I’m hardly dropping a bombshell revelation when I state that leftists and non-white tribal activists do not particularly care for white people. Of course, such hostility has never prevented legions of white useful idiots from embracing liberal ideas and policies designed to assist their colored brethren. However, the noble intentions of white liberals are never enough to placate their supposed allies. The perpetual discontent of non-white SJWs has once again reared its head following the conclusion of the Sydney hostage crisis. In a nutshell, a deranged Iranian guy with a penchant for radical Islam held several people hostage at a cafe in Sydney, Australia. After many hours, the crisis was resolved following the deaths of three people, including the gunman.
I’m not going to turn this post into a discussion about Muslims. Likewise, it’s hardly a shocker that there are ungrateful immigrants and minorities living in Western countries today, whether it’s Man Horan Monis in Australia or Anjem Choudary in Britain. Such lunatics are thankfully the minority of most immigrants and Muslims, but they can nevertheless be quite a thorn in the side. They also wouldn’t be able to act on their extremism so easily without permissive attitudes towards borders and multiculturalism. Needless to say, Western countries need to seriously reassess their current immigration policies.
I’m more interested in the attitudes exhibited by leftists and non-white tribalists in response to this incident rather than discussions regarding extreme versus moderate Islam. In typical fashion, the reactions of leftists to the crisis have been all too predictable. Since white people are all potentially violent racists who can barely contain their insatiable hatred, many Australian Muslims have been bracing themselves for a potential backlash. They needn’t worry, however. Many do-gooder Australians, fearing for the safety of Muslims, now stand in solidarity with them. Such solidarity even culminated in a hashtag entitled #illridewithyou.
One would think that few people could possibly object to such a noble display of solidarity. After all, I think we all know what would happen if Muslims or other visible minorities, individually or in groups, were to pull off such a terrible deed in most non-Western countries. Unfortunately for some aggrieved colored souls, far from being a positive development, the #illridewithyou hashtag is an exercise in colonialism. I kid you not. At least that’s what one editorial writer for my favorite hypocritical leftist media outlet Al Jazeera argues. This editorial is so fatuous that it merits a thorough deconstruction:
“More subtly, this expectation for Muslims to keep speaking out is nothing short of Islamophobic. It assumes that Islam is, at its core, evil. It also upholds the view that Muslims can be essentialised as a monolithic whole.
The chastisement thus becomes the yardstick from which the wider world is to differentiate between a good Muslim and a bad Muslim.”
I can accept the argument that it’s unfair for Muslims to have to disassociate themselves from the actions of extremists, especially when most of them have nothing to do with extremism. However, as I pointed out in my post regarding the left’s notion of collective responsibility, such a courtesy is not extended to whites. It is leftists who assume that whites are evil at their core, can be treated as a monolithic privileged mass, and can be differentiated between good whites (SJWs and radical leftists who betray their own kind) and bad whites (all other white people). The editorial only gets even more absurd:
“Yes, the hashtag was born out of goodwill as the Twitter universe reacted to the story of a white Australian woman pledging to walk in solidarity with a Muslim woman who took her hijab off following news of the Sydney siege. We will protect the good Muslims, so gestures the campaign.
Unfortunately, it also reproduces an age-old trope that has been highlighted by scholars of postcolonial studies. As Western colonisers encounter non-European natives, they began to think of their “Other” in one of two antithetical ways – either as a barbaric savage or a noble savage.
To the colonisers, the hostile savage is inherently dangerous in a sub-human way and always an enemy to the civilised individual. Meanwhile, the noble savage is romanticised as innately benign. Untouched by modernisation, the noble savage should be admired and protected.
Transposed to modern times, the hostile savage translates as the bad Muslim and the noble savage – the good Muslim. Yet, barbaric or noble, a savage is still a savage. The hashtag #illridewithyou is just as patronising.”
Only someone with a major axe to grind against the West could possibly reach the conclusion that a campaign designed to shield a minority group from backlash and hatred somehow amounts to treating them like “savages.” Also, are we supposed to pretend that “bad Muslims” somehow don’t exist? Similar to Jewish gatekeepers like Max Blumenthal who insist that the crimes of Zionism not be associated with Jewish identity as a whole, Nazry Bahrawi treats acts of Islamic extremism as aberrations. Only bigots would dare critique Islam in relation to acts of Muslim extremism. Bahrawi is likewise angered by perceived double standards regarding Muslim and white mass murderers:
“Yet consider this. During the Sydney siege, a shooting spree incidence unfolded in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania that left 6 dead.
International media agencies described the perpetrator, the now-deceased Bradley William Stone, simply as “a suspect”, “a gunman on the loose” and even “a Montgomery man”. No hashtag campaign was necessary to assure white people that the rest of the world will ride with them to keep them safe.
The same can be observed of the reaction to the mass killings committed by the Norwegian Anders Breivik in 2011. While Breivik had claimed himself a baptised Christian in his 1,500-page manifesto, the world did not expect Christians to condemn terrorism in the same way Muslims had.”
Perhaps “the world” didn’t expect whites or Christians to apologize for the crimes of a few of its members, but leftists and non-white tribalists such as the author certainly do. Every time a trigger happy white cop kills an unarmed black man, we white people are constantly told that the cop’s action cannot be divorced from the general racism and white supremacy that characterize the United States. In the wake of Ferguson and the death of Eric Garner, one can easily find several arguments to the effect that the U.S needs to undergo serious racial soul searching, and that white America needs to take responsibility. Acts of white racism are always treated as an integral part of white identity, whereas SJWs and non-white tribalists pull out the No True Scotsman argument and expect us to cut slack to other groups, whose identities and cultures remain fundamentally pure. I guarantee you that if a high profile white individual were to engage in bigotry against Muslims, Mr. Bahrawi wouldn’t hesitate to place that individual’s action within the context of a “culture of Islamophobia,” rather than treating him as just a deranged individual.
Aside from reiterating that the left is hypocritical with regards to applying their standard of “collective responsibility,” the purpose of this post is to highlight just how difficult it is to satisfy these non-white SJWs. No matter what white people do, it is never enough in their eyes.
If white people just go about their daily lives and remain ignorant, then they’re in denial of their privilege and are contributing to oppression through their silence. If whites critique Islam following acts of Muslim terrorism, then they’re Islamophobes. If whites attempt to stand in solidarity with Muslims and insist that most Muslims are good, then they’re patronizing colonists who are treating Muslims like “noble savages.” There is very little that white people can do short of prostrating themselves before non-white activists that won’t result in some kind of criticism.
Nor are white allies of Muslims the only ones who get tarred with such criticism. Take Tim Wise, who has incurred the wrath of many white nationalists and conservatives for his relentless critiques of white people and white identity. However, his treachery is not enough to satisfy certain non-white tribalists such as Suey Park. He’s also earned the ire of non-white activists less radical and abrasive than Park.
Essentially, white people are either wicked or they’re eternally on probation, with the slightest mistake resulting in an avalanche of social justice fury. Small wonder that more white people aren’t eagerly embracing the opportunity to become an “ally.”
Ultimately, it’s necessary to inform my fellow white people that these leftists and tribalists are bottomless pits, and that there’s little point in engaging them. Don’t apologize, don’t make concessions, don’t even give them the time of day. The second we debate these issues on their terms, we’ve already lost, because white will never be right to them.
While I will continue to pathologize and critique leftism, I won’t waste valuable time by directly engaging them, and neither should you. I say we let them eat them eat their own and enjoy the popcorn.