Monthly Archives: August 2017

Enough Pandering To Actual White Supremacists

In every clash of ideologies there is a large palette of nuances of grey, usually overlooked by both sides when posturing on their key issues. Hence the idea of analysing all possible aspects in a neutral manner.

However, there is at least one exception – when the clash involves any ideology based on racial supremacy, which seeks to reduce humanity to no more than packs of mammals fighting over territory, a phase humanity is said to have transcended a long time ago (but apparently hasn’t completely).

There is no redeeming aspect or nuance in being a race supremacist. It is the absolute lowest denominator in any society. The drive towards tribalism can be understood in certain contexts, but not this one.

After the events in Charlottesville, US, when, at a white nationalist rally where violence erupted between marchers and protesters, a woman was actually killed by a disturbed right wing extremist who purposefully ran into people with his car, the reactions were, paradoxically, mixed.

As praised as the first amendment in the US constitution is, giving the right to free speech to anyone on any matter, one must rationally admit that a march based on racial supremacy is, in and of itself, incitement to violence.

Analyse and dissect it all you want – that it what is boils down to. And when such elements freely congregate and propagandise, nothing good comes of it. Because it simply can’t. It is the most base, irrational, anger-fueled drive a person can have, and should not be alimented by any means. It borders on (and sometimes even is) murderous rage, blended with the sickest type of utilitarianism.

There is no silver lining. As much as “free speech advocates” (whose devotion is questionable when joining ranks with the right) like to throw stones at the radical left, which overall has damaged its image through acts of violence of its own, this is not debatable. No one is blowing this out of proportion. These are actual racists. Not someone making an inadvertently offensive comment or a potentially offensive joke, to be picked on for no reason. Actual torch-wielding racists, looking for concrete results and political backing.

And still, commentators claiming to be moderate wrack their brains to defend Trump’s half-hearted condemnation “of both sides”. Because they support Trump. Normally, outside of these circumstances of belonging to a clique and having to defend it at all cost, I think those same people would be very quick to disavow any such gathering.

In the Trump-supporting-yet-supposedly-not-alt-right alternative media, especially online, things carry on as usual, with issues such as the demands of irrational feminists and “regressive leftists” being treated as a priority, when it is clear that at least in the US the radical right has become a major problem, emboldened by the establishment’s tacit approval.

The idea that Trump’s election would cause such consequences was treated as ridiculous last year, with believable rhetoric – and yet it’s all happening. It seems the “ridiculous” “hysterical” left actually had a point.




Why Isolationism Is Completely Detrimental

Where does one draw the line between healthy nationalism (belonging, memories of one’s upbringing, culture, traditions, spirituality) and its potential toxic effects? The latter can range from a sense of superiority compared to other countries to a sense of entitlement (the US for instance) or even blatant racism, xenophobia and other types of bigotry.

Most people, I infer (and see in everyday life) are somewhere in the middle, enjoying the positive, harmless aspects associated with nationalism and at least frowning upon a radical view.

There is, however, a growing trend towards isolationism in the West, especially as an opposition to adverse cultural aspects found in certain minority communities. My sole intent is to extrapolate on this as a general idea, which I dare think applies well enough.

Travelling and meeting people from all corners of the Earth is the most efficient transformation a human being can experience, from being self-centred and presumably all-knowing, to being humble and accepting of others.

There is no reason why one should not be able to enjoy their cultural specifics without turning into an apologist for cultural superiority and moral hegemony (which is religiously-inspired in many countries where faith is the main drive of what is accepted morality).

Moreover, though many think that because the availability of information is such a plus nowadays (and it is), they can gain an objective perspective of life in other countries with a single click. The fact is that most reporting is biased, focused on what the purpose of said reporting is. There are many different realities in each country and each one either under-represented or over-represented, according to the bias and ultimate objective of the media outlet doing the reporting.

We are all limited in our knowledge and experience, and seeking certain sources of information may very well solidify certain biases.

Whereas one can never get the full perspective on the world, they can very well try, and try to do so in an objective manner.

Ironically, although countries and by default their citizens were separated in the past by more restrictions on travelling (or the physical difficulty of it, which is no longer an issue) isolationism and “othering” seem to be more prevalent nowadays, when the media reaches nearly every home and every person in the West (and I’m including the alternative media here).

The end goal seems to be a major clash, violent perhaps. Unless it’s avoided by people’s realism and why not, humanity.