At Persuasion, possibly because the newest New York Times columnist couldn’t get through the editorial gate, John McWhorter presents a ten point catechism of the new religion of neoracism.
He’s given the high priestesses the title “The Elect,” because they take SJW and woke as derogatory and, outside of their ideological views on social justice, are otherwise perfectly nice people who do ordinary jobs and are fun at parties. They’re not zealots, he explains, except when they’re zealots.
Whether this sticks remains to be seen, but McWhorter rejected “inquisitors” as being a bit too mean and is trying to find a way to move forward without offending these Elect so he can get them “off the bottom of our shoes,” which doesn’t sound a whole lot less offensive than calling them SJWs. But I digress.
- When black people say you have insulted them, apologize with profound sincerity and guilt. But don’t put black people in a position where you expect them to forgive you. They have dealt with too much to be expected to.
- Black people are a conglomeration of disparate individuals. “Black culture” is code for “pathological, primitive ghetto people.” But don’t expect black people to assimilate to “white” social norms because black people have a culture of their own.
- Silence about racism is violence. But elevate the voices of the oppressed over your own.
- You must strive eternally to understand the experiences of black people. But you can never understand what it is to be black, and if you think you do, you’re a racist.
- Show interest in multiculturalism. But do not culturally appropriate. What is not your culture is not for you, and you may not try it or do it. But if you aren’t nevertheless interested in it, you are a racist.
- Support black people in creating their own spaces and stay out of them. But seek to have black friends. If you don’t have any, you’re a racist. And if you claim any, they’d better be good friends—in their private spaces, you aren’t allowed in.
- When whites move away from black neighborhoods, it’s white flight. But when whites move into black neighborhoods, it’s gentrification, even when they pay black residents generously for their houses.
- If you’re white and only date white people, you’re a racist. But if you’re white and date a black person, you are, if only deep down, exotifying an “other.”
- Black people cannot be held accountable for everything every black person does. But all whites must acknowledge their personal complicity in the perfidy throughout history of “whiteness.”
- Black students must be admitted to schools via adjusted grade and test score standards to ensure a representative number of them and foster a diversity of views in classrooms. But it is racist to assume a black student was admitted to a school via racial preferences, and racist to expect them to represent the “diverse” view in classroom discussions.
Is he right? Has he put too much in? left something out? Is it as contradictory as he presents or can sense be made of it? Or is it worse, less rational, than he presents? It’s not necessarily an all-or-nothing proposition, either, and while some are good, others fall short. Did McWhorter nail the inherent contradictions or has he missed the point?
*Tuesday Talk rules apply.
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
This is, unfortunately, a mixed bag of common sense rules and SJW nonsense. Some of the rules (specifically, numbers 1 and 10) are common sense rules that apply equally to all races. (Although number one gets a little shaky.) The others are far too general, and too blaming of whites, to be anything other than nonsense. No. 9 in particular is pure SJW cant. I refuse to acknowledge ‘complicity’ in events that happened before I was born, events that I had no control or knowledge of (or any ability to change, even if I had knowledge of them), and events that would have happened no matter the race of the participants. All one can do is try to be a good person to everyone you meet, do what you can to combat racism when you find it, and generally treat others as you would have them treat you.
I think you’ve missed the point. He’s not promoting this nonsense, he’s condemning it. Read what he wrote.
I am, shall we say, unpersuaded. You’d think someone who teaches within the hallowed halls of an Ivy would be ashamed to publish such tedious and error-riddled prose, but here we are.
On a side note, given John McWhorter’s corpus, doesn’t it feel too on-the-nose to shine the SJ spotlight his way?
I let you comment, Jake. Clearly, I have low standards.
I expect better from you too, comrade. I’m aloof enough to not know what flag you march under. I know it’s not mine, even if we can travel together sometimes.
I found the article refreshing in the way it cut through the religious chanting and provided a neat vocabulary for further discussion about racism or neoracism or third wave antiracism or whatever. I’d imagine it was written for easy consumption so that this McWhorter could plug his book, but it wasn’t tedious in any sense.
Matters of taste shouldn’t be disputed, I’ve heard. What about the substance are you opposed to? Am I getting lost at some intersection I wasn’t expecting? Can you do better?
Pops, I understand I might regret my questions if they are answered, but Jake’s part of the book club now and it is TT. Also, thank you.
It’s clear to me, McWhorter hasn’t had substantive exposure to the targets of his critique. I’m sure he believes students of creole linguistics and whatever other academics he rubs shoulder with at Columbia University are a fair sample, but they are not. In short, his strawman is a caricature. I’m sure it will sell many copies of his book, but to leverage the movement’s parlance, “that ain’t it, chief.”
Just so I’m clear, woke white guy tells unwoke black guy he doesn’t get the black experience right.
No, you are not clear. But when did you convert to the church of identity?
It’s a caricature or it’s just not who you it to be when it gets held up to the light of scrutiny?
I’ve seen all that McWhorter is talking about over and over, and the best you can do is pretend that’s not the predominant contentions, but just Ivy prof trying to sell books? Sad. Jake.
This woke nonsense, including BLM, has little to do with black people. It uses them as props, and some exploit it, for example the “communist” leader who goes around blowing millions of dollars on fancy houses while refusing to allow any audit of BLM funds (a perfect illustration of how communism works), but the driving force behind it is old white male oligarchs.
You say that McWhorter is chewing on straw. That there’s some elusive place where everything is explained and makes sense, free of contradiction. Help lead me to this nirvana, brother, or else I’ll stay as a critic of the nonsense McWhorter describes because despite your objections, your pure ideology isn’t reflected in the real life actions of those you would call allies. Stop being mercurial and stay on subject. I care about what McWhorter says not who he is.
We need to get past this so that everyone can realize they are mere wage slaves, comrade. Yes, race matters, but material conditions matter more. Marx and Engels showed us the way. What you’re on about ain’t it. I don’t blame you, we haven’t gotten all the way through Capital and the Wealth of Nations yet; they can be dense.
“That there’s some elusive place where everything is explained and makes sense, free of contradiction.”
I’m saying the opposite. Like so many others with books to sell, McWhorter is diddling with reductionism to appeal to the feelz. But I know many who have bled for the cause, and I too have experienced life in the real world and the people I know; they don’t resemble the strawmen he paints, in any hue, or the laughably limited set of interactions conjured up with so much mental masturbation.
Because we don’t; because the many individual members of society do not fit neatly into those boxes we all hear about in the dueling versions of reality that passes for journalism in America -no matter how much dopamine the patsies get from believing. To pretend we do is an insult to the intelligence of even the most uneducated with more than two brain cells pulling in the same direction.
You’re like the cartoon character who just keep running head first into the same wall, over and over, and you’re the only person who doesn’t realize you’re doing it again.
Jake, Have mercy and edit this drivel down to one or two sentences preferably one.
Me: Can you do better?
Jake: No.
You aren’t saying anything at all. Can’t you see that? All you’re doing is saying “nuh uh”. I’m trying to be nice, but you’re making it difficult. Talk about the ideas next time and not your limited experience. I’m not giving up on you just yet, but I’m already getting a headache watching you ram your head against the wall.
Ah, PK please don’t lose faith. It wouldn’t have been much of a Tuesday Talk without a contrarian in the mix.
McWhorter, like other people who agree with me, is brilliant! I’ve been saying for years that wokeism is the new religion of the NWO. Everyone needs religion, especially young people who disdain religion and are desperately seeking something to believe in, that they can tell themselves isn’t “the opiate of the people.” (anti) racism is the perfect puzzle piece to fill the “religion” void in their souls.
Different opiates for different folkiates.
You are not the only one who has been saying this for a long while. But we are knocked down as conspiracy nuts wearing tin-foil hats whenever we point it out, and are ignored. This article was originally published in February, but did not come to our attention till our Dear Leader pointed it out to us today. The vast majority of the Elite are just ignoring it. It is their way of dealing with it. Just ignore it and eventually it will be forgotten.
I would also observe that the rise of new religions has generally not been a pleasant event for humanity. Whether based on spiritual revelations or “logic and reason”, they create stress between people which inevitably ends up with someone declaring war on the deniers/unbelievers/infidels/blasphemers.
The antiracism thread is only one part of the new society the elite want to build on the rubble of the current system, and there are stresses there, too. It is a new religion, and it is not to end well.
The whole thing of high priestesses telling us how we should think, act, speak, genuflect etc is too much to swallow anymore. After watching this country slide into the abyss like a slow motion train wreck for decades, there is only one proper response. It was articulated by the sister of one of the dead Marines from Biden’s Kabul fiasco. She screamed it at Biden at Dover Air Force Base on Sunday as the Marines’ remains returned to the U.S. – and they were given a chance to meet with the president. She spoke for millions of Americans on the priest and priestesses causing the collapse of our once great country.
‘I hope you burn in hell! That was my brother!’
We are tired of this mess. We just want them all to go to hell.
I think McWhorter’s use of “the elect” is a penetrating insight into the secular religion of “anti racism” since they clearly take the Calvinist view that some are guaranteed entrance to heaven while others are irredeemably tainted with sin. I’m reminded of a recent SJ post about CRT and animal shelters where browsing source material turned up this gem from Nathan Winograd
“Weaver’s embrace of “critical race theory” is a misnomer. It is not even hypothesis. It is supernatural piety, akin to alchemy or astrology — received wisdom where evidence, analysis, rigor, and falsification have no place.”
For musical accompaniment I recommend “That’s When I Reach For My Revolver” by Mission of Burma
Not gonna lie, I thought the man was serious until I got to #6. The thing is, I’m pretty certain there are folks who agree with all 10 without batting an eye.
” Did McWhorter nail the inherent contradictions or has he missed the point?”
Yes BOTH!
Intelligent life does not exist on planet Earth and if it does it came here from somewhere else. In inventing the word “intelligence” humans coined a concept that does not apply to the great majority of humans, I make exceptions for the late Albert Einstein and the late Richard Feynman.
THEOREM. For any 2 humans A and B competent in a shared language it is possible for them to converse on any subject.
COROLLARY. Male bovine excrement!!!
Humans are infected by ideologies and different humans have or maybe serve or believe in or are different ones. Eg. Born again Christian abortion opponent in Texas and mysogynist Taliban head choppers in Afghanistan can never converse sensibility because they use the same words with different sets of meanings. A word has multiple meanings attached to it and in any particular instance of use a particular human will only intend a subset of them and if his interlocutor is using the same word with a different and incompatible subset of meanings CONFUSION RESULTS. Ideologies deal in absolutes and humans are prone to Manachean ideologies aimed at different versions of ABSOLUTE GOOD. However one person’s or ideologiy’s idea of GOOD may be another perso’s or ideology’s idea of EVIL. Those who use the terms WOKE and SJW actually mean LEFT SECULAR WOKE and LEFT SECULAR SJW. Their also exists potential for versions of WHITE CHRISTIAN WOKE and WHITE CHRISTIAN SJWs. Of course right wing Christians would not acknowledge that such terms have meaning they would call them COMMON SENSE.
The argument is really between followers of different and incompatible ideologies . The pejorative WOKE is for proponents of the SILLY secular belief that all functional members of species HOMO SAPIENS are human in the sense of being entitled to human rights. Right minded people may not say it openly but they believe that members of species homo sapiens who are a problem for humans entitled to human rights should be disposed of quickly and efficently. They have terms for such, UNPEOPLE, DISPOSABLES, TORTURABLES, SUBHUMANS, INFERIOR RACES, INDIGENOUS PEOPLE etc ……….. The terms don’t need to be used often as all RIGHT THINKERs have automatic mental links to the current concepts.
The problem with the WOKE is their insistence on behaving as if UNPEOPLE are entitled to the protections of human rights Eg Berta Caceres. George Floyd, Ahmaud Aubery or any Palestinian whacked by the IEHD (Israeli Ethnic Hygiene Department) AKA the IDF.
By the way, belief in the need for and value of THE LAW is an IDEOLOGY and may be obscuring some ideas for some who read this blog.
TL;dr. But TT rules, so here ya go. And for anyone keeping count, see the great stuff we get at SJ that you would ordinarily never see but I have to suffer?
It is your fault SHG for running such an interesting blog. Every few days I visit and sometimes I find a post and a stream of coments that resonate with certain ideas that trouble me. This one did did very much resonate.
It’s cool, but make it shorter. You’re killing me.