I’m a taxpaying fool, too, and I take responsibility for the decades that I spent assuming a little too credulously that our leaders were tending to our civic interests. Every day I get up early and head off to work as I’ve always done. I pay my taxes dutifully. Sometimes it feels like I’m paying more than my share. Never mind that, I tell myself: taxes are the dues owed in order to participate in a peaceful and healthy society. We’re all a part of this bargain and if my taxes help someone less fortunate than me, I’m more than okay with it. Maybe one day I’ll run into trouble myself and the taxes paid by others will help me. I love my country and I wish to see the Canadian experiment continue to succeed in its current form because it’s one of humanity’s greatest achievements. However, this civic bargain is being quietly altered: the money I pay in taxes seems to be ever-increasingly directed toward policies and programs that are designed to preclude certain citizens from benefiting equally based on their skin colour. More and more, our tax dollars are being used to support social justice activism that is openly hostile to Western civilization and, followed to its logical conclusion, will cause real harm to our social structures and the order of our civil society.
Perhaps you’re familiar with terms like “whiteness,” “white privilege,” “toxic whiteness,” or the myriad of other racially-prejudiced terms cooked up by social justice activists in order to justify their discrimination, exclusion, and organized violence towards white people who are, as defined by the Criminal Code of Canada, an “identifiable group” with the same rights and protections as every other identifiable group. The pernicious attitudes that have lead to pernicious social behaviour are peddled in the same way that many violent campaigns of tribalism throughout history have been peddled: with motives pure and benevolent, and aimed at balancing the scales of justice. Simply put, the purveyors of this noisy and bigoted insanity are announcing to the millions of fellow citizens who hear their message: “You’re poor and suffering because those (insert category) people over there have stolen everything from you, including your dignity.” This sentiment in one form or another is the clarion call of nearly every deadly pogrom in human history. Sure, the advocates will tell us that things are different this time because their intentions serve the greater good, that it’s for real justice. Isn’t that how they explained it to themselves in Nazi Germany, and to the victims of the Rwandan genocide, and to the Kurds, and, right now, how they are explaining it to the white farmers of South Africa?
On the other side of the globe, terms like “white privilege” and “toxic whiteness” are presently being used to justify and incite the rape, robbery, dispossession, torture, murder, and genocide of white people. More specifically, white farmers. The type of “race advocacy” propagated by zealous activists in my country — and additionally condoned and promoted by our current Liberal government and our left-leaning parties — is the same type of advocacy responsible for the deadly outcomes in South Africa that one would expect. There is an increasingly deadly hostility towards white people there, and white farmers are being outright slaughtered for their land. Peter Dutton, Australia’s Minister for Home Affairs, has called for emergency visas for white South African farmers because non-white aggressors and agitators are openly calling for the massacre and expulsion of white people. South Africa’s far-left political party EFF (the Economic Freedom Fighters) has been chastised for its frequent use of the chant “Shoot to kill the white man” and “The white man must die.” This is what serves as discourse from a political party. T-shirts displaying the slogan “Fuck White People” have even been worn in schools and universities by anti-white activists. How did all of this happen? In the same way that all of these things happen: state-supported ideologues riled their citizens with grievances of inequality — “You’re poor and suffering because of those people over there” — and violence resulted as its rational outcome.
We have very little in the way of racial or ethnic violence in Canada, for now. We live in relative civic harmony and use language and ideas instead of violence to get what we want. We also participate in an individualistic society as opposed to a communitarian society. Perhaps this is the most important component of our peaceful existence — the right of the individual over the community — and while we have been asleep in our peace, it appears that malignant political forces have been hard at work trying to ruin our serene society. These people want us to return to a tribalism that is motivated by the desire to rehash ancient resentments. This is precisely the political goal that our public institutions, with the full blessing and purse of our government, is complicit in nurturing.
University subsidies in Canada are staggering. In a report from the Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer entitled Federal Spending on Postsecondary Education I found that, “in 2013-14, total federal spending on postsecondary education reached an estimated $12.3 billion,” not including tuition or provincial sources of revenue. What are they producing with this money? At some of our universities, they are promoting racial inequality via the teachings of social justice and the promulgation of race hierarchies, and we are expected to fund it. What is our federal government doing handing over public funds and institutions to frauds and demagogues with unproven social theories? Who’s in charge of it? Who in the hell do they think they are?
Ryerson University in Toronto recently held the “White Privilege Conference Global - Toronto.” Ostensibly, taxpayers helped fund a discussion that intended to deal with the following problem: “Are Canadians Too Polite? Addressing Global Perspectives on White Privilege and Oppression in Canada and Beyond.” As you can see by the title and the theme, villainous white people have been “oppressing” others and Canadians are far too polite about it. Perhaps the tactics used in South Africa — blowtorches, machetes, guns — are more desirable than our unacceptable politeness? If you accept the premise put forward by conference organizers and speakers (that white people are oppressing everyone else with their privilege) then they of course must take action. Following their logic, white privilege must be removed and the oppression of others answered for. Perhaps they should seize land and give it to the oppressed. It doesn’t matter that, as a white person, I have never oppressed anyone and have never benefited from privilege due solely to my skin colour. The fact that I am perceived as a member of a favoured powerful race group is enough to justify their condemnation of me. This sounds like racism, doesn’t it? The Canadian Human Rights Act would certainly say it does. Does it make it any better that this sort of bias is state-approved? No, it makes it much worse. State-sanctioned racism is the most destructive and deadly kind there is. The historical record leaves no question about that.
One of the keynote speakers at the Ryerson University event was Rinaldo Walcott, Director of the Women and Gender Studies Institute at the University of Toronto and Instructor of Social Justice Education at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education (OISE). Walcott is apparently paid $188,000 per year to research and publish on “black cultural politics; histories of colonialism in the Americas, multiculturalism, citizenship, and diaspora; gender and sexuality; and social, cultural and public policy.” I have read some very disturbing accounts of Professor Walcott’s xenophobic behaviour online. In response to Lindsay Shepherd being intimidated by her faculty superiors at Wilfrid Laurier University for teaching her class the controversy around gendered pronouns, Walcott tweeted, “Crying white girl crys about called crying white girl. Will the defenders get their guns, nooses, baseball bats among their other weapons to inflict violence now?” When Jonathan Kay, a journalist for the National Post, called Walcott out on his prejudiced reaction, Walcott responded, “How sway. How chivalrous of you to step up for crying white lady-hood from the well paid Black brute. Go away. Go away. I repeat “crying white white girl crying about being called crying white girl…” I am willing to publish Mr. Walcott’s side of the story if he ever chooses to relay it to me. The truth is important to me and if I’ve interpreted his words wrongly I will acknowledge it. I have seen the tweets, though, and I am not sure how he could possibly justify them as the sane product of a professional, reasonable or charitable thinker. Walcott’s strategy seems to be to make racist statements and then hysterically align his critics with white supremacist ideology when they challenge him.
These examples from our mainstream institutions should be alarming to all citizens. The activities and policies being promoted are downright racist in the most basic and accurate sense of the word, especially according to our own Human Rights laws. As with all racism, the racist justifies his beliefs and behaviour with insubstantial moral reasons which, as we’re seeing now, have real, undemocratic consequences.
You may think that when Canadian Black Lives Matter founder Yusra Khogali referred to white people as “recessive genetic defects” and “sub-humxn” and called for their deaths on her public Facebook page that she may be a one-off, a deranged loudmouth shunned by the larger political community, but you would be wrong. Khogali was recently given a “leadership award.” In a delusion of governmental fantasy, Toronto city councillor Kristyn Wong-Tam, who handed out the awards, thanked the winners for “making us uncomfortable.” What really makes me uncomfortable here is the fact that something so sanctimonious, distorted, and immoral was uttered so effortlessly from the mouth of an elected representative of the people. I wonder how the families of murdered and tortured South African farmers might feel about a Canadian government official presenting an award to a race activist for “making us uncomfortable” with her anti-white hatred and claiming to need strength from god not to kill white people, or claiming that “black ppl simply through their dominant genes can literally wipe out the white race if we had the power to”. Since when did our government begin rewarding calls to criminal racial incitement? Such incitement is nurtured with our tax money and will eventually escalate into actual race-based violence. That is the necessary outcome of the social justice treatise.
In light of the encouragement that race activists receive from our politicians in the inner circles of mainstream power, it is worth exploring further the anti-white rhetoric that Rinaldo Walcott — a university professor and department Director, remember — earns his public paycheque from:
What we do now is I make it clear to you that you do not have the intellectual chops to come for me. I am not living off of the steam of white supremacist structures and logics like you. I am working to destroy them. I am clear about that. I will not hide that. So know that.
I don’t intend to go back & forth with you all night. So let me put it this way: if you got a check from Mcleans today it was undeserved because you add nothing of value to intellectual life in this place we now call Canada. That check is a whiteness dividend.
Please let Jon know I am not afraid of white male mediocrity. I am a Black Power baby.
If you value Black life, if you value Indigenous life, if you value non-white life, you have no other option but to work against all manifestations of white supremacy, its logics, practices and structures.
If equity was really being practiced Jordan Peterson would not exist. In fact he has now become the perfect example of how white male mediocrity survives and thrives at UofT and in the world.
Replace the word “white” with some other racial or ethnic designation in any of the above statements. Would that statement then be permitted to remain on any social platform? Could you imagine a white professor being paid $188,000 a year to bang on about the congenital evils of another race? I’m aware that this argument is overused but it still requires an answer. Why is Mr. Walcott collecting so much public money while his entire pedagogy is based on anti-white bigotry? Does the university condone Walcott’s statements? Do they agree with his statements? Perhaps they may explain that free speech and academic freedom are important. Okay then, let’s have it for everyone. Will they host and promote conferences for Stormfront now? Is this really where we want to go?
People who support Walcott and the social justice mentality frequently point to the righting of historical injustices as their motivation, yet the history of humanity is built on injustices, and almost everyone alive today, no matter their ethnicity, has descended from a group that at one time or another likely committed acts of barbarism against another group. We know that there was an Indigenous slave trade before Europeans arrived in North America, and that slavery was the norm across the world until Europeans abolished it in the nineteenth century. Stronger and more militarily-advanced tribes have always preyed on, dominated, absorbed, or scattered neighbouring tribes. Conquest and slavery were ever-present in Africa long before colonialism took hold there. The slave trade persists in Africa today, independent of colonialism. Europeans have been killing each other over religion and land domination for at least as long as we’ve had recorded history. Asia’s history is one of war and empire. Injustice is an ancient story told again and again, and it will never end. Our injustice problem is a human one, not a racial one. We should work together to avoid repeating the crimes of the past, not exacerbate them by targeting people who had no original part. We should not shift racial discord and violence onto a different group for the next round of human stupidity.
Fomenting racism as a public policy will not help. If we do not tackle now the scourge of social justice activists in our most elite societal positions, we are headed for serious trouble. There is an election coming up and people really ought to show up to exercise their wills at the polls. We should do this before we stop communicating with our polite Canadian words, our ideas, and our votes, and the vilified counter-mob starts taking justice into its own hands.