White supremacy, that ambiguous term, is the voguish justification for the elimination of heritage. Wokes maintain that White supremacy dominated the entire 245 years of America’s existence. They also insist that our Founding Fathers should not be respected but remembered only as White supremacists and slaveholders. Wokes and their ilk exaggerate the effects White supremacy has had on our heritage.
The state of Virginia, a treasure trove of traditions, is currently being subjected to extensive heritage eliminations. Originally one of our most important colonies, Virginia was the home of many of our founding fathers, early presidents and famous families, such as the Lee family. Consequently its heritage should be preserved as much as practical. But Virginia’s monuments and other tributes are being removed by aggrieved busybodies. Loyal citizens did try to prevent the removal of century-old monuments in certain Virginia cities. But removals of monuments, mostly Confederate, continues and more removals are being threatened.
Of the removal of the Robert E. Lee monument in Richmond, state senator Jennifer McClellan said: “ Now, the statue is gone — but our work remains to address the systemic results of White supremacy.” For Wokes and Leftist Democrats like McClellan, “White supremacy” is a broad inclusive phrase encompassing whatever they believe to be detrimental to society. McClellan and her ilk think they should be allowed to decide what is offensive and what should be eliminated. Although McClellan is a well-known state political figure, she lost her 2020 bid to become Virginia’s first Black female governor,
The latest in the line of Richmond’s Black mayors, Levar Stoney described the city’s Confederate monuments with these words: "...the greatest example of nostalgia masquerading as history." But Stoney’s selection of a company to remove Confederate monuments could also be called a masquerade. Bypassing city procurement procedures, Stoney used a shell company to hire a friend and campaign donor to take down the monuments. His friend’s company was paid $1.8 million dollars - $180,000 per day. A local contractor maintained that other companies could have removed the Confederate monuments for as little as $10,000 per day. Stoney’s exorbitant monument removal contract is under investigation.
As Confederate monuments are being removed, monuments honoring victims of slavery are being erected. The Emancipation and Freedom Monument is a 12 foot bronze memorial recently unveiled in Richmond. It commemorates the 150th anniversary of the Emancipation Proclamation and depicts two recently freed Black slaves. A female carries an infant and holds aloft a replica of a document inscribed January 1, 1863, the date of Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation. A shirtless male is breaking free from shackles and exhibits a back scarred with marks left from whippings.
The year before this emancipation monument was erected, a similar emancipation monument was removed. The eliminated monument, in Boston, was a replica of the original - “The Freedman’s Memorial” – located in Washington,DC. It depicts a seated President Lincoln holding a copy of the Emancipation Proclamation. Kneeling before President Lincoln is a nude freed Black slave with his shackles being broken. Black Lives Matter and others object to this monument, claiming it gives too much credit to Whites for emancipation and downplays emancipation efforts put forth by Blacks.
The Richmond Emancipation and Freedom Monument was unveiled in a park not far from the site of the recently removed Robert E. Lee statue. At the unveiling ceremony, Mayor Stoney said: “The enslaved built this city with their hands. We will rebuild this city with our hearts.” State Senator McClellan’s statement implied more removals: “We have made progress in dismantling the systemic legacy of slavery and Jim Crow in our state, but there’s still so much more work to do.”
Phrases similar to “...there’s still so much more work to do” are often heard after each capitulation to a monument removal or a name change. “More work to do” means that heritage eliminations will continue as long as a complacent public offers no resistance. White docility must end before America loses too much of its heritage.
Although it sounds extreme and unattainable, the elimination of Whiteness must be taken seriously. Western Civilization, a creation of Whiteness, is losing its influence on society. White heroes of past generations are being eradicated by a process known as “presentism.”
The term “presentism” means judging persons and events of the past using today’s standards. It is often used to disparage heroes of past generations whose values are no longer compatible with contemporary attitudes. Our heritage is currently being maligned by non-White groups who have altered the composition of our society. After only two decades into the 21st century, important aspects of our culture have been lost to heritage cleansing.
A prominent victim of heritage cleansing is Robert E. Lee, one of our most celebrated heroes and a member of one of our most distinguished families - the Lee family of Virginia. Although originally a Confederate hero, Lee has been honored in all sections of our country. During the century and a half since his death, there have been monuments, street names, school names and other tributes to Lee.
On the wall of his office, President Eisenhower had pictures of his four most famous Americans. Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, and Robert E. Lee. Theodore Roosevelt characterized Lee as “the very greatest of all the great captains that the English-speaking peoples have brought forth.” Franklin Roosevelt praised Robert E. Lee as “one of our greatest American Christians and one of our greatest American gentlemen.”
President Truman gave his mother a gift of a portrait of General Lee. In Great Britain, Winston Churchill wrote that Lee was “one of the noblest Americans who ever lived, and one of the greatest captains in the annals of war.”
Unfortunately, what many Americans of this generation know about Robert E. Lee comes from surfing online websites. These websites tend to report history selectively and avoid complex issues. Some sites assert that Robert E. Lee committed treason against his nation. But in 1860 there were only 33 states, the majority located east of the Mississippi River. People rarely relocated to other states and loyalty to one’s state took precedence over loyalty to the regime in Washington. This was the socio/political environment that shaped Robert E. Lee and should be used to evaluate him.
Each generation thinks it has the final answers to society’s problems but its solutions are often altered in succeeding generations. In this Woke generation, we have a coterie of ideologues and malcontents who are eliminating aspects of our heritage because they feel it is outdated. Robert E. Lee is dismissed as a product of 19th century values that are out-of-step with 21st century values. The Woke generation approves of the removal of Lee monuments because they offend minorities.
Virginia’s racially tainted Governor Ralph Northam removed the renowned equestrian statue honoring General Robert E. Lee on Richmond’s famous Monument Avenue. Removal of this 130 year old, 12 ton, 60 foot tall General Lee monument, the largest in the South, clears Monument Avenue of all of its Confederate memorials. Demagogic Governor Northam ignored an opinion poll indicating that Virginia was evenly divided on the question of removing Confederate memorials. Instead, he relied on the hyped, overworked term ‘racial justice’ to rationalize his eradication of the celebrated Lee statue.
The Lee monument had been a target of cancel culture for some time. Lee supporters hoped that a push-back would develop and save the monument. That push-back has never developed. But, despite the censure of Wokes and elites, the monument remained resilient. Interestingly, what finally brought it down were protests following the death of Black shoplifter George Floyd, who died while being restrained by White police in Minnesota.
The phenomenon of Robert E. Lee is unparalleled in history. Although his side lost the War, his military prowess was praised. Curiously he was celebrated by both the losing side and the wining side. After the War, even though he led a quiet, unpretentious life, Lee became an American icon. Robert E. Lee’s monuments were unharmed until 21st century rage mobs began eliminating White culture.
During the last five years over 100 monuments have been removed. Protesting crowds tried but couldn’t prevent those removals. A growing sense of loss over the removal of Lee memorials could precipitate some kind of recovery effort. I’m hopeful, but not optimistic.
For roughly the last half-century, history reporting has been seriously politicized. Politicized historians make no attempt to be impartial and they interpret the past in the way that best accommodates the present. Also they don’t view America favorably and tend to make racism our most significant problem. And, of course, they claim slavery was the sole cause of the Civil War.
It might be informative to scrutinize a typical politicized historian. A classic example is media favorite Karen Cox, professor of history at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte. Her trendy, partisan versions of history and culture are exactly what the establishment wants to read. The establishment’s villains and heroes are also hers. Cox’s primary villain is the antebellum South which she excoriates for its use of slaves.
Cox holds the South alone responsible for American slavery and insists that Southern heritage shouldn’t be celebrated. For her, Confederate memorials are simply reminders of the Jim Crow era and lynchings. She states; “People do not want to see the connection between the Jim Crow period and these monuments,” But, Cox claims, an increase in Confederate monuments parallels an increase in lynchings. Yes, you read that correctly. Confederate memorials do not honor heroes but inspire lynchings.
Actually, Karen Cox’s histories are little more than propaganda. She compares Donald Trump with Robert E. Lee, maintaining that both failed and both did more harm than good. Furthermore, Cox claims that Trump, like Lee, pursued a “lost cause”, undermining the Constitution as Lee tried to undermine the Union.
Generally, ‘lost cause’ implies an immoral South rationalizing its capitulation to a righteous Northeast in a War fought solely to end slavery. But professor Cox and her ilk use the worn-out pejorative term ‘lost cause’ rather loosely.
War was declared to prevent Southern secession and “save the Union” not to end Southern slavery. Funds provided by slave-grown cotton and Southern tariffs were a needed source of revenue for Lincoln’s government. Lincoln didn’t want large plantations in the territories because they would compete with small farming families relocating from the industrializing Northeast. This was an economic reason rather than a moral one. Ending Southern slavery didn’t become a cause of the War until Lincoln feared Great Britain and other European countries might assist the Confederate War effort.
Karen Cox’s histories avoid complex issues, focusing instead on what sustains contemporary social concerns. She makes little or no mention of the Northeast’s involvement in the slave trade nor its financing of plantations in the largely agricultural South. Also, she doesn’t mention how slave-grown cotton created the North’s economy or how the majority of profits from slave-grown cotton ended up in Northern pockets.
As a Feminist, Cox claims: “Some of the best historians working today are women and people of color.” Although she claims that Blacks and women are the best historians, she doesn’t include women members of the United Daughters of the Confederacy. The UDC’s versions of history don’t fit her narrative. Ranking women and people of color as better historians than White males is fairly typical of Woke culture.
In past decades, when Americans got their information from print media rather than electronic media, Karen Cox couldn’t have become a historian. Actually, she is more a media celebrity than a historian and its her support of contemporary political opinions that is favored, not her scholarship. I, like many others, have reservations about the veracity of her histories and I resent her over-simplified, disparaging depictions of the antebellum South. Her histories are little more than proselytizing and will probably not stand the test of time.
We used to say “over time things get better” but that hasn’t been true for decades. Things have gotten much worse in the 21st century. Two of the more offensive phenomena are historic memorial removals and imprudent attempts to create equality. Removal of monuments and other historic tributes began as a result of complaints from aggrieved malcontents. But ruling class elites are also eliminating traditions, especially Southern heritage in order to create social justice.
Who are these ruling class elites ? This cabal of smug , self-important prodigies who have usurped Constitutional powers and make decisions for we uninformed denizens of middle America. Because of their wealth, power, and position, they are essentially the upper echelon of society. But even though some might have expertise in certain fields, they aren’t necessarily capable of determining what constitutes social justice or what heritage is acceptable.
Social justice hasn’t been clearly defined but it is basically equality of groups including equal wealth and opportunities. Ruling class elites prefer the term ‘equity’ over ‘equality’. Equity means equal outcomes whereas equality means only equal opportunities. Of course, ruling class elites decide who is treated unfairly and who should get wealth and opportunities. Elites also chide the celebration of Southern heritage because it may project hurtful images of White supremacy.
In the previous century, we had common sense rather than social justice. There was also a general agreement that success resulted from individual skills, work ethics, intelligence, and stamina. These attributes were largely innate and individuals were mostly independent and resilient. Although essentially self-sufficient, similar individuals formed together into groups.
But self-reliance essentially ended when ruling class elites decided that wealth and opportunities should be divided equally among groups. Elites apparently saw no conflict between making groups equal while telling us that ‘diversity is our strength’. But redistributions of wealth and opportunities will not satisfy disgruntled groups. And social justice is more a placebo than a panacea; not an actual condition but only contrived language.
Ruling class elites felt encouraged in the early 21st century. In 2007, Nancy Pelosi became the first female Speaker of the House and the following year, Barack Obama became the first Black President. Media fawned over Pelosi and Obama, portraying them as successful even before they had spent any significant time in office. But actual performances didn’t match media reports. Pelosi’s Speakership and Obama’s Presidency were more symbolism than substance.
The election of the first Black president set off impulsive nationwide tributes to Barack Obama. Schools, libraries, government buildings, streets, highways, and even animals were renamed after the new president. Many of the bloated tributes to Obama occurred before he had spent enough time in office for his performance to be evaluated. And this renaming epidemic provided an opportunity for elites to eliminate tributes to famous Confederates, a trend that had been under way for some time.
A case in point was the J.E.B. Stuart Elementary School in Richmond, Virginia. This former Confederate General’s name was removed and the facility was renamed Barack Obama Elementary School. Students preferred to change the name to Northside Elementary and many residents recommended using the name of some important local Black person. But the school board rejected all other recommendations and held firm to the Obama designation. The irony of a Black named school in the former capital of the Confederacy was not lost on the media.
Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi often uses the manipulative language of social justice to justify actions that go against the public’s wishes. For example: the majority doesn’t approve of the removal of statues or tributes honoring famous Confederate heroes. But in her first term as House Speaker, Pelosi removed a Robert E. Lee statue from a place of honor in National Statuary Hall and replaced it with a statue of Rosa Parks. She also pushed through legislation that eliminated all capitol statuary venerating famous Confederates. Pelosi justified her capitol cleansing with this language: “There is no room for celebrating the bigotry of the Confederacy in the Capitol or any other place of honor in our country.”
Speaker Pelosi also arrogantly ignored the majority opinion by encouraging the passing of a bill to rename all military bases honoring famous Confederates. Pelosi’s justification: “These names are white supremacists that said terrible things about our country,” Media never questions or censures Pelosi’s overblown verbal harangues. Getting media attention is more important to her than addressing public concerns.
The needs of the public are also not a concern of ruling class elites although their politicized language makes it appear otherwise. Elites generally engage in symbolic, trendy behaviors rather than substantive ones. Denigrating Southern heritage is typical and currently fashionable with elites. But the majority of Americans aren’t fooled and have no problem with Southerners celebrating their heritage.
Many of you are tempted to stop reading an article when you see the word “racism.” I understand that reaction. Hardly a day goes by that we don’t read about one of our White heroes being accused of racism. There are even revised histories portraying America’s Founders as a racist slaveholders, justifying the removal of monuments honoring them. We’ve been force fed racism claims for decades but most of those claims are media-created rather than authentic.
Media reports on the 1960s racial turmoil depict Southern States as hotbeds of racism and bigotry while exempting States in other areas from racial accusations. But this involves turning a blind eye to racial unrest outside of the South. A classic example is the violent attack on Martin Luther King by a White Chicago mob during King’s civil rights protest. Of this Chicago attack by White racists, Dr. King said: “I’ve never seen so much hostility in a demonstration before, and I’ve been all over the South.”
Not only have racist accusations mushroomed but the term “racism” is being continually redefined to include any unpleasant interaction between a White and a Black. A seemingly unfriendly facial expression, a less than enthusiastic greeting, a turning away, or any other routine mannerism can be construed as racist. Blacks have been so conditioned to expect racism, that they even perceive it in innocuous interactions with Whites.
Racism is a round-the-clock subject of print news, cable media, entertainment venues, political and social organizations, interviews with celebrities, and so forth. Any racial group defect, whether it be income, wealth, achievement, or whatever is deemed to be caused by White racism. Based on today’s media, you would think racism was the core of America’s creation. Today’s Woke Movement maintains that the American way of life is based on White racism that has oppressed and is oppressing non-Whites.
It is ironic that after decades of Anti-discrimination legislation and innumerable societal measures to eliminate racism, we are told that the phenomenon has actually worsened. Indeed, the Wokery maintains that racism is systemic and controls our society. One of the tenets of systemic racism is that White folks are racists even if they haven’t knowingly committed a racist act. The Pledge of Allegiance, the National Anthem, and the American Flag have all been characterized as racist symbols of hate.
Although highly publicized, most racist incidents will not hold up under scrutiny. They turn out to be either greatly exaggerated or outright hoaxes. But the Wokery continues to insist that Systemic Racism is at the root of our society, restraining achievements of minority groups. Woke militants also hold that traditional White culture impedes the elimination of racism.
But society-altering endeavors cannot continue indefinitely. They usually cross a line where their activities become unacceptable and a grass roots revolt develops. Ill-advised anti-racism objectives of Woke militants are causing great harm and they are actually considering the elimination of White culture. Hopefully White folks will strongly resist Woke militants.
The majority of Americans were born long after Leftist politics took control of news media and academia. Classrooms and cable TV influence children’s thinking very early. By the time they reached their teens, most view America with disdain, convinced that White racism keeps non-Whites locked into a slave-like existence. Also, most accept the establishment’s concept of ‘systemic racism’ as well as the claim that our existing society must be eliminated.
And that is the goal of Critical Race Theory (CRT): to eliminate (they prefer the term ‘dismantle’) existing society. Dismantling society essentially means eliminating Whiteness because CRT blames White culture for racism. CRT is the most pernicious of society-altering trends being promoted by militant groups, primarily Cultural Marxists.
The ease in getting the Juneteenth Holiday approval rushed through Congress encourages efforts to get CRT mandated as part of America’s academia curricula. CRT maintains that systemic racism characterizes our society with Whites being the oppressors and Blacks being the Oppressed. With CRT, all Whites are racists, even those who have never committed an act of discrimination or uttered a slur that could be perceived as racist.
The Woke generation , rooted in aspects of CRT, uses the characterization ‘White Supremacy’ for the murals in the Capitol Rotunda. Of course, the famous figures depicted are predominantly White – Christopher Columbus, George Washington, William Penn, Orville and Wilbur Wright, etc. But these are our Founders and heroes and should be honored regardless of skin pigmentation. The Rotunda does include a bust of Martin Luther King Jr. but that lone effigy isn’t sufficient to prevent the Rotunda from being labeled “structural racism.”
CRT militants are demanding that Capitol Rotunda murals represent today’s diversity. Using that excuse, various monuments and other tributes to historical figures have already been demolished. But Rotunda mural removals will only accomplish one of CRT’s goals – eliminating Whiteness. And it will leave blank walls. CRT activists don’t consider these murals works of art but rather examples of ‘ White supremacy.’ So we should be concerned that non-White figures, even contemporary ones, will be added to these age-old murals to make them ‘diverse.’
Myself and others who oppose society-dismantling trends are dismissed as right-wingers, arch-conservatives, reactionaries, and deplorables. I object to most of these labels but I don’t object to being called a deplorable. I even use that term to describe myself. Deplorable was originally, and still is for some, a term of derision. But it also has a polar opposite meaning; a traditionalist who ‘deplores’ insipid Leftist attacks on existing society and White Americans.
In previous eras, our country was characterized by the phrase “The American Dream” and it was assumed that Blacks, roughly 13% of the population, would assimilate into America's White culture. Indeed, for decades Blacks did assimilate into White culture while retaining crucial aspects of their own culture. Until recently, Black culture and White culture coexisted peacefully. But the mindset of the Woke generation is ending peaceful coexistence.
Can America’s entire history be reduced to merely ‘slavery and racism’? Can esteemed figures of the past be denigrated as simply oppressors of non-Whites ? CRT is the Woke generation’s most fashionable cause and its primary goal is the elimination of racism which requires ending White supremacy, i.e. White culture.
Woke militants are so convinced of the rightness of their cause that they will go to extremes to implement it, hence their attacks on White culture.
In the decades since the 1960s, there have been countless attempts to transform aspects of society. These endeavors had varying degrees of success but most lost their vitality before too much harm was done, so existing society could be redeemed. But the goal of Critical Race Theory (CRT) goes far beyond simply altering society. It demands nothing less than the dismantling of of White culture. This dismantling has already begun and is supported by Democrats, academia, and establishment Elites.
If you had a question about history in a prior generation, you would consult a book or an encyclopedia - now you simply “Google It.” But anyone, regardless of expertise, can post videos on YouTube. Interpretations of history vary based on the generation in which they were written and the political persuasions of the historians. This is especially true of agenda-driven history videos on YouTube.
As someone who was born and raised in the South before the 1960s counterculture, I'm skeptical of today's versions of history, especially history videos on YouTube. These videos seem more concerned with promoting social causes than reporting reliable history. And YouTube interpretations of history are heavily influenced by racism, the cause de jure of Leftist ideologues.
Today's YouTube videos portray racism as America most serious problem. But our country has much worse problems; such things as unchecked immigration, exorbitant healthcare cost, rampant crime and unsafe streets, poverty, excessive government spending, politicized education, and declining religious affiliation. Although these pragmatic problems are the most harmful, they are not the most fashionable. Consequently, they are of little interest to elites.
Although slavery ended well over a century ago, YouTube videos claim that its legacy is demoralizing members of contemporary society who were never slaves. Slavery is a popular YouTube topic but you will rarely find a discussion of its beginning in prehistoric times. The use of slaves predates the development of cities and even recorded history. It is estimated that slavery has existed for roughly 9,000 to 11,000 years and it was legal for most of that time.
During all those centuries when slavery was legal, prominent citizens would likely have had some involvement with the practice. But any connection with slavery, even when it was lawful, prevents distinguished persons from being honored for their accomplishments. Monuments for these past dignitaries are being eradicated by juveniles and others who have only a limited grasp of history. In addition to involvement with slavery, a statue can be removed simply by inferring a connection to one of today's hate symbols. A century-old statue of songwriter Stephen Foster was removed from a park in Pittsburgh because it contained the figure of a shoeless black banjo player sitting at Foster's feet. Activists felt that the statue implied white supremacy.
A YouTube video gives the year of our nation's beginning as 1619, the year when the first African slaves arrived in Jamestown. This conflicts with 1776, when the Declaration of Independence liberated the colonies from the British monarchy. That was always considered our founding. A 1619 creation date would mean that America began as a slave-holding nation rather than a constitutional republic. If citizens accept the 1619 founding, esteem in America will lessen. Also objections to the restructuring of society would lessen.
If you rely on YouTube history videos you will get the impression that moral opposition to slavery caused the Civil War. But the War was fought for economic reasons rather than moral reasons. (Statistics indicate that in the Ante-bellum South only 1 in 5 families owned slaves.) The War was fought primarily to keep the Southern states in the Union and to prevent the spread of slavery into the territories. Slave plantations in the territories would hinder smaller farms operated by families relocating from the Northeast. Only abolitionists, around 5% of the population, opposed slavery for moral reasons.
The South has long been slandered with hyperbolic racism accusations and YouTube videos largely malign the Southern region. One such anti-Southern site goes by the name Atun-Shei Films and uses play-acted videos to dramatize slavery and racism in the Ante-bellum South. The term 'Atun-Shei' is a loosely translated Turkish term meaning 'horse phallus.' This site's crude designation and its entertaining videos appeal to a younger generation.
Atun-Shei is the creation of a Massachusetts filmmaker who relocated to Louisiana – one of those Northern self-anointed experts. His video scripts depict a slave-holding South permeated with racism and his actors don Civil War uniforms and recite derisive comments using exaggerated Southern accents. Although the site exhibits a proficient knowledge of history, its formulaic caricatures of the old South are passe.
For too long elites have made the South the scapegoat for slavery. But he public knows that the entire country was involved in and benefited from slave grown cotton. And Blacks demanding reparations also know that. If reparations come to fruition, areas outside of the South that sanctimoniously absolved themselves from culpability with slavery will have to pay their share.
In her interview with Meghan Markle and Prince Harry, Oprah Winfrey asked Meghan: "How do you feel about the palace hearing you speak your truth today?"
Phrases like 'your truth' and 'my truth' are a way of making personal opinions sound more substantial. Meghan Markle's 'truth' is that the Royal Family's racism prevented a title for her son Archie. But in accordance with royal protocol, Archie's lineage doesn't qualify for a sovereign title.
The concept of 'my truth' is fairly common among minority groups that feel underrepresented in society. Their opinions can be questioned but 'truth' is unarguable. Minority 'truth' consists of subjective, preconceived viewpoints. Consequently minorities tend to interpret any unpleasant encounter with a white person as racist. And media rarely attempts to corroborate accusations of discrimination.
Stacey Abrams, our most prominent race-hustler, insists that the Jim Crow era never ended and racism permeates our entire society. Media ignores Stacey Abrams' lies and shady financial dealings and instead portrays her as a benevolent voting rights activist. She was even allowed to secretly and retroactively edit her previous comments promoting the boycott of Georgia by the MLB all-star game.
But the State of Georgia is investigating Stacey Abrams and her non-profit organizations for various voting irregularities. The spending of some of Abrams' non-profit voting rights groups is also being looked into. Hopefully, media adulation of Stacey Abrams will lessen and they will stop promoting her questionable racial allegations.
A coterie of activists are expanding the meaning of racism with the scholarly sounding Critical Race Theory. This theory divides society into two groups: victims (primarily blacks) and oppressors (primarily whites). It maintains that race is not biological but simply a social construction. It also claims that racism has evolved from individual acts of discrimination and is now a vital cog in our legal and social structure. And the experiences of people of color, passed on through storytelling is more important than evidence and reason.
One of Critical Race Theory's strangest assertions is that the insistence on the right answer is oppressive to minorities. In the past, not insisting on the right answer would have been described as “dumbing down.” And 2+2=5 would have been a wrong answer. But the new 'Woke' math allows persons to pick and choose their preferred answers. Restricting a minority to only one answer to a math question is now considered racism. So woke math is being offered as a replacement of Traditional math.
Critical Race Theory's ultimate goal is the elimination of White supremacy. But that will essentially involve replacing our current society. And that objective, although anti-American, is actually being proposed.
As anti-American as the Critical Race Theory are the assertions of the 1619 Project. You probably accepted the sincerity of the Declaration of Independence and thought our Founders were honorable men. But the 1619 Project claims that emerging anti-slavery sentiments in Britain caused colonists to fear losing slave labor, hence independence was declared. The 1619 Project further maintains that enslavement and persecution of Africans was and is the core American ideology.
It was assumed that, even with their differences, Black culture and White culture could peacefully coexist within the same society. But peaceful coexistence is being threatened by Social Justice advocates and Leftist media. These activists insist that White culture must be curtailed or eliminated because it oppresses Black culture. The public won't approve of curtailing White culture, so we can expect activists to exaggerate the negative effects of White Racism to justify their actions.
The formerly innocent term “whiteness” now has a racist connotation. And ideologues are actually demanding that whiteness be eliminated. I don't know how whiteness could be eliminated but it would certainly involve drastic alterations to western civilization. Actually, social justice ideologues are already characterizing western civilization as a harbinger of racism and white supremacy.
Ideologues want us to think that racism and white supremacy are our most serious problems but they aren't. Far worse problems include unchecked immigration, affordable health care, violent crime, and weakening of marriage and family. But media and cultural elites are so fixated on racism and white supremacy that they are unable to address other problems.
I won't even try to catalog the countless forms of racism that media claims to have discovered over the years. Reporting racist incidents seems to have become media's primary function. And media wants us to think that accusations of racism come solely from the black community. There are indeed numerous blacks who have made a career out of race hustling. But many reports of racial incidents are being put forth by caucasian cultural elites.
Cultural elites seem to think that eradicating whiteness would improve society and uplift blacks. Whites not only have unearned privileges but have created a society that perpetuates their privileges to the detriment of others.
All of us encounter slights and discourtesies in workplaces, shops, and government agencies but when a minority is the recipient and the perpetrator is white it is automatically labeled as racist. But do all white/black encounters involve racism or could some encounters be just ordinary non-racial clashes. Minor everyday unpleasant encounters shouldn't be construed as racist simply because a white and a black were involved.
In the past, if you researched racism you would usually find a description something like this: Race determines individual traits and abilities and some races are deemed superior to others. Recently Merriam-Webster updated its definition of racism to suit the times. “The systemic oppression of a racial group to the social, economic, and political advantage of another.”
If elites can convince the public that oppression of minorities now pervades our entire society, then massive governmental corrections to our way of life can be justified. Also, if this systemic oppression of minorities can be blamed on white supremacy, calls for the elimination of whiteness may escalate.
The controlling establishment has not only changed our government structure but has created a new language to accommodate the change. This new language is confusing, even intimidating, to the public as new meanings have been assigned to old words. Social Justice is now used to describe an egalitarian society. Other refurbished words are equality, equity, inclusion and diversity.
If words were still used in their original sense, unity would be more important than diversity. But elites have semantically altered the term “diversity” making it the quintessential core of our societal values. Of course, the meaning of the word has changed; diversity now means “cultural diversity.” The goal of cultural diversity (formerly multiculturalism) is the equality of all groups. But regardless of how much is done to make groups equal, members insist on more changes.
Since the dawn of civilization some folks have accomplished more than others. Until the current age it was believed that some people had stronger work ethics and other energetic traits that made them successful. But elites insist that accomplishments are not the result of individual effort. They maintain that society favors some groups and restrains others. White folks are currently designated as society's most favored group and white privilege is claimed to be detrimental to other groups especially blacks.
White privilege and white racism are regarded as the cause of most of society's problems. In fact, current establishment thinking holds that were it not for white privilege and white racism, equality of all groups might be achieved. Equal outcomes for all is the goal of the Left who believe it is important enough to be mandated by government. Actually, quite a bit of legislation has already been passed to insure equal outcomes. Rarely discussed is the fact that lifting up one group often involves lowering another group.
Decades of hyping the need for across the board equality has seriously altered our leadership and our society. In fact, claiming to promote equality has boosted the careers of many politicos. It has so empowered the establishment, that they are on the level with monarchs. (I prefer the term monarchy to the term totalitarianism.) The establishment represents our King and Queen but its power is appropriated not inherited. We even have a royal family, albeit an unconventional grouping, created by media hype rather than a bloodline; Jeff Bezos, Nancy Pelosi, Mark Zuckerberg, Oprah Winfrey, Bill Gates, Hillary Clinton, Michelle Obama, and so on.
To make us to think we still have a Democratic republic, the public is allowed to vote. But votes are processed by establishment apparatuses which essentially predetermine election results. Mainstream media dutifully covers up suspected voting malfeasance. And to placate the citizenry, the establishment stays out of local elections.
The Founding Fathers didn't consider that the republic they created would someday end. But that ending is consistent with the concept that democratic republics generally have a lifespan of around 200 years. America has essentially gone full circle and assumed the characteristics of the monarchy it rejected in 1776.
Gail Jarvis is a Georgia-based free-lance writer. He attended the University of Alabama and has a degree from Birmingham Southern College. His writing is influenced by years of witnessing how versions of news and history were distorted for political reasons. Mr. Jarvis is a member of the Society of Independent Southern Historians and his articles have appeared on various websites, magazines, and publications for several organizations. He lives in Coastal Georgia.