Decoding “White Supremacy Culture” Verbiage. Part III

March 25, 2021   |   by Eriс

We are continuing with analysis of the “woke” dogma.

Part I can be found here.

Part II can be found here.

“Only One Right Way” – There is one right way to do things and once people are introduced to the right way, they will see the light and adopt it

  • The belief there is one right way to do things and once people are introduced to the right way, they will see the light and adopt it.
  • When they do not adapt or change, then something is wrong with them (the other, those not changing), not with us (those who know the right way).
  • Similar to the missionary who does not see value in the culture of other communities, sees only value in their beliefs about what is good.

Well, what can we say? No one lives in a vacuum. We live among other people, in the society. When you are dealing with your personal matters, it is your responsibility to select the path that is right for you or your family. When one is part of a much larger group, we as a nation, come up with consensus about what is right for all of us. It is done through politics, grass root movements, street protests and court cases. Get enough people who disagree with society norms – and make noise, peacefully that is.

This is what Western civilization is all about. We know how to find our way, to make things right and acceptable for people to leave in peace. Our own U.S. Constitution supports “the right way”, by establishing the basic principles on which everything else can be built, properly and reliably. Yet there is enough flexibility there to right the wrongs. In our land, the right way is what we all can accept and live with, at least some of the time but historically mostly all the time. Not a rigid doctrine, but a way to march forward, to meet and overcome challenges; to uphold the “right” principles enshrined in our Constitution.

Our “Awoken” enemies want to accuse us of not making their viewpoint our own. They insist on alternate paths in achieving the same goals. But it is not about flexibility. There is this talk about how “white supremacists” bring their own ways into other communities (i.e. black Americans) and that is wrong. The underlying theme here: “stay away from the black neighborhoods (ghettos if you wish), and we’ll take care of ourselves. We don’t need you”.

What the “Awoken” want is to have a say in every initiative the society has for its members, regardless of who they are and where they live. Is it reasonable to accept something already tried and approved elsewhere? Probably. But they want to twist every “right way” so it becomes the “wrong way”. Separate a group of people from society; make them feel miserable and blame it on the culture they live in. Without a doubt a clever revolutionary plan.

“Either/Or Thinking” – Seeing things in terms of good or bad, right or wrong, or black or white. This “results in trying to simplify complex things, for example believing that poverty is simply a result of lack of education.”

  • Things are either/or, good or bad, right or wrong, with us or against us.
  • Closely linked to perfectionism in making it difficult to learn from mistakes or accommodate conflict.
  • No sense that things can be both or and
  • results in trying to simplify complex things, for example believing that poverty is simply a result of lack of education
  • Creates conflict and increases sense of urgency, as people feel they have to make decisions to do either this or that, with no time or encouragement to consider alternatives, particularly those which may require more time or resources

If you think about it, our decision process IS a sequence of “either or”, “yes or no” type of thinking. Solving complex tasks can (and should) be a mental path broken up into series of these “yes or no” forks. By choosing “yes” or “no” answer one arrives to the next decision fork and so on, until the final conclusion is reached. It is totally subliminal. We break issues down into steps; we simplify them to make sense of the elements. “Either Or” is the most basic way we, as humans, react to challenges.

Things cannot be both right and wrong at the same time. You must choose sides in most conflicts. When one is in trouble, quickly decide how to get out of it. Creative alternatives, require more time, resources and deeper analysis? Not so! Yet the Woke advocates are trying to convince the people there is a third way. The way that opens things up to demagoguery, empty verbiage creating confusion in the minds of the most vulnerable part of the population. People who lack education; understanding of how things work; of self-analysis; may believe they are being used by some powerful capitalist masters. Poverty is the greatest gift to the future revolution-makers. Being poor is a result of many socio-economic factors, one of which IS lack of education.

Poverty doesn’t live in neighborhoods, it lives in the human mind. Uneducated, unenlightened, stay-poor people are the “huddled masses” and can be manipulated to their socialist masters’ advantages. They want their “people in captivity” to distance themselves from the society that meets challenges head on. Draw them astray and create another false path resulting in rejection and conflict. It’s not about “either or”. It is about building resentment. We are convinced of it, are you?

“Power Hoarding” – Similar to defensiveness, those in power seek to preserve it, and see it as something that can’t and will not shared. They may also feel threatened when someone suggests change, and “assume they have the best interest of the organization at heart”

  • Little, if any, value around sharing power.
  • Power seen as limited, only so much to go around.
  • Those with power feel threatened when anyone suggests changes in how things should be done in the organization and feel suggestions for change are a reflection on their leadership.
  • Those with power don’t see themselves as hoarding power or as feeling threatened.
  • Those with power assume they have the best interests of the organization at heart and assume those wanting change are ill-informed (stupid), emotional, inexperienced.

Most successful careers take years to achieve. Climbing the ladder of success results in saddling one with bigger responsibilities and more power over decision-making and ultimately, over your own livelihood. Now, you have invested years of your life and there comes someone who wants you to give it up, simply for the asking. Would you do it? It is a challenge no one would eagerly agree to. Suggesting changes is a mere pretense here. Start yielding power little by little; and soon it will be all gone. Those who demand power sharing know what they crave. They want control over you, your business and your life; they ultimately want you out, by taking your place. That’s right. Having invested nothing, outsiders want to be the insiders. Great plan if you want to change the world:  Shame the bosses over being power-hoarders and take it away. That would be easy, like taking a candy from a baby.

Don’t you see the danger in stupid little demands? These small steps, one by one, break up the society. Create the “Awoken” opposition. Pull out the bricks here and there, until the structure is no longer solid. Take it down. If we don’t resist these allegedly benign wants, they will ultimately undo everything we know and accept. Oh, the dangers of “Woke”.

“Fear of Open Conflict” – This comes through when someone overemphasizes politeness and equates broaching touchy topics with being rude. “The response is to blame the person for raising the issue rather than look at the issue which is actually causing the problem.

  • People in power are scared of conflict and try to ignore it or run from it.
  • When someone raises an issue that causes discomfort, the response is to blame the person for raising the issue rather than to look at the issue which is actually causing the problem.
  • Emphasis on being polite.
  • Equating the raising of difficult issues with being impolite, rude, or out of line.

“Awoken” utilize some foggy allusions, hard to understand by ordinary people. What are they talking about? But we sense an opening here. It is all about race and racism. The idea is to cut the society off from our understanding of events. They want to draw us into discussing racism. So the provocateurs can shape it into fake political agenda. The instigators want to be above criticism and reproach. Devils fanning the flames are not to be blamed for the fire.

We are rightfully scared of race conflicts. Once started, they are very difficult to extinguish. The ideologists who twist peaceful and polite conflict resolution into armed clashes aren’t rude or out of line. Their intentions are murderous. We do have an issue of race relations; the society was patiently addressing them. Instead, they want to go to race war in America. These types gloat at our fear of open conflict. They are so wrong.

“Individualism” – This idea is found among the people who “have little experience or comfort working as part of a team”. It can lead to isolation, and emphasize competition over cooperation.

  • Little experience or comfort working as part of a team.
  • People in organization believe they are responsible for solving problems alone.
  • Accountability, if any, goes up and down, not sideways to peers or to those the organization is set up to serve.
  • Desire for individual recognition and credit.
  • Leads to isolation.
  • Competition more highly valued than cooperation and where cooperation is valued, little time or resources devoted to developing skills in how to cooperate.
  • Creates a lack of accountability, as the organization values those who can get things done on their own without needing supervision or guidance antidotes: include teamwork as an important value in your values statement; make sure the organization is working towards shared goals and people understand how working together will improve performance; evaluate people’s ability to work in a team as well as their ability to get the job done; make sure that credit is given to all those who participate in an effort, not just the leaders or most public person; make people accountable as a group rather than as individuals; create a culture where people bring problems to the group; use staff meetings as a place to solve problems, not just a place to report activities.
  • I’m the only one.
  • Connected to individualism, the belief that if something is going to get done right, I have to do it.
  • Little or no ability to delegate work to others.

“If you want to do it right, do it yourself”. Ever heard that phrase? We did. Our adversaries are having a field day with our individual desires to succeed in this world. Stripping one of responsibility is a great way to create proletariat that follows the orders of the political commissars. Mass mentality is one of scared cattle, following the anointed leaders or its own collective fear.

Teamwork is important when you have someone in charge. And who should be in charge? An individual. A person working as part of a team but is still individually responsible for the end-result.

You can relegate work to others, but it’s one’s charge to measure the progress and final results. This isn’t about work alone, either. This is about controlling our minds, accountability to the higher-ups. On the surface, it is wonderful to cooperate with others doing what one is doing. And demanding recognition for it is great also. But when it becomes group-responsibility, group thinking, group solving anything, you, as the individual is nothing when alone. Work by committee is purely the socialistic school of thinking. One is zero outside of the “collective”. Cannot claim credit for the work you, as individual, have done. Extend this further and then the society becomes responsible for you and your well-being – as it is in socialism. We, here in the Western world believe in individual rights and responsibilities, and the successes of nations depend on many individual successes of its members. Of course, it is more complex than that, but this is the basic premise. We admit – it is hard to deflect this type of thinking because smooth “Woke” words conceal the jagged cravings to destroy what our world is built on. But we try to point it all out.

End of Part III.

3540cookie-checkDecoding “White Supremacy Culture” Verbiage. Part III

Leave Your Comment

Your email address will not be published.