Life After Wokeness I

Ideology is a specious way of relating to the world. It offers human beings the illusion of an identity, of dignity, and of morality, while making it easier for them to part with them.” — Vaclav Havel (1978) The Power of the Powerless. Saimizdat.

If I was Vaclav Havel’s Green Grocer, what sign would I hang on my shop, as the utopia of wokeness comes to power? Maybe some woke-sounding thing like “Love comes in all colours”, with perhaps the pride colours as part of the sign.

Similarly to Marx’s call to arms of yesteryear, a shopper may gloss over the slogan to see what I have on sale; or if they bother to notice, think that the message is heartwarming, something that all folks can agree with. On its own merit, “Love comes in all colours” doesn’t offend, and brings out the warm fuzzies. But cheifly, Green Grocer remains a person to do business with if the items on offer are appealing, and the price is right. The slogan is really not so much of a warm, fuzzy statement of the Green Grocer’s view of matters of gender and sexual orientation so much as a passive acceptance of those elites that are in power.

While the language of wokeness, a genuine language since its words suck the life and meaning out of every word it utters, purports to “celebrate” oppressed groups of all descriptions, its main proponents come from the most elite of prep schools, and educated at Ivy League universities. They work in high positions of the largest organizations and businesses. You might have noticed that the message of wokeness come from the top down.

The use of “Celebrate” is used in a way that deprives it of all life and meaning. Rather than a spontaneous show of our elation, “celebrate” is more of a command. Claims that I “celebrate” our diversity is a token of my social acceptance, and does not mean that I plan a party and send out invites.

It is worth “celebrating” when oppressed people make demands. But in this case, the demands are instead coming from the top down. Large organizations are the ones telling us to “acknowledge” the contributions of minories; to “celebrate” diversity. If taken on their face value, the words are not so much the problem. What poses a difficulty is who is calling the shots. Speaking truth to power is quite different from those in power telling us what to think and do, no matter how much they dress themselves in humanistic-sounding jargon.

Like most directives from on high, this “celebration” of our differences and cultures does not take on the open forum of a discussion. It is more like a lecture by those of purportedly superior knowledge to the rest of us purported know-nothings. The jargon used has the calculated effect of requiring a high barrier of intellectual entry for most people, thereby discouraging discussion. In that regard, it is no different from the attempt conservatives take to exact loyalty and conformity to their own groups’ way of thinking. It is telling that “antifa” has become the new “communism” in terms of politically taboo groups of people. Anti-fascism is the only true antidote to both of these tendencies, since both are fascist in nature; and it is the one tendency that strikes terror in both of these elite groups.

Watching the election

On Monday night/Tuesday morning, I watched the Canadian Federal election, covered as it was non-stop on CBC Newsworld. I watched history unfold; how the NDP’s Jack Layton will occupy Stornaway as the leader of the opposition; how the Liberals are in third place, at about the level of Ed Broadbent in his mediocre days; or how the BQ is wiped off the map but for one candidate (which under our rules robs them of official party status, effectively wiping them off the map). As Chantal Hebert said on CBC, we are witnessing the “Social Creditization” of the Bloc Quebequois. All of this is historic (except for the part about the PC victory).

And, didn’t Osama bin Laden die earlier that Monday or something? Oh, whatever.

The “Orange wave” was impressive. I was listening to a CBC reporter take one NDP campaign organizer to task for the idea that the NDP split the vote. They did, too. In riding after riding, we were shown how the Conservatives won a riding where there was an even battle for second place between the NDP and Liberals.

The debate went in circles, and frankly, the organizer where to buy tramadol for dogs should have borrowed the line from Ralph Nader’s book: Screw the liberals. Igantieff’s loss is Igantieff’s fault. Ignatieff seemed to work with diligence to make absolutely sure to ignore every one of Harper’s gaffes, or to under-react to Harper’s attempts to subvert parliamentary protocol as he had done several times in the past 3 years; and to not react to attack ads attacking his ethnicity, all while Harper canvassed the “very ethnic” ridings of Toronto picking up Conservative converts in traditional Liberal ridings. It takes a disciplined mind to miss stuff like that. You really have to work very hard to not see the Republicn-style double dealing that is inherent in attacking ethnicity on the one hand and courting it with the other, whenever it suits you. You can’t blame the Conservative’s publicity machine for this; the fault lies squarely on Liberal turf.

It satisfies my pet political theory that the two best things to happen to the Conservatives are: Stephane Dion, and Michael Ignatieff after him. They helped Harper attain power for the longest-running minority government on record, followed by handing him a majority.