pause for a moment here, because if you're reading this and thinking, “What far-right part of hillbilly racist hell is this guy from?!” then before you slam your phone down and start calling me names, I would ask two things of you:

1. Ask yourself which of these ideas, specifically offends you and why (and you can't say “everything”, cuz that's just lazy), and then

2. Formulate at least two reasons why you think I might be wrong (because I might be).

This would be the proper way to attempt to change another person's thinking.

Now, back to our new racists (the antiracist ones, that is). While these people seem very concerned with pointing out others’ perceived acts of racism, they are seemingly much less concerned with actually making things better for the victims of the alleged racism, even though they claim to be their champions. The more they lament their white privilege, the more they show their superiority complexes and their desire for control.

Interestingly, my answer to this conundrum is the same one I gave at the end of the last thing I wrote called, The Natural State of Everything - just say NO. And do it knowing you'll be called a racist, and a conspiracy theorist, and whatever the latest kind of denier is, but do it anyway, and then demand an explanation, because the more these new racists are forced to actually attempt to defend their positions, the quicker they'll be exposed for who they are, or maybe even come to some sort of understanding, and then the sooner we can get back to actually stamping out real inequity and discrimination for good, or at least trying to, rather than perpetuating it at every level of government.

1. White liberals dumb themselves down when they speak to black people, a new study contends - Dupree/Fiske -American Psychological Association

2. Media coverage as a risk factor in suicide - S. Stack, British Medical Journal

3. Expert warns of tokenizing racialized supporters as Ottawa convoy faces backlash over hate - Isaac Phan Nay, National Observer

4. Do Trudeau Liberals even know what racism is anymore? - Jamil Javani, Toronto Sun