Against Civil Discourse

The recent upheavals in the social media landscape caused by the megalomaniac Musk have fanned the flames of respectability politics. People are rightly alarmed at the rising rates of hate speech on Twitter. At the same time, there are groups of people who argue that free speech needs to be encouraged and that we should engage Nazis in discourse and treat them fairly. I ask – Just Why? First, this viewpoint falsely equates the right to “free speech” in the US and the right to “say anything you want”. Yes, the constitution does give citizens the right to “free speech”, but it does not mean what most people think it does. The constitution allows you to criticize the government or people in power. It does not mean it is okay to call for the extermination of Jewish people because you need to “express” yourself. 

Your freedom of expression stops when you are using your expression to oppress others through hate speech and threats of violence.   Beyond that, what is the value of letting Nazis propagate their hate speech to society? Moreover, how does engaging with Nazis online work to change their stance on human rights and the status of non-white people as humans? I do not need to read the hate speech to know people exist with these ideologies (it is not informing me). I have never seen white supremacists persuaded to change their ideation based on conversations and reason. Allowing hate speech to flourish does not work towards ending hatred.

Ironically a lot of the discourse in online spaces discourages people from talking about harmful acts committed by white supremacists and institutional racism and encourages love and forgiveness. This stance is mind-boggling. How does remaining silent about the violence committed against you help anyone ever? How does remaining silent about the violence you witness being committed against others help anyone? The silence of victims is encouraged by those who are made uncomfortable hearing about the facts of abuse. Those privileged to never think about white supremacist violence do not want to know about the violence that white supremacy enacts daily. It makes white people uncomfortable to know about victims’ pain. This is also an act of power that oppresses victims. Once more, silence on the part of witnesses is the same as being an actor of violence and hate. 

The claim of free speech and the call for civil discourse is a complex form of gaslighting. First, it claims that the hurt caused by violent rhetoric is negligible or nonexistent. The notion that “words cannot hurt” is farcical for anyone who grew up in a violent household or has been called names and threatened physically. Words can debilitate children and cause harm in adults whose psychological well-being can be threatened through prolonged verbal threats and attacks. Some people have been led to suicide through verbal online bullying.

Second, asking for civil discourse is delusional. Just because Nazis may not use vulgarity and speak in metaphors eluding to violent ideas does not make their discourse civil. The appropriate reaction to hate speech and verbal violence may or may not include vulgarity and verbal attacks against Nazis. Rage is an appropriate response to groups of people who want to genocide the marginalized. Calling out Nazis is an appropriate response to Nazis. Shutting down hate speech and threats of violence is appropriate. We do not need to hear the Nazis out. They do not respond to reason. They are not going to read something and change their minds. 

Kafka Knew:

The contemporary world we find ourselves in today was foreshadowed in succinct ways in the work of Franz Kafka.  His short stories and novels centre on neurotic characters trapped in the machinations of state apparatus that are designed to control the population.  The stories he spins of people trapped by the secret police for crimes that are never charged, constant surveillance and the neurosis brought about by working in repetitive low-level dead-end jobs. 

Kafka saw the issues of race and identity from a liminal context.  While he was fluent in German, he lived in Bohemia (now Czech) from 1883-1924 and was Jewish.  Which places Kafka in the heart of WWI amid people who were increasingly anti-Jewish, in a republic at the centre of the conflict geographically. Czechoslovakia incorporated Bohemia in 1918 up until after Kafka’s death in 1939.  Bohemia is ill remembered in US popular culture as a hippie style in the 1960s who wore long hair and recited poetry playing bongo drums in smoke-filled clubs while snapping fingers.  In fact, Bohemia existed in Eastern Europe and was part of the Holy Roman Empire and mostly chirsitan.

There are recordings of Jewish people in the area who traded with the Romans in the 1^st century, with Jewish settlements appearing in the 13^th century.  The history of Jewish life in Bohemia is filled with attacks and discrimination, which intensify with the rise of Nazism in Eastern Europe in the 1930s.    This indicates that Kafka understood the dangers that marginalized people face within societies that have deemed them less than human and disposable.  Reading works such as The Trial, The Castle and “The Judgement”, we see the exploration of existential angst that stems from deep generational trauma.

The absurdity of a land in which no one knows what law they violated and are being punished for [“The Judgement”]; the anxiety of living in a state which is run by a secretive oligarchy that insists you follow unknown rules [The Castle]; and the terror of being stalked, arrested and prosecuted by the powerful with no reason or knowledge of who is in charge [The Trial]:  all seem like story lines written specifically for the moment the US is currently navigating and the experiences of Black and Brown people at the hands of the police.

On the 11^th of April 2021, police shot a 20 year old black male named Daunte Wright to death during a traffic stop near the Minneapolis spot where George Floyd was killed in May of 2020.   Reports say that the young man was pulled over because of an air freshener that was dangled from his rearview mirror.   

https://www.vogue.com/article/daunte-wright-police-killing-what-to-know

In a city that is gripped by the murder trial of Derek Chauvin [the cop who purposefully held George Floyd on the ground with his knee on his neck for 9 minutes of 29 seconds until Floyd was dead from asphyixia], another Black man was murdered by the police.    For Black people in the US, life is truly a Kafka horror show.  Always being watched, arbitrarily stopped and arrested or murdered, with no recourse and layers of hidden bureaucrats, lobbyists and the uber-wealthy protecting and abetting the police behind the scenes. 

The authorities’ quickness to blame the victim and gaslight the millions of Black people who fear for their lives, not knowing if they will be the next one killed for no reason, supports the police oppression and control over Black people for continued economic exploitation.  The bedrock of the US was wealthy white men who “owned” Black people. The police were created to kill Black people who were trying to escape enslavement or who were too educated and rebellious enough to not obey the “master’s” whims no matter how disgusting or dehumanizing. 

Kafka as a Jewish person living in Eastern Europe knew of the experience of a people who were often killed for arbitrary reasons [with the crescendo of events that transpired during WWII] at the hands of racist police, soldiers and regular citizens who were deeply entrenched in the idea that whites were superior to all other people and had a right to rule over all of creation.  The police today are another example of an organization that is designed to contain or destroy non-whites.  They do so at their pleasure and with no recourse or accountability. 

How do we quash white supremacy from within a white supremacist society?  A society that is white supremacist at every level, public and private?  

C-PTSD is a Bitch

This week I learned that my best friend from High school took their own life.  We hadn’t seen each other in many years and were in sporadic contact (like most people I have known throughout my life of constant moving and upheaval).  I feel a deep love for my friend and a great sadness that they died too soon and in so much pain.  My friend and I bonded sophomore year in high school and were part of a band of misfit kids who came from broken families and abuse.  We held each other together.  We understood each other in ways ‘normal people’ couldn’t.  We were neurodivergent, queer punks navigating the beginning of the end of the US empire and AIDS.

My friend and I share a horrible mental phenomenon known as C-PTSD.  The C stands for complex, meaning that we were sexually assaulted in childhood and had multiple other abuses inflicted upon us by adults in our lives who were suppose to care before we were 18 years old.  We were friends partly because we understood each other’s mood swings and anger came from the same place and wasn’t about our friendship.  We were friends partly because we could deal with crazy erratic behavior that scared others, and would take risks others would not.

C-PTSD has profound effects on the psyche and literally changes your brain function (look it up they did MRI scans).  It leaves us survivors vulnerable to a host of medical issues such as substance abuse, obesity, anorexia, heart disease, asthma, a propensity for cancer, and diabetes.  Those with C-PTSD have shorter live spans typically dying by our 50s.  It leave us survivors vulnerable to extreme anxiety and depression.  My suicide attempt was in 8^th grade, I am not sure when my friend had their first attempt but I know there were many throughout the years for my friend.   In sum C-PTSD is a bitch, it hurts physically and emotionally.

There is hope, there are ways to cope and retrain your brain to process better, but it is a hell of a lot of work and is exhausting.  Those of us with C-PTSD know there is no cure, it will always be something that must be managed and worked around this is also exhausting.  I feel a lot of people minimize C-PTSD if they even believe it is a thing and that makes it difficult to disclose and talk about our issues, compounded with the immense self-shame we feel because of C-PTSD.  I don’t blame my friend, though there is a tinge of anger that they chose to exit the planet.  I understand all too well the emotions and the frustrations and the isolation and the pain. 

So here I sit in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed millions of people over the last 12 months, thinking about death has become the norm.  I sit here with sadness but also with – I know it’s weird for me – hope.  As we get older, more people we know die.  Some people experience the loss of parents at young ages (I was 26 when my father died). Some people experience the death of friends and family early.  The pandemic really brought into focus the fact that many people have never dealt with significant losses before.  Loss sucks, it burns, it aches, it sucks out your breath.  Knowing that someone you loved is never ever going to have a conversation with you again is heartbreaking.  Loss also is good.

I don’t mean it’s good that all these people have died or that my friend killed themselves.  I mean that it is good in that it generates empathy between humans.  I mean, it is good in that it is when we lose people really show up.  I walked in the sun the day I learned of my friend’s death with my dog, smiled, and was thankful for still being alive to feel the warm sun.  I was thankful for my friends who have sustained me in my adult life even when they were not aware there were.  I was thankful for the chance this even and the pandemic have given me to think about what actually matters in life, and to be more conscious of telling people how much they help me, and I love them.

So thank you, my friend.  I will always love you. I am thankful you are at peace.

Enabling and its excuses

The recent revelations concerning NY governor Andrew Cuomo are an opportunity to think about sexual assault and its consequences or lack thereof.  Whether they would label it as such, I do not know a single woman who has not experienced sexual assault or harassment.  Statistics show that approximately one in five women and one in seventy-five men have or will be sexually assaulted in their lifetime.  The problem of sexual violence has existed for millennia and seems to be increasing; as a result, scholars and reporters spend a great deal of time dissecting victims – their vulnerability and their reactions to assaults.  The newest public case of governor Cuomo highlights the problem society has holding aggressors accountable.

Many people are bringing up Senator Al Franken’s resignation from his seat over allegations of sexual harassment and assault in 2018.  The range of comments compares Cuomo’s aggression to Franken as an example of why Cuomo should or should not resign his position.  Some say that what Franken did was not as egregious as Cuomo, so obviously, Cuomo should resign.  Other people say that the loss of Franken as a Democratic senator was devastating beyond what was called for given the accusations against him, and the lesson should be learned to not overreact by asking Cuomo to resign.  Those in favour of Cuomo staying in his job cite his excellent leadership skills and how he has handled the pandemic’s last year, which ravaged NY. 

I have seen this before, not in headline news, but in my own social circles, and I suspect most of us paying attention find this discourse familiar.  The number of sexual aggressors that are in the world is staggering.  That they are allowed to move and operate as free citizens with no consequences is infuriating.  I know several men who had beaten or sexually assaulted people in a social circle and met no adverse reactions or consequences for their behaviour.  Why?  Because sexual aggressors tend to be smart, manipulative and charming.  Sexual aggressors can be highly successful and good at their jobs. Sexual aggressors can be sexually attractive.  Sexual aggressors can be anyone. 

The normalization of acceptance of sexual aggression in media and entertainment mirrors how the real world deals with sexual aggression.  People know the behaviour happens; people know who is being sexually predatory and aggressive; people will still invite the predator to the party.  The lack of consequences for predators is dangerous and damages victims.

Conversations around abuse, and the predator, amongst those that know what is happening, involve several patterns.  The aggression is down-played as not that serious because the victim was not hospitalized or no police were called.  The aggression is down-played as not that serious because that is just how men behave (yes, women can also be predators, but I am focused here on men).  The victim is blamed by asking how much they drank or what drugs they consumed.  The victim is blamed for not knowing better or having better self-defence training.

Moreover, finally, the predator is praised.  The predator is called a great guy at heart.  The predator’s successes are recounted to prove what a great guy they are.  Lastly, the enablers talk about how the predator never assaulted them – I have never seen that. Or, they have always been so nice to me. 

I do not have all the answers to making the world a better place, but it seems that if we are committed to the notion that it would be great if people did not have to worry about being sexually assaulted or harassed every day of their life, then we must stop enabling predators.  We must accept that predators are not actively assaulting people 24/7 and so can also do good things in the world and be successful.  We must accept that just because someone is nice to you, that does not mean they are nice 24/7 to every person they encounter.  We must accept that predators are not obviously evil caricatures but regular people living regular lives.  We must accept that we are perpetuating and engaging in abuse when we ignore predators bad actions to keep the peace.

science, christianity and the human condition

As the rise of fascist racism in public escalates; and a deadly plague sweeps over the US, the arguments over god and nature are back.  Being somewhat older, I am forever feeling a sense of Deja Vu to the days of Reagan coming into office and the AIDS crisis striking fear across the world.  Two major themes of the Reagan era were the christian propagandist god choose the US over the USSR, and all the problems that Black people and other marginalised groups suffered were their own fault.  These themes remain consistent and loud, coming from the GOP.

So the question becomes linked to what are humans supposed to do with themselves anyway?  Are we designed for some “higher” purpose or biding time until we are sorted into eternal damnation/salvation?  The Abrahamic believers link our design and purpose to god and divine planning, and any deviation from the plan is seen as heretical [ironic given that humans are not supposed to be capable of understanding the divine plan].  In the Abrahamic schema, you are poor and suffering because you are not following the plan. 

As the 18^th century unfolded, this can be seen in eugenics notions that attempted to merge science and christo/fascism.  It is no accident that the prevalent ideas of white supremacy undergirded the popular understandings of evolution.  I always come back to the subtitle of Darwin’s book of Evolution.  The chirsto/fascists see whiteness as the objective of the entire human population.  Given that Darwin told us that the best traits were selected for optimal success of a species, then obviously, the traits of whiteness were the human species’ optimal traits.  Eugenics holds that non-desirable human traits should be bred out [though direct breeding programs if necessary], and those possessing them should be cut out of society and left to die or worked to death for the profit of white people. 

Christianity offers several dangerous narratives that propel white supremacy today.  The linkage of shame, sin and “deformity” works to give chisto/fascists leeway to actively work to harm non-cis, white,christian, male, hetero, non-disabled people.  The presence of traits other than those thought to be cis, white, christian, male, hetero, non-disabled people is something chisto/fascists consider a sign of sin and evil.  Those who have such evident signs of evil marking them out are always already bad and therefore expendable.  Often these arguments revert to pseudoscience in that they have premises that rely on notions of what is biologically normal and best.  God, for these people, designed humans to be a certain biologically normal way.

But what does that mean? What is biologically normal?  Sexually humans come in a wide variety of chromosome combinations.  There is no binary in nature; there are species of other animals that change sex and are parthenogenic.  Humans come in a wide range of skin tones, hair types, sizes and shapes.  As Donna Haraway pointed out long ago, most humans are reliant on technology to sustain their lives and correct defects (do you have teeth fillings? wear glasses? …)

If we take normal as what the “average” human should be like, then statistically, we have issues.  The average human is not a white male.  There are far more Asians on the planet than white people and far more women than men.  Nevertheless, especially in Europe and North America, white males are seen as the norm despite the lower numbers of them worldwide, and even in Europe and North America, there are more women than men.

If we take “normal” to me good (as in gods idea of good) design and therefore better for the continued success of the species, we have more problems.  The notion that god is a singular male figure responsible for the entire universe and your life is not a belief system that relies on the accuracy of historical or scientific fact.  We also know that statistically, men are not a very good design.  Men have higher rates of heart disease, cancer, suicide and infertility compared to women. 

From a non-religious standpoint, the point of life is to live and to help sustain other life.  This means that a wide variety of humans are needed to cope with a wide variety of stresses.  The fact that non-white/cis/hetero/abled/male humans continue to exist despite millennia of attempts of genocide might show that these people are actually better designed for life and should be promoted as the “norm” and good.

Violence and the Christian Trauma Bond

For people unfamiliar with domestic violence and phenomenon such as Stolkholm Syndrom; the Trauma Bond occurs when the abuser creates a traumatic situation such as beating you or threatening to kill you.  After the abuser has calmed down, they deflect all blame and seek to soothe you with attention.  At the same time, the abuser tells you that you need to do better to prevent the abuse and that they love you more than anything.  Thus creating a bond in which the victim seeks to please the abuser to get positive attention.  This cycle is replayed over and over again until the victim leaves or is killed by their abuser.

The high levels of abuse in society mean that millions of people are susceptible to abusive cycles, yet little society does to curb domestic violence.  As with many of the US’s social and economic problems, we can see the perpetuation of abuse and violence is part of the bedrock of US society, which began as a nation that enslaved people for life.  Christianity certainly plays some role in the abuse and violence prevalent in US society today.

The far-right is replete with god loving jew hating christians.  Furthermore, scores of people have died since the 1960’s alone at the hands of violent abusers who were christian white supremacists.  From Timothy McVey to the QAnon insurrectionists who broke into the Capitol on January 6^th white supremacist christians have done significant damage killing adults and children and leaving wakes of trauma behind their destruction.

While people in the US, especially the white people, are happy to justify the endless prison hell of Guantanamo Bay and violence against Muslims because they are Muslim and therefore violent; we fail to account for how violent white christians are in the US.  Besides the millions of domestic violence cases, white chirstians have killed thousands of US citizens since 1865.  I find this peculiar given the similarity between the two faiths and the long history each has of conquest and murder.  Perhaps this is why when the mainstream media discuss white supremacist terrorists in the US; their religious affiliations are often ignored.

I keep thinking about abuse and christianity and terrorism and violence and always Kierkegaard’s Fear and Trembling pops into my head.  Kierkegaard focuses on the seminal biblical story upon which all Abrahamic religions (Jewish, Christian, Muslim) praise deep faith and commitment to god.  In the story of Abraham god, via an angel, tells Abraham he must make a sacrifice to him of his son to prove his love for god.  The son that Abraham received after he pleaded with god.  Abraham dutifully takes his son up the mountain, places him on an altar for burnt offerings and is about to plunge the knife into his child when god tells him to stop.  He pleases god, and everyone lives happily ever after (no one really talks about how much PTSD this caused Issac). 

Kierkegaard reckons that the story shows how you must leap into the unknown with faith to have a genuine relationship with and love of god. Sound familiar?  Kierkegaard seems to be describing the Trauma Bond as an ideal model of christian faith.  The powerful god gives you what you asked for, but only if you acknowledge the complete control of your life to god.  Those that give control are punished, psychologically like Abraham and Issac or physically like Jesus and then rewarded with the promise of eternal bliss.  Those that doubt are also punished until they relent or die with the promise of eternal torture.  The prevalence of violence in US society cannot be fully understood without understanding white christianity. 

Spectacular Capitalism and Social Media

In the last year, I have spent significant amounts of the pandemic online, looking at Face Books posts from my small group of friends and scrolling Twitter.  I think a lot about equity and white supremacy in the US, and the problems that non-white, non-cis, non-hetero, non-christian face economically. 

The founders of the US were white supremacists; many had enslaved people working their plantations.  The US began when monarchies across Europe were losing power, and capitalism entrenched itself in the west.  Enslavement of the “other” allowed capitalism to flourish, and as the triangular trade waned other commodities and cultural artefacts became commodities in the US and Europe. 

In DeBord’s work, he explains that capitalism is tied to spectral as various markets and sellers compete against each other.  Spectacle feeds several human desirers; visual entertainment, dopamine kicks from surprise and awe, and escape from the everyday.  DeBord speculated that as the need to sell increased public spectacles and advertising pushed to supply increasing amounts of visual imagery that was increasingly symbolic and emotionally exciting.

The current trends show how correct DeBord was.  Most social media is heavily visually driven.  Sites make it easy for anyone and everyone to upload photos and videos of their daily life.  Those who post visual content are rewarded with more shares, more views and a chance to “go viral”.  Likes deliver little jolts of dopamine and provide a sense of connection to others.  During a pandemic, this becomes amplified.  The longing for connection prompts competition amongst those posting to social media to drive towards visual content.

It is not surprising to see how social media has contributed to the spectacle of Capitalism.  Social media has influenced language itself as millions of users engage with emojis and short acronyms instead of text.  The prevalence of memes, gifs and short videos has become such that they regularly make mainstream news reports. 

In spectacular capitalism, we are lured into consumer action and visual signalling in the name of good.  We are told that buying the symbols of Blackness and banning those of white supremacy helps solve racism and makes us moral citizens.  There are so many problems with this…  Symbols are powerful tools for human communication, but you cannot appropriate other peoples cultural symbols and remain a good citizen. 

White people have no business wearing dreadlocks or Native American War Bonnetts.  Changing your avatar to BLM or a section of Kente Cloth is not being an ally.  Buying exotic clothes, art, or furniture is not being an ally.  Engaging with visual symbolism is neutral at best but mostly harmful.  Because it allows people to feel good without actually knowing anything about the symbols.  Symbols speak to the superficiality of white political commitment to equity and justice.  Without understanding the history of white supremacy and working to undermine white supremacy, you are merely seeking attention and congratulations for your “wokeness”.

The moto of spectacular capitalism might be summed up as:  all things can be seen and all is for sale.  The white western commodification of other cultures allows places like Black Africa to remain exploited, and aids in the oppression of Black people in the US.  White westerns jump at the opportunity to consume things that will alleviate their guilt of complicity with white supremacy.  The impulse buying of non-white culture by white people contributes to the oppression by making you forget about the actual problems non-whites face and making profits for white people who sell ethnic commodities.  The money and power remain in the hands of white people. 

Black History

Dear fellow white people:

It is that time of year again when Black people gained visibility through the outdated and tired diversity month initiatives.  As a result, slews of well-meaning white people will trot out historical facts and Black accomplishments.  Well-meaning white people will circulate “woke” hashtags and smile that they too know the names of more obscure Black people.

PLEASE STOP

Representation does not equal equity, a pithy fact or cute meme does not erase white supremacy.  Think!  In a society that is rooted with spectacular capitalist systems, the celebration of Black “History” tends to be harmful, superficial and attention-seeking.  White people see themselves as allies, promoting Blacks in low stakes arenas like social media or through appropriation of Black culture.  Thus, white people are satisfied with themselves for not being racists yet the relegation of Black history and culture to the shortest month of the year is, in fact, racist.

Everyone should celebrate Black history amazing and at all times, not once a year (maybe twice if you like the pacifist version of MLK).  These practices are particularly egregious in academia, which the notion of diversity months has really taken off over the years.  The lack of substantive Black history in US education is ridiculous and racist.  Everyone should be working on learning more about the US’s racist foundations and thinking of ways to end white supremacy daily, not a few times a year.

Many white people see the appropriation of Black culture (this applies to Native Americans and other groups) as a celebration and a sign of acceptance.  They wrap themselves in Kente cloth expecting love and rewards for their bravery of celebrating Black culture.  Of course, the US House speaker and others in 2020 missed a big point when they kneeled over the violence and death Black people experience because they are Black in “solidarity”.  First, Kente cloth is Ghanian; it is not a US phenomenon.  Second, wearing a BLM pin or other symbols of white wokeness does nothing to solve systemic racism and white supremacy.  Third, culture is not really something to be shared.

White people think they have full rights and access to everyone else’s cultural history, and demand it should be shared and used by white people.  This idea is colonial shite supremacy incarnate.  Cultures are not things to be shared and used by the out-group.  Cultures are societies that have shared histories and locations and have developed practices to keep their society together.  Culture is what societies enact to preserve their stability and longevity.  If you are not part of a culture, you do not get to use someone else’s culture for your own vanity or monetary gain.

post-modernity and white supremacy

DRAFT

: political unrest in the US 2021

Post-modernity ideas come out of the late 20^th-century scholarship amongst academics who were engaged in western philosophy.  In the early 21^st century, most people, especially critics, are unaware of the central issues and how they play out in the real world.

For my purposes, post-modernity firstly disputes the Cartesian mind/body split.  Descartes’ notion of knowledge as something that cannot come through sensation (that includes reading) and that knowledge must always be true is rejected by post-modern philosophers.  Descartes was a devout christian and desperately wanted to prove that god exists, so his thoughts on knowledge reflect this stance. 

The second issue that post-modernity takes on is the idea that knowledge must always be true, and that there are absolute truths.  The claim to have universal truth is highly problematic – it might be true at this time and in this place, but it is impossible for humans to predict the future and so it might not be true in a different place or time.  This means that even what humans take as fundamental truths about nature (like gravity) will not hold up through all time and space.  While we like to think that science is indisputable because they use experiments, remember that many scientific ideas have been overturned throughout human history. 

People tend to argue that if there is no truth, then you cannot make a statement that there is no truth and this is misreading what post-modernity is all about, and what claims it is making.  Post-modernity comes from a standpoint that the real problem is not just that truth is unstable but that thinkers in western philosophy see truth as binary.  It either is or is not true.  The post-modern approach would say that there is no binary is or is not, but rather both exist.  People really hate this and usually start yelling about the reality of your death at this point, because it fundamentally upsets the belief system that forms our world, our society and our institutions in the US. 

The US was formed by white christian terrorists and wealthy tax dodgers who attached themselves to christian terrorists to gain power.  The entire western system of binary knowledge embedded in US culture has always broken society between two types of people.  On the one hand, you have the white, moral, intelligent, emotionally controlled, male citizen on the other you have the black, not-white, immoral, stupid and emotionally and physically uncontrolled, non-male.  There is no middle for the white supremacists either you are, or you are not white—[we can think of this in terms of transphobia as well].  The US cultivates identities based on these binary ideas of humanity.  chirstianity cultivates these binary identities as well. 

At the core of the US’s conservative movements, today is the fight to preserve the US as the white christian nation it was started in the 1800s.  Many factors lead up to the current political landscape in which white supremacy is growing more violent and outspoken one factor is that post-modernity is gaining traction in the digital information age.  Digital information exchange has revealed, in real-time, the hidden facets of history and exploded the access to knowledge.

As internet access and communication has expanded the rise in white supremacy has become open knowledge.  The reasons are many and complex, but the violence and cult-like behaviour of white terrorists seems to be linked to post-modern identity crisis.  White supremacy is baked into US culture, the idea that white people are better in all ways is so ubiquitous few white people ever had cause to doubt their superiority.   Christianity is also a crucial cultural force in the US, in which many people believe the bible to be literal history and the ultimate truth.

The post-modern is doubly dangerous to white supremacist christian ideology.  The idea that identity is binary along racial lines is ridiculous in the face of genetic testing and migration patterns.  People are seldom from one “pure” undiluted ethnic stock, and many generations of passing have led people to think of themselves as anglo/saxon whites.  The reality of the enslavement of Black Africans in the US is that many anglo/saxon men raped and impregnated Black African women producing children so that the one-drop rule would exclude probably a quarter of those thinking they were white from the front of the bus. 

Secondly, christian fundamentalism does not hold up well under historical scrutiny.  There is no way to prove that god exists, and there is significant historical evidence to show that the bible is barely accurate historically and that the writings were highly politicized and translations vary wildly.  Saying god must exist because there is a bible is the equivalent of saying elves exist because there is a Lord of the Rings.  The moral authority that christian fundamentalism clings rests on the existence of god and the truth of the bible, in the post-modern era, this is a difficult position to maintain.

The growth in the cult of Tang and Qanon has several factors, but I think it is important to remember how threatened these ideologies are.  Important because when people are faced with the reality that most of the things they believe are incorrect, especially their idea of self, and are raised in a non-self reflective rugged individual culture, they become violent.  If you want to fight white supremacy, you need to understand how traumatic having your entire life of believes disproven is.  Not so we can feel sorry for the white supremacists, but so we can realize how dangerous they are. 

There is a reason why people abuse, torture and kill others beyond money or sex, and that is control.  People who find their entire world view disrupted will find themselves losing control.  This reaction could be small, like being a white woman on the street yelling at Black people for no good reason.  The reaction could be invisible but harmful, like denying someone a job or calling the police anonymously.  The reaction can also be catastrophic, like murdering a man for jogging down the street, blowing up a building or trying to take over the government.

some brief thoughts

26 January 2021-  The Wild West, Christianity, Poverty and Covid-19 in the US

The world has been affected by a global pandemic as the Convid-19 virus sweeps across borders, leaving death and destruction.  This is obviously tragic for those who die, but for those who survive, there is also a lifetime of problems that might await them.  A year ago, not many had heard of this virus, and so people went on with their lives.  A year on we can see that the problems of containing the virus are not solely down to the properties of the virus itself but the logistics of dealing with poor human behaviour (failure to follow the rules and heed advice), Dysfunctional leadership (especially evident in the US) and systemic issue like poverty and racism. 

After being fed a steady diet of “American exceptionalism” most people in the US believe that they live in the greatest nation-state to exist.  People in the US seem so enamoured with the country’s superiority that they tend not to travel to other countries [low passport rate] and know little about global politics and culture.  The vanity of people in the US is astonishing when comparing other comparable nation-states (those with large economies, high literacy rates, advanced science) who in reality do a much better job not killing their citizens and working to protect their access to basic needs.

Looking around at the carnage, we find common themes that have defined the US and its relationship to its citizens or inhabitants since the very beginning.  Here we find three strands, 1^st the notion of rugged individualism, 2^nd the belief in a world ordered by Christianity, 3^rd an equation with poverty as a sign of immorality.  Each strand intertwines to undergird the rationality that leads to the crisis now unfolding.

The prevailing ideal citizen in the US is modelled off of puritan Christian culture.  Individualism became a hall-mark of Christian identity in the Christians are reported to have a cultivated individual relationship to god which does not require the intermediation of a religious official.  In the Protestant Reformation, the ideas brought about solidified in the colonists’ culture and governance who settled in the US in the early 1500s onward.  As time moved on the characterization of the rugged individual became a mythological figure to strive to imitate.  Individuals did not need to rely on experts or literally any other people as they pioneered the west and developed homesteads across the US.  Individuals were only responsible for themselves and their survival or the survival of their offspring as a substitute.

The failure of so many people in the US to follow basic hygiene by wearing a mask in public is explained in part by these foundational ideals.  The individual comes before the community is a standard that promotes such immoral behaviour.  More aggravating is the lack of awareness of the dangers of rugged individualism.  Perhaps most dramatically in recent decades the global deaths and infections from covid-19 show that humans are connected in large and fluid networks that circumnavigate the globe.  Nevertheless, in the US – an uber-wealthy nation- there has been a decided failure to convince the public to follow guidance to prevent the virus’s spread.

While the defence posture proclaims civil rights and liberties, it is evident that the real message is – my life and comfort are more important than your life.  No one, not experts, not scientists can tell them what to do.  The tragedy is how many people with this entrenched mindset have actually killed by proxy their loved ones via covid-19.  Mixed with this individual rights narrative is a message of strength and power.  Those who refuse to protect themselves seem to want to project an image of toughness and power.  The virus will not get them, or at least will not kill them, because they are strong and powerful, and those who get sick or die are weak and do not deserve to live. 

We see this played out in the epidemiology in which Black communities have the highest rates of death.  The jump to – oh it must be because they are weak and lazy and do not take care of themselves took no time at all to come out.  The idea that Black people are just genetically inferior plays on the notion of rugged individualism.  The failure to look at history, economics and eugenics as forces at work against Black people makes Black communities more vulnerable to covid-19. 

There are particular aspects of US Protestantism found in the refusal to follow guidance, which manifests in the pandemic’s larger governmental responses.  Interwoven into the lack of response is a definitive Christian outlook which equates individuals’ tragic circumstances to a moral failing.  Many believe that those killed or permanently damaged from covid-19 were chosen by god to be infected and deserve the consequences.  This idea mimics the notion that poor and Black people (those hit the worst by the virus statistically) have failed morally and so deserve to be poor. 

Sadly, a virus that has highlighted the interconnection between humans globally has prompted a resurgence of rugged individualism.  At the same time, it is troubling that the response has re-entrenched racist and classist ideololy, which fail to see how individuals’ suffering has long-term economic and moral consequences in the future.  The 45^th presidency advanced these narratives as months passed with no effective nationwide response and states bidding against each other for basic protective equipment. 

The 45th presidency is not responsible for the history that put the US in this current state, but the rhetoric and disastrous response to the crisis is partly to blame.  Perhaps the most effective and enigmatic campaign phrase touted by the previous administration was “Make America Great Again”.  Looking at the last five years, we can imagine that the “Again” refers to when the US expanded its settlement west of the Mississippi. Indeed, it feels as if we are living in the Wild West again.  People dying everywhere, no enforcement of laws, no morality beyond narcissistic self-interest, armed citizens all fit right into a “Wild West” story.  Unfortunately, the “Wild West” was not a great place for women, poor people, people of colour and the disabled and vulnerable in which to live.