‘It’s windy, isn’t it?’ says the first. ‘No, I think its Thursday,’ says the second. ‘So am I,’ says the third. ‘Let’s all go and have a cup of tea.’

 

Agreed: we ought to be woke but in the original sense of race conscious. As it is, ‘woke’ for Europeans reverses the original meaning, entailing a rejection of inherited identity. No one’s captured the attitude of this author and those of his ilk better than the mighty truth-teller VS Naipaul. Of middle class whites who take up Third World causes Naipaul wrote of “Those who in the end do no more than celebrate their own security.” That’s from ‘Michael X and the Black Power Killings in Trinidad’ written in the 70s about the daughter of a Conservative MP who took up with a black power cult in London and ended up in a grave in Trinidad.

Only Europeans don’t take their own side. As another great man of truth Rene Girard put it: ‘Not only is the revolt against ethnocentrism an invention of the West, it cannot be found outside the West.’ It’s no wonder that as people become increasingly aware of their numerical advantage, the scapegoating of ethnic Europeans intensifies here and elsewhere. Even without further immigration ethn1c cleans1ng of indigenous Britons is already mathematically guaranteed by fertility rates alone. ‘Minority’ births will be a majority by 2030; British schoolchildren a minority in British schools by 2035.

Does this author expect the antagonism against natives to go into reverse as what Powell called the “alien wedge” expands ever further? Talking of Powell, he did a hatchet job on Powell’s prophetic 1968 speech on here a while ago. Powell reckoned he didn’t have the right *not* to voice the fears of his constituents on their demographic displacement.

And it shan’t be long before native Britons won’t have the option of not being woke in the original race conscious rather than the current exclusively European anti-European ‘elite’ sense. Of necessity they’ll be proper woke. And that consciousness will be born out of the most primal human response: reciprocity and the desire for belonging / membership / identity - choose your own term.

The luxury of siding against your own group, denouncing them as “racist”, what we call “left”, what Roger Scruton termed “culture of repudiation” won’t be available, that’s if the group is to maintain itself at all: assuming ‘elites’ don’t convert, assimilating with the majority as per the Michel Houellebecq scenario envisaged for France in his novel ‘Submission’ set in 2020s, where the allure of young p*ssy overtakes all other considerations re ‘elite’ loyalties.

 Defenders of critical race theory training often miscategorise it as a standard form of essential workplace training, but training people in critical race theory is not like training them in protocols of data protection where compliance with the law can reasonably be required. It is more like training them in a belief system like Christianity and denying employees the right to be openly Muslim, Jewish, Hindu or atheist. Nobody should be required to pretend to believe themselves to be racist or to believe in invisible systems of whiteness if they don’t.

Is Hart correct that critical race theory and anti-racism training simply want all people to be recognised as equally human? No, this universal humanist approach is explicitly criticised in critical race theory as the failed liberal approach. Critical race theory works by foregrounding identity, not our shared humanity. Is the Trump administration thus correct to call it “divisive”? Absolutely.