How Will Wokeism Die?

Audio Version

Are we approaching an “Emperor’s
New Clothes” moment?

“Racist”, “Sexist”, “Homophobe”, “Transphobe”, “Nazi”, “White Supreeeemist”, etc., are, as we all know in the Dissident Right, the language of control that portions of the White population of the West use against other portions of the White population of the West to maintain control and social power.

Occasionally Non-Whites—usually weaponised by Whites of course—involve themselves in this power dynamic. But it is mainly a form of White-on-White violence, or tyranny, and like all such things it is deeply resented.

But, unlike earlier tyrannies, it is not well understood. Invisible chains are, after all, the most effective ones.But no tyranny can last indefinitely. Indeed, all tyrannies have to be constantly reinvented or rejigged, because, proportionate to their success, they all breed resistance, antithesis, and finally their own overthrow. So it will eventually be with Wokeism too, as well as its central “crime”, “sin”, or “taboo” that certain objectively valid generalisations and topics are somehow “evil”.

In order to facilitate the death of this particular tyranny on the free opinions of mankind—because, yes, its negative effects ripple out over the whole of humankind—we have to start thinking concretely of how Wokeism will actually die.

This is not immediately clear because those who suffer most from this tyranny—certain groups of straight, male cisgender Whites—often misunderstand their oppression so badly that they end up simply reinforcing it.
“Dems/Leftists are the real racists” is a classic example.
Another failing strategy is to embrace whichever term is used to oppress you, along the lines of “Yes, I’m a racist/Nazi! So what?”In both cases the subject just strengthens their own oppression; in the first example by agreeing that the words of tyranny should have power (“Dems/Leftists are the real racists”), and in the second by isolating themselves and agreeing that they should not have power (“Yes, I’m a racist/Nazi! So what?”)
But eventually, after a lot of false starts and toing-and-froing, some sort of effective resistance against the White-on-White tyranny of Wokeism is bound to emerge. Here, in these pages, we have already had some worthwhile attempts to deconstruct the juggernaut going back several years:
There are no doubt others that I have missed.
These are mainly intellectual critiques. But a truly effective resistance against Wokeism is likely to take on a more unpredictable and populist form. With that observation in mind, my predictions are that the death of Wokeism will include some of the following elements:
  1. In Europe and elsewhere it will take on a form of anti-Americanism. Those using “woke” jargon will be denounced as lapdogs of the American Empire and its sick culture, and accused of resorting to “American words” when they make their usual power plays. They will be associated with America’s Globohomo Imperium. This is not as unlikely as it may sound to some Americans because it is undeniable that Wokeism is all part and parcel of US attempts at globally projecting its “anti-cultural” power.
  2. Anti-Wokeism will also increasingly focus on wokeism as nothing more than a tool of oppression. Already non-woke, straight, male cisgender Whites are the most oppressed group in Western societies. This has been masked by their ability to cope with and overcome this imposed and artificial handicap. But, in recent years we have seen the oppression escalate to the point where it is really starting to bite not just the core group but also adjacent groups like gay Whites and White females. Even the White exploiters of the tyrannical mechanism must be increasingly ambivalent about its benefits to them, as the power they gain from it ultimately works to undermine and destroy them.
  3. In America the two trends above will be weaker, because that country is the font of this poison and, in certain important respects, Wokeism serves as a useful social cement for what is in reality a deeply fragmented and asymmetrical society. However, the ongoing underclass replacement that we see in America, where Hispanics have been pushing out Blacks, will highlight the Black Underclass-White Leftist Upper-class synergy that has always been at the heart of Wokeism. In short, Wokeism in America will be perceived as a class problem.
  4. As a result of this, Authentic Black nationalists will become more aware of how they have been weaponised and used to serve inter-White power struggles. They will respond by working to “decolonize” Black identity politics from White Leftist elite control, and instead seek synergy, Malcom-X-style, with legitimate identitarian groups in American society.

Reposted from Affirmative Right, with permission.

41 replies
  1. Robert Penman
    Robert Penman says:

    And the most effective “Shut-up” phrase the globalist have is “Holocaust denier”. It works so well, that even some here are terribly afraid of it!

  2. Some White Guy
    Some White Guy says:

    The article would be so much more effective if the wording was White Positive and replaced “wokeism” with anti-Whiteism, (that’s what it is, there is nothing “awake” or “woke” about it), replace “dissident right” with White Positive Sphere, (we need to bring White people from all corners into the conversation – stop excluding all the people who will never identify as “dissident right”), the weaponization mentioned is being done by White anti-Whites, (not just random White people, so make the distinction), using terms like “cisgender” reinforces those doing the oppression, (everyone knows what a straight male is).

    In one sentence it is suggested that a “failing strategy is to embrace whichever term is used to oppress you”, and then the author goes right on using terms of White oppression!

    • Ned J. Casper
      Ned J. Casper says:

      I suspect it was adopted as a more convenient synonym for “politically [in]correct”. As well as “race” there are “gender” and “class”.

  3. Some other White Guy
    Some other White Guy says:

    Yes. “White-on-White” being a euphemism , of course. Or only a proximal description, at any rate.

  4. W. Poe White
    W. Poe White says:

    I see two problems with this post:

    (1) There is no mention of the essential role played by Jews in creating Wokeism.

    (2) The rhetorical strategy of replacing the weapon words “racism” and “racist” by language such as “anti-White” is inadequate. The only way to free the minds of White people from the spell cast by these weapon words is to explicitly deal with the very real meanings which they have taken on. Whether we like it or not, the words have entered the general lexicon and they won’t go away because some of us refrain from using them. They need to be brought to the fore and deconstructed.

    There are multiple racial attitudes and behaviors which can all be called “racist.” Some of them are benign such as racial preferences and racial separatism; some of them are malign such as racially targeted oppression and genocide. Our people need to have moral clarity in their minds about matters involving race. This requires being clear-minded about where they stand ethically on the various racial attitudes and behaviors.

    I would suggest the following ethical stance (which is my own): We have every right to feel and express our natural racial preferences and to have our own homelands. We are prepared to respect the right of other races to do likewise so long as they reciprocate by respecting our rights in this regard.

    Rather than trying to suppress the words “racism” and “racist” we should take the bull by the horns and address the component meanings in the forthright way I have just outlined.

    • BEIR BUA
      BEIR BUA says:

      Thanks for that

      If you have any bibliographical leads in re of the replacement of AD/BC in academe (by CE/BCE) and the methodology of its filtration I would be grateful


    • Nick Argead
      Nick Argead says:

      Defining terms is something they just won’t allow. Every attempt to define a term is immediately impugned and redefined according to their vision and narrative.

      Racism and racialism. The former the act of not liking something because of its race, the latter the tactic which defines the former. Racism, at the end of the day is just an opinion and the last time I checked, everyone’s entitled to one. Racialism, the usage of racial constructs to outmaneuver, suppress, and defeat your enemy would be defining the crime with its inherent intent. Racism might be defined as, I don’t like a race that’s different than my race? It’s a nebulous term for sure. I’d say it’s not defined as genocide, which is an ACTUAL physical act and a crime.

      Even the courts refuse to allow the definition of terms, where to do so would be detrimental to their entire system of authority.

      • W. Poe White
        W. Poe White says:

        “Defining terms is something they just won’t allow. ” Do we need their permission? Of course we are free to make clear what we mean when we use a word and we are free to point out how words are being misused by others.

        “Every attempt to define a term is immediately impugned and redefined according to their vision and narrative.” Then we respond by showing how they do not use their terms consistently and demonstrate their obvious bias (which is not hard to do). Respond to gaslighting with logical clarity and facts.

        “Racism and racialism. The former the act of not liking something because of its race, the latter the tactic which defines the former.” I thought we weren’t free to define terms but here you are defining terms. “Not liking someone because of their race” is only one of the meanings that the term “racism” evokes in people’s minds It also means things like preferring your own race, wanting to live among other people of your race, discriminating in favor or those of your race, discriminating against those of another race and committing genocide. You may not include genocide among the meanings of “racism” but most people surely would call it racism. Indeed, targeting a race for genocide is one of the most virulently racist things it is possible to do.

        Anyway, you have missed the point of what I am saying. The important thing is not whether we use the term “racism” or not; the important thing is to bring to the forefront of consciousness the various meanings conflated together by the weapon word “racism.”

        We must not allow people to get away with weaponized use of the word “racism” without making plain its ambiguity. If someone calls you “racist” you need to ask them exactly what they are accusing you of. Are they accusing you of attacking someone because of their race? Presumably you haven’t done this so just say so. Are they accusing you of liking White people more than, say, Black people or Jews on average? Then respond with something like this: “Don’t Black people and Jews prefer their own as well? Why are you singling out White people to criticize for having natural racial preferences? Such discrimination is ‘racist’ – by the definition that you yourself are giving the term. Racial double standards are ‘racist.'”

        Remember, the audience we care about convincing is our own people. We aren’t going to persuade the hardcore anti-Whites. What message will be most powerful in getting through to White people who are confused and indoctrinated but still have some capacity to think? I would say it is (1) distinguishing benign from malign racial attitudes and actions (so that Whites can recognize that they have a right to be racist in its benign forms just as they would allow non-Whites without objection); (2) making plain the anti-White racial double standards of the Woke, i.e. pointing out how they are “racist” according to one of the commonly accepted meanings of the term. Not only that, the Woke are guilty of malign racial discrimination against White people whereas (most) Whites are only exhibiting benign racial preferences.

        We should want our people to respond to Woke accusations of racism something like this: “I have every right to feel and express my natural racial preferences as do you and everyone else. How dare you discriminate against my race while pretending to be a principled opponent of all forms of racial discrimination! It’s you who are being malignantly and transgressively racist whereas I only desire the freedom to be myself without being attacked for being who I am. Hypocrite! Fake universalist! Mind manipulator! You speak with forked tongue.”

        • Ned J. Casper
          Ned J. Casper says:

          @ Mr W. Poe White
          This is a pretty good analysis of the problem and the concluding response is reasonable, if critics were willing to listen and benefit. Birds of a feather…a fact of human social and cultural life too. “Blacks” often today speak of “people who LOOK like us” – sauce for the goose. I have found a number of “non-White” people good and interesting companions, but I am not ashamed to regret, deplore and wish to reverse the numerical and residential disappearance of white families from my native land, never mind the politically inspired attack to rewrite the history and remove the imagery of white people in my ancestral homeland where even Chaucer and Shakespeare have followed Newton and Nelson and previously Galton and Keir Hardie into the “racist” category.

          • W. Poe White
            W. Poe White says:

            I wish anti-Whites and Leftists would listen to my argument but the more important audience is White people who are still under the spell of the “anti-racist” psyop. They need to realize that they are the target of a psywar campaign to guilt trip White people and only White people for feeling natural racial preferences. Then they need to go on and realize that there is an instrumental purpose behind this psywar campaign: namely, paralyzing White people into passivity so that they do not organize for political action in their ethno-racial self-defense in order to halt and reverse their dispossession.

    • Eric Novak
      Eric Novak says:

      The Occidental Observer itself as well as Kevin’s writing are works dedicated to exposing wokeism as Jewish creations, all of which are understood to be Jewish by readers of the O.O.😉

      • Ned J. Casper
        Ned J. Casper says:

        Single-cause theories can be a handicap. Knowing and naming the “enemy” requires a telescope and a microscope rather than just a monocle.

  5. Kay
    Kay says:

    Wokeism, PC-ism etc. will result in the destruction of America and White Christians.

    Overall, conservatives, Republicans, and average patriotic Americans do not have the committment that the Left does.

    The Bolsheviks (the American Left, Democrats, Jews, LGBT, and certain minorities) are storming the “Winter Palace,” and most of the guards have abandoned their posts.

    Trump could lead a counter-revolution, but he does not have the intellectual capacity to do it alone.

    • Gus
      Gus says:

      I am convinced that ever since the so-called “Enlightenment”, we as “white conservative Christians” are fighting a losing rear-guard action.

    • Nick Argead
      Nick Argead says:

      ” “Defining terms is something they just won’t allow. ” Do we need their permission? Of course we are free to make clear what we mean when we use a word and we are free to point out how words are being misused by others.”

      We are ALWAYS free to define the terms. But if they remove the expression and nobody receives the truth, what good does it actually do? The issue is that it is not in their interest to define the terms by which they enslave. As you directly pointed out, the term racism (and many others) is nebulous, at best. For their crimes to be effective, they must keep it that way.

      I’d argue that genocide is not racism but rather the mass murder of a race. It may have been inspired by racist thoughts and ideas, but racism itself does not reach the level of a physical act. Racism is a construct of the mind alone. An opinion. It is this very issue that they cannot allow us to realize. They want the freedom to define their terms, i.e… racism, holocaust, denier, anti-semite, etc., i.e… An opinion, with an actual crime, like genocide or a race based execution. They want us to believe they are one in the same. Once this is carefully defined and strictly adhered to, the entire sham of hate crimes and claims of racism or anti-semitism crumble, utterly.

      In order for a crime to exist their must be both the intent AND the act. And the act must be something that causes an ACTUAL physical harm. Butthurt does not qualify. But genocide, the knockout game, race based hiring preferences and quotas, discrimination, etc. certainly do.

      I’ve seen enough of the way they operate with the obfuscations of semantics to understand implicitly, that this is a weakness that can and should be exposed and leveraged against them. And if our courts weren’t already subdued and under their control, we’d have a much easier time of it.

      Consider their attempt to define anti-semitism as a stand alone term, i.e… Antisemitism, WITHOUT the hyphen. In 2016, I did a quick study of their total failure to properly define anti-semitism and exposed that the online definitions said NOTHING about anti-Jewry. Within several weeks of this FB exposure (in my old deleted group, The Jew Exposed), they’d updated ALL online dictionaries (I assumed that this was possible through Google and the algorithmic interconnectivity of most of the online dictionaries) with the addition of not liking Jews to the correct definition.

      Interestingly, they FAILED to do their job thoroughly, as the definition of semite remained unscathed and still said NOTHING of jewry. And the last time I checked, that was still the case.

      In American jurisprudence, the corruption of our justice system through semantic shenanigans began in earnest and on a planned and systemic level during the so called Civil War. This was where they redefined state as State and introduced the national element of the United States of America as the state, when the ACTUAL state was and can only be the people. The States, i.e… Illinois, Tennessee, Alabama, etc., were nations, not districts beneath a leviathan mega government. The order and priority of authority went from the people to the nation states, to the national level government. This has been turned upside down now and the corruption of the semantics played a key role in this power reversal.

      • W. Poe White
        W. Poe White says:

        “the term racism (and many others) is nebulous, at best. For their crimes to be effective, they must keep it that way.” That’s why it is so important to define terms clearly, including taking note of the various different meanings which terms are imbued with. The Globalists, Technocrats and Leftists won’t do this because ambiguity and confusion are essential to their psychological warfare. Defining terms clearly in order to critique propaganda is a potent defensive strategy against being manipulated. That is certainly how I have freed my mind from their ideological manipulation.

        “racism itself does not reach the level of a physical act. Racism is a construct of the mind alone.” That is your special definition. However many people would disagree. “Racism” can mean mental attitudes, affects and beliefs. But typically it can also refer to acts such as discrimination, especially including racially targeted attacks.

        They indeed conflate “opinion, with an actual crime, like genocide or a race based execution.” This conflation of benign and malign racial attitudes and behaviors is the crux of how the weapon word “racism” functions as a smear. The intent is to intimidate White people from feeling and acting upon their natural preferences for other White people by applying the “racist” label implying that these people want to harm, perhaps even enslave or kill, non-Whites.

        “In order for a crime to exist there must be both the intent AND the act.” Globalists and Leftists want to make thoughts, affects, attitudes and beliefs into crimes – THOUGHT CRMIES, that is.

        Globalist/Leftist “obfuscations of semantics … is a weakness that can and should be exposed and leveraged against them.” Yes. By all means turn their weapon words like “racism” back against them. It’s foolish to not point out over and over how the Globalists/Leftists are engaging in malign racism against Whites – including using accusations of racism as a weapon of anti-White racism. This could be called Orwellian racism.

        You can tell the real meaning Jews give to their weapon word “anti-Semitism” by the way they use it. They apply this smear label to anyone or anything which opposes Jewish wealth, power and privilege or Jewish objectives.

  6. Tsigante
    Tsigante says:

    Wokeism doesn’t exist in Europe (52 countries) except in some parts / age groups in NW Europe. In the capital cities amongst certain young privileged. At least 46 countries reject it completely….it’s pushed by the US & Echelon embassies and George Soros. That says it all.

    Woke is American. And really only USA is the “West”. Everything is EAST of that on another continent separated by an ocean, and not speaking English except 2 offshore countries. It’s your American thing.

    • Eric Novak
      Eric Novak says:

      Europe isn’t woke? Where are you from in Europe exactly then? Lower Slobobia? All Western European capital cities are capitals of wokeness. Macron recently tried blaming America for critical race theory wokeness, the risk that it will destroy France now recognized at the highest levels of gov’t, but is apparently unaware of the fact that wokeness itself is a direct descendant of French Postmodernism and Post-Structuralism from the École Normale Supérieure, where both Foucault and Derrida studied and taught.
      Europe has been The Occident for 2000 years before Christopher Columbus set sail, and English is Europe’s lingua franca.

      • W. Poe White
        W. Poe White says:

        Derrida can fairly be said to share some of the blame for Woke anti-Whiteness but Foucault was a different sort of thinker of a much higher caliber. Foucault was a fierce critic of Western modernity but I can’t think of anything he said that was anti-White. And while he was homosexual he was also markedly androcentric Hardcore feminists do NOT like Foucault. Foucault had his serious faults but he was intellectually honest and very insightful while being neither anti-White nor anti-masculine. I have learned a lot by reading Foucault. Perhaps you could too.

        More to the point, the Frankfort School Cultural Marxist ideologues were far more important sources of Wokeness than so-called Post-Modernists and Post-Structuralists.

        • Nick Argead
          Nick Argead says:

          “Western ideology” is an oft used but rarely, if ever, defined term. From research I’ve done on this nebulous cultural demarcation, it appears to originate from the Tartarian Empire, centered on Moscow, but utterly subdued and broken up by the usual suspects. Tartar was a worldwide empire, stretching from western Europe, across Asia, down to southeastern Asia, up across the Bering Straight, down to Florida, and possibly down to Argentina. And I challenge you to find a reference to it in ANY books from 1850 forward.

          Everything east of Moscow was eastern, everything west of Moscow was western.

          Today, it appears to be a veiled reference to white nations. And in that corrupted form it serves their purpose extremely well.

        • Pierre de Craon
          Pierre de Craon says:

          You think, then, that the pro-White movement would profit from the thinking of a radically self-absorbed homosexual and pederast, a man the entirety of whose outlook embodied a baseless scorn for morality and received knowledge and insight and whose behavior throughout his academic career was marked by a combination of sexual favoritism toward those whose favors he desired or possessed and active subversion of those who opposed him in any way? Interesting.

          • W. Poe White
            W. Poe White says:

            I’m skeptical that all these personal smears about Foucault are even true. But even if they were it would remain true that much of Foucault’s work is sound. I’ve learned a great deal from a critical and thoughtful reading of Foucault. You can close your mind if you wish but I will learn from any source that makes sense – even from my enemies.

            There is indeed much to criticize in Foucault. I think his biggest flaw was ignoring or denying that there exist mind-independent natural laws/causality.

            The parts of Foucault’s work that I find especially valuable are (1) his notion of power/knowledge and the realization that power effects cannot be reduced to the deliberate actions of powerful individuals or groups; (2) his work on governmentality and the history of what he called discourses of governmental rationality.

            He framed a useful definition of “power” as whatever induces people to obey/conform when they could have done otherwise. In other words, influences guiding actions other than force or threat of force.

            His book “Discipline and Punish: the Birth of the Prison” is great. Especially Part 3 dealing with disciplinary techniques. Also great is his College de France lecture series “Security, Territory, Population” and his lectures “Governmentality,” “Omnes et Singulatum: Toward a Critique of Political Reason” and “The Political Technology of Individuals.”

            I first learned about the 17th-18th Century intellectual tradition of Polizeiwissenschaft from Foucault (in Omnes et Singulatum and The Political Technology of individuals). This is a very interesting (and disturbing) body of thought about governing a population and territory in order to build up the power of the state through cultivating the population and territory as resources. A few writers in this tradition are Johann Heinrich Gottlob von Justi, N. De Lamare and Louis Turquet de Mayerne. I see in these theorists of governmental reason an adumbration of today’s notion of Technocracy.

            One especially useful fruit of my study of Foucault is my framing a definition of totalitarianism using several concepts I took from Foucault:

            Definition: “Totalitarianism” is a social system characterized by three intertwined features:

            (1) SCRIPT: There is a script (like that written by a playwright) specifying how each member of a society is to behave, feel and think.

            (2) PANOPTICAL SURVEILLANCE: There is a ubiquitous 24/7 surveillance which cannot be circumvented. This surveillance is not a mere looking upon but also entails a normative evaluation of behavior with respect to how well the subject is conforming to the script. (In Foucault’s terms, this surveillance is an example of the gaze of power/knowledge.)

            (3) MOLDING/CORRECTION: There are effective means of molding, training, indoctrinating or conditioning people to perform their scripted role and of correcting people who deviate from their scripted role in order to bring them back into conformity with this role. (This molding/correction would fall under the rubric of disciplinary techniques such as those Foucault dealt with in Part 3 of Discipline and Punish.)

            In addition, totalitarianism is a matter of degree. One can speak of “totalitarian intensity.” Some societies are more totalitarian than others. A society is totalitarian to the degree to which the script aims to precisely specify every action, feeling and thought; to the extent that the surveillance approaches omniscience; and to the extent that the methods of molding/correction approach omnipotence in shaping actions, hearts and minds.

            In this definition the idea of the “script” is mine as is the realization that totalitarianism should be seen as lying on a continuum of intensity rather than a simple binary opposition totalitarian/not totalitarian. The way surveillance and molding/correction are conceived is derived from Foucault.

          • Pierre de Craon
            Pierre de Craon says:

            It is disheartening to see that you think that both you and Foucault are saying things that possess content genuinely linked to cognition or indeed have any coherence whatsoever beyond the merely notional. The emptiness of the blather just above borders on the frightening. There is truly no there there.

            Your notions and Foucault’s ideas are at root at least as much of a danger to white people and white Western civilization—a civilization Foucault hated for its inescapably Christian foundations, assumptions, and implications—as the wokeism whose true meaning you seem to have little practical understanding of. Rather like “Duns Scotus,” you evidently think that wokeism can be talked to death. It can’t.

          • W. Poe White
            W. Poe White says:

            “Your notions … are at root at least as much of a danger to white people and white Western civilization … as … wokeism”

            Why so triggered? How is an analysis of totalitarianism a “danger to white people and white Western civilization?”

            I would say that totalitarianism in the form of Technocracy poses a grave danger to White people – actually to all people.

            Anyway, Wokeism is not the root of the problem, just a symptom. It is the result of brainwashing and a toxic social environment. Unhealthy diet and exposure to toxins are probably playing an important role in generating Woke psychopathology too. If the brainwashing were stopped there is nothing here that couldn’t be cured by being around sane sensible people and a healthy lifestyle: healthy food, avoidance of toxins, exercise, work, fresh air and some peace and quiet.

            There is a terrible alienation dividing and isolating people today. People need to get away from these toxic social conditions so that they can begin to feel like humans beings and start emotionally connecting with others again.

  7. Ned J. Casper
    Ned J. Casper says:

    Wok(e)ism increasingly controls Britain. It is a global extension of the “race, gender, class” movement of the New Left/Critical Studies launched in the USA during the later 1960s. The evidence for this trajectory is quite conclusive, starting with academic circles and spreading outwards, up and down, using mass immigration. It now reigns in Britain through coercive legislation, selective re-education and false propaganda, under the official label “equality, diversity, inclusion”. The “Church” of “England” is its latest victim. Some Jews have been prominently involved in its promotion (e.g. Herbert Marcuse for a time) but also other people (e.g. Stuart Hall), and other Jews have belatedly opposed it. Critical race theorists have now turned on Israel after attacking other “settler” peoples (Afrikaners, Christian Americans, White Australians). The lies about the death of George Floyd have given impetus to the universal manipulation of a mob/fashion mindset, long ago described by writers like Charles Mackay and Gustave LeBon, and more recently Eugene Methvin and James Lindsay; there are also online articles about wokist quasi-religion by Christians like Max Funk and atheists like David Ashton. Whereas the Old Marxists were concerned about the control of the means of material production; their successors have been controlling the means of mental communication.

    • Tsigantes
      Tsigantes says:

      It’s no surprise that Britain is imposing Woke as official doctrine, given its political and linguistic relation to
      the USA, and as a key Echelon country, officially number 2 after the once-hegemon. But imposition and popular agreement are 2 different things. Ireland is trying desperately too though there is a lot of resistance from awake Catholic Irish. Meanwhile you see what has happened in France, the coup warning letter from the Generals….

      In a way Woke Scandinavia doesn’t really count [minus anti-woke Finland and woke-resistant Norway, in Europe, Scandinavia exists its own life style bubble, thoroughly controlled by the hegemon, especially the unloved and historically resented (by the other Scandos) Sweden.

      Outside of that “woke-ness” is an affair of the US embassies, backed up by Echelon embassies, conducted in English in non-English speaking countries [duh], its manifestations paid for by the internationally despised George Soros. These manifestations are few and pathetic: little marches of Soros employees and mothers from the American schools, all wearing the same T shirt. Laughable, avoidable and doomed.

      While USA maintains its hard power inside the EU (occupation, multiple bases in each country), its soft power evaporated forever when Clinton attacked Yugoslavia. Imposing woke-ness on the 26 non-English speaking countries is a lost cause [bar Sweden] though until the dissolution of the US empire the compradore leaders will pretend occasionally….

      Thus the author’s assumption that woke-ness is destined to extend beyond America culturally is to believe the State Department’s own PR. It also overlooks that only the USA has the cultural conditions for it (black
      slaves historically, massively insufficient education, inability to identify Trotskyism in all its manifestations thus lack of immunity etc). And even there the majority is not convinced and has to be intimidated and silenced. Which the whole world can SEE, as it saw the theft of an election in November 2020. The West, thus, consists of the USA only, struggling to maintain its brief hegemonic status, even as it appears set to destroy its own country with ridiculous lies and Presidential Decrees. Even Israel ignores woke-ness, despite being imbued with homosexuality – its much boasted of IDF are useless snowflake mama’s boys.

      Wokeness is a tool to destroy and reshape the USA to full oligarchic and corporate rule [fascism] with at present, for the moment, a pretence of democracy as cover.

      • Ned J. Casper
        Ned J. Casper says:

        Denmark, some resistance.
        “Communism”, not “fascism”. Qv A James Gregor, Maurice Bardeche, Raven Thomson on the latter re “corporatism”.

  8. Nick Argead
    Nick Argead says:

    “As a result of this, Authentic Black nationalists will become more aware of how they have been weaponised and used to serve inter-White power struggles. They will respond by working to “decolonize” Black identity politics from White Leftist elite control, and instead seek synergy, Malcom-X-style, with legitimate identitarian groups in American society.”

    Using this to elucidate the evident fear they have of blacks waking up and moving on from the victim mentality they’ve been indoctrinated with, where 2 prominent black sports figures were removed for being too responsible and for redirecting their energies into positive results in their field, instead of into dead ended racial injustices by which most blacks falsely hope to defeat their white opponents.

    Mike Singletary, the black head coach of the San Francisco 49ers would be sacked and replaced after bringing his team from the depths of the league to the playoffs in several years. He publicly whipped his black players when they tried to pull minority privilege games and paid the price for going against the narrative.

    In a more severe case, Coby Bryant was likely assassinated for his uplifting interviews, books, videos which delivered messages of hard work and goal achievement.

    They will NEVER take their boot off the black neck in this regard. To do so, would be to risk removing a major boot from the white neck.

  9. Anthony Kimball
    Anthony Kimball says:

    I’ll tell you for certain how “wokeism” WON’T die: it won’t die by whites bitching and moaning about it. Like all the other tools that our enemy employs against us, “wokeism” will only be destroyed when our people finally realize that endless chatter about a thing does nothing to actually neutralize that thing, and so there’s only one viable option left. May that moment of realization come soon.

    • Pierre de Craon
      Pierre de Craon says:

      That wokeism is hardly likely to die of its own accord—in short, that it will have to be killed off somehow—is a fundamental insight that seems to have escaped everyone else. Well spotted!

      • W. Poe White
        W. Poe White says:

        The only thing required to end the Woke crusade is an end to the economic dominance and monopoly on mass media of the Zio-Globalist elites who are pushing it. If people would not risk losing their jobs/careers by speaking out and opponents would have a mass media platform to criticize – and ridicule – Wokeism then Wokeism would quickly die a well-deserved natural death. It would be buried with howls of laughter.

  10. Eric
    Eric says:

    The power centers of wokeness in the U.S. are fourfold: academia, big corporations, mainstream media, and government. We should consider the role each one of these plays in promoting wokeness as well as their motivation for doing so.

    1. Academia: There is a long history of Marxism in the social sciences, arts and humanities. This is the result of a conscious effort to infiltrate these disciplines, reinforced by nepotism. Marxism was based on class warfare. That model failed in the U.S. The working class didn’t feel oppressed enough to revolt. So Marxism was reconfigured as racial and gender warfare. Class became so unimportant that few people noticed that the Democratic Party (which in truth is a communist party nowadays) became the party of the wealthy while the White working class slowly moved into the Republican column. The Democrats used to be the party for the working class. Now the Republicans are the party of the working class — although, in truth, neither political party cares a bit about the working class.

    2. Big corporations: Major corporations were in a bind fifty years ago. They couldn’t fire nonwhites or women who failed to perform because they would get sued. Even if they won, their reputations would suffer — or so they thought. I saw this for myself when I worked for United Airlines. You could get away with pretty much anything if you weren’t a White male. Well, if someone hands you a bunch of lemons, make lemonade! Corporations have positioned themselves so they don’t need White males anymore (or so they think). Smart White males are being replaced by smart Asian immigrants. And a lot of jobs have been offshored to other countries like China and India. Robotics and AI will complete the job of making the White male work force obsolete.

    3. Government: The line between big corporations and government has disappeared in the last twenty years. The government forced corporations to enact affirmative action policies (discrimination against White males). Now force is no longer needed. At the same time, with the Supreme Court decision allowing corporations and the wealthy (as well as unions, particularly government employee unions) to buy our politicians, there is no longer a meaningful distinction between big business and big government. Right now, big government is letting big business do a lot of its dirty work: e.g., deplatforming and censoring critics on social media, reporting “dangerous dissidents” to the authorities.

    4. Mainstream media: The media simply tell people what the government/corporations want people to hear: White males bad, minorities and women good, Covid a dangerous pandemic, take your vaccines, etc. This is all done in the context of a phony “battle” between the Republicans and the Democrats, who form a uniparty with the same goals. All that being said, “wokeness” really only lives in the media, academia, government and corporations. Most people wouldn’t give it a second thought if it weren’t constantly shoved in their faces. The ones who do care probably only make up about 5% of the population. But they’re the ones who get the limelight.

    How do we cure this disease? Wish I knew. It’s really up to the White males in this country. I already know where I stand.

    • ChilledBee
      ChilledBee says:

      Thank you so much for that very well-thought-out comment. It really does highlight what powerful forces are against us. It just goes to show that while White Americans were just getting on with their lives there were very malicious people conspiring to advance our extinction. Unfortunately, the majority of Whites cannot or refuse to believe this is really happening.

      • Ned J. Casper
        Ned J. Casper says:

        I agree with ChilledBee that Eric has presented an accurate list of the main enemy-strongholds. They cannot be defeated by throwing stones through the windows of banks, newspapers, mosques or synagogues &c. Only the internet and then the hustings provide an opportunity using fact, logic, self-interest and patriotism, plus having more white children. It is late in the day but still not impossible to emulate the communists with sleeper infiltration and front organisations. But the US Americans have still one advantage denied to the British and the Germans alike – Free Speech.

  11. bruno
    bruno says:

    These few lines present a valid lesson. They speak volumes about today’s Western battles. With Cancel Culture running wild, we see this book. It’s a bestseller, making the author rich. It’s one of many that are similar, used in schools, etc.

    The author, a diversity consultant, elicits numerous faults and evils of W piggies. She has done plenty to win anti-majority major battles.

    DiAngelo insists that any W who does not accept their own “inescapable” racism is in error and binds such individuals to their own racism… She appears to be more than a mere champion, Knight in shining armor, of the anti-majorityites.

    She has indicated that anyone rejecting her hypothesis verifies the validity of her ideology. Media has glorified her and she has gotten rave reviews from such publications as the honest New York Times, amongst others.

    Reading her work can make a person think that if you don’t see racism everywhere then you are a racist. So, be honest with yourself. For example, what have you done to honor Geo. Floyd, that wonderful contributor to society, who was trying to turn his life around? Do your share, buy Robin’s work today and give it out to friends on their birthday. Yes, buy it along with pictures of BO, Sleepy Joe and our next Prez, Harris.

    Yes, it’s true that Robin might not have done as much as Washington bureaucrats, or your political “Reps,” for the cause of cancel culture. She might not have been like Harris, using her back and cunning, to reach the top. However, who could possibly deny that it’s generals like her that have been changing civilization?

    She’s proof in the pudding as to why Western Civilization is becoming unrecognizable. Perhaps Harris should consider Robin as an eventual VP. This then, is the world of today.

    Have love in your heart. Spend more hours in front of the tube. Believe.

    From Charlie (He took it off the Web)-

    Robin DiAngelo
    Robin Jeanne DiAngelo is an American author, consultant, and facilitator working in the fields of critical discourse analysis and whiteness studies. She formerly served as a tenured professor of multicultural education at Westfield State University and is currently an Affiliate Associate Professor of Education at the University of Washington.

    In brief, here’s a typical book review of that scumbag-
    5.0 out of 5 stars A Book Every White Person Should Read
    Reviewed in Canada

    I’m disabled and need to self isolate because I’m high risk if I get Covid 19. No protests for me!

    I was thinking “What can I do to honor George Floyd, his family and black people in general that I can do from home.

    I decided that the very least I could do was buy this book and read it.

    To be honest the title triggered feelings of defensiveness and eye rolling. Deep inside of me was a part of me that did NOT want to read this book. I decided that this reaction signalled that I needed to read it. “If people can be out marching and putting their bodies in danger to protest police violence against black people…the very least I can do is read this book with the title that triggers so much anxious avoidance in me.”

    So I did! And I’m so glad I did. The book discusses the feelings of fear, defensiveness, shame, guilt and anger that white people experience when discussion of racism comes up. It explains where these feelings come from and labels them as being a kind of psychological “syndrome,” known as “White Fragility.”

    It also explains Racism/White Supremacism as a culture we have all grown up within and how our emotional reactions help strengthen that culture vs challenging it and creating something new.

    I saw much of myself in the examples given but also, for the 1st time a way of responding to and taking responsibility for these emotional reactions instead of demanding black people stop everything to take care of my feelings.

    It gave me words to use, questions to ask myself, ways to understand how my behavior is being perceived and recieved by black people. It gave me examples of ways to own my own racist thoughts or behaviour and ask for forgiveness, attempt to make amends even if the person chooses (as is their right) not to forgive my Racism.

    For the 1st time in my life, I feel like I have a bit of a framework and basic etiquette to use to navigate my racist reactions in a way that both empowers me to feel more confident in my diversity skills while also attempting to create more honest and intimate relations with black people.

    I can see this book being used in Anti-Racism workshops with white people. Reading a chapter, journalling about our reactions and finding ways to become less “fragile,” and more capable of listening to and engaging in respectful discussions of race.

    I really mean it. Every single white person should read this book. You wont regret it!
    119 people found this helpful

  12. OMGDwayne
    OMGDwayne says:

    It doesn’t much matter if Blacks divorce themselves from upper-class (((elites))). Both groups are Whites’ deadly enemies and must be reacted to on that basis. In fact, Hispanics and Asians of all breeds are equally the enemies of Whites. I frequently encounter a deep yearning among Whites for at least one of the nonWhite races to ally themselves with us. This yearning is a great weakness; a symptom of moral bankruptcy. We should NOT dilute our White movement and race with ANY of the nonWhites. Our country must be once again achieve a super majority of Whites.

Comments are closed.