The Economist is worried that this anti-racism obsession has begun to spiral out of control and is devouring liberalism.
“Liberalism—the Enlightenment philosophy, not the American left—starts with the assertion that all human beings have equal moral worth. From that stem equal rights for all. Libertarians see those principles as paramount. For left-leaning liberals, equal moral worth also brings an entitlement to the resources necessary for an individual to flourish.
Yet when it comes to race many liberals have failed to live up to their own values. “We hold these truths to be self-evident,” wrote Thomas Jefferson in America’s Declaration of Independence in 1776, “that all men are created equal.” More than a decade later the Founding Fathers would write into the country’s constitution that a slave was in fact to be considered three-fifths of a person. In Europe many liberals opposed slavery but supported despotic imperial rule overseas. “Perhaps liberal theory and liberal history are ships passing in the night,” speculated Uday Singh Mehta of the City University of New York in 1999. …
In the three decades since that paper was written, critical race theory has flourished, spreading to education, political science, gender studies, history and beyond. hr departments use its terminology. Allusions to “white privilege” and “unconscious bias” are commonplace. Over 1,000 ceos, including those of firms such as JPMorgan Chase, Pfizer and Walmart, have joined an anti-racism coalition and promised that their staff will undertake unconscious-bias training (the evidence on its efficacy is limited). Critical race theory informs the claim that the aim of journalism is not “objectivity” but “moral clarity”.
More than words can ever say
Yet as critical race theory has grown, a focus on discourse and power has tended to supersede the practicalities. That has made it illiberal, even revolutionary.The philosophical mechanics that bolt together critical race theory can be obscure. But the approach is elegantly engineered into bestselling books such as “How To Be An Antiracist” by Ibram X. Kendi and “White Fragility” by Robin DiAngelo. …”
In order to fully understand what has happened here, it is necessary to travel back in time to the 1930s when “anti-racism” was still a fringe critique that was percolating on the Far Left.
According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the term “racism” first appeared in English in the United States in 1936 in a fascist pamphlet by Lawrence Dennis called The Coming American Fascism: The Crisis of Capitalism. It is pretty clear that “racism” was in use as a critique in other European languages before it jumped into English. The origin of “racism” is commonly attributed to either the Jewish communist Leon Trotsky (1930) or the Jewish sexologist Magnus Hirschfeld (1934).
In 1939, a Roper poll found that 7 out of 10 Americans believed that blacks were less intelligent than Whites. More than 8 out of 10 Americans believed that blacks should be prevented by law or social pressure from living in White neighborhoods. At that time, the Jim Crow South and much of the West practiced segregation while restrictive covenants and sundown towns were commonplace in the Midwest. America was on the cusp of entering World War II which changed all of this.
In 1942, 42 percent of Whites believed that blacks were as intelligent as Whites, 30 percent believed blacks and Whites should attend integrated schools, 51 percent believed that blacks and Whites should be segregated in public transportation and 62 percent were bothered by the thought of having black neighbors. By 1946, a poll found that 53 percent of Whites believed that blacks were as intelligent as Whites – this was the first time in American history that a majority of White Americans professed to believe in racial equality. Finally by 1952, 78 percent of Whites believed that blacks were as intelligent as Whites, 49 percent believed blacks and Whites should attend integrated schools, 60 percent believed that blacks and Whites should not be segregated in public transportation, and 52 percent of Whites were not bothered by the thought of having black neighbors. This was a sea change in White racial attitudes.
The concept of “racism” came into circulation in the English language in the late 1930s and exploded in usage around 1960. The first use of “racist” as an adjective was in 1938 which was also the year the American Anthropological Association passed its first resolution that condemned “racism.”
The term “racism” began its storied career in Far Left circles as a critique that explained why it was an obstacle to class struggle. In the late 1930s and early 1940s, it went mainstream when liberal elites began to feel threatened by the rise of Hitler in Germany and later during World War II.
World War II was the last major crisis in the West. In that conflict, the Axis powers were identified with racism and nationalism and totalitarianism while the Allies were identified with anti-racism and and anti-totalitarianism and liberalism. When the Allies won World War II, the postwar West was built on anti-racism, anti-totalitarianism and liberalism and was sustained by American military power.
By 1945, the majority of White Americans, particularly upper middle class Northern and Western professionals and suburbanites, were convinced for the first time in history that racial differences were purely cosmetic, cultural and environmental and were the result of prejudice and discrimination and that something called “racism” existed and it was a personal moral failing best exemplified by the Nazis. The Swedish social scientist Gunnar Myrdal framed the issue of “racism” as a conflict with the “American Creed” in his highly influential 1944 book An American Dilemma.
This was the dawn of a new era and the idea of “anti-racism” was absolutely central to it from the beginning and served as an adjunct to liberalism. Previously, “racism” wasn’t a thing although what we would now understand to be racist beliefs and attitudes existed in society before this was problematized. “Racism” was invented as an object by self conscious “anti-racist” crusaders. “Anti-racism” is a critique and a therapy that is designed to weaken “racist” beliefs, attitudes and practices.
This monster didn’t just appear out of nowhere.
It was enthroned by triumphant liberals in the aftermath of World War II. “Racism” became the greatest evil in our society. “Anti-racism” became the greatest good. The idea was to weaken strong truths, values, beliefs and attitudes in order to prevent a resurgence of nationalism.
Here is the best way to look at it: “anti-racism” is like a drug. The point of the drug is to change and manage your emotional state. It is to sedate you and put you in a stupor in order to calm your passions and to weaken your beliefs and attachments to stop the “proto-fascism” of your “authoritarian personality” from maturing and developing into full blown fascism.
The whole world that our grandparents and great-grandparents built was like this:
“Calthorpe had the floor. Lean and urbane, Calthrope, forty-five, was in a humorously expansive mood. He proposed two theories. The first was The Stroke Theory. World War Two, he said, was so traumatic that it had caused the same kind of damage to western civilization that a cerebral hemorrhage can wreak on a human mind. It had made the advanced nations of the world lose some of their most important abilities, to forget their own history and culture, as a stroke victim loses his powers of speech, his memories, the particulars of his education. All the ghastly office buildings, banal dwellings, crappy commercial structures, and other common architectural garbage of our everyday world, Calthrope proposed, were like the inchoate squawkings and bleatings of a stroke victim who had lost the ability to express himself. This theory met with such general approbation that Calthrope went on to propose a second.
This was The Stupor Theory. World War Two, he said, was the high-tide of our fathers’ generation. All these American men in the full bloom of youth had marched off to a terrible war against manifest evil and won a decisive victory for democracy and decency. In the process, many of them had the adventures of a lifetime – moments of heroism, romances with grateful foreign girls, days and nights enjoying the spoils of liberated castles, profound friendships with army buddies, and, finally, the worshipful reception of the folks back home, with a sweet package of emoluments upon return to civilian life, including free college tuition and low-interest home mortgage loans.
These young men, Calthrope went on, were immediately absorbed into postwar corporate life, fitting well into large hierarchical organizations. Corporate life was familiarly regimented like the army, where so many of them had lately enjoyed their heroic exploits. They knew how to give and follow orders, and patiently await promotion.
The downside was that their greatest adventures were over, that life on the commuter platform with hundreds of other guys in gray flannel suits was in some elemental way an awful comedown. What was there to look forward to? Selling ten million units a month of Oaties breakfast cereal for decades to come? How did this compare to drinking seventy-year-old cognac in an Alsatian castle with a pistol strapped to your left and a seventeen-year-old French cutie in your lap, having spent the day slaughtering Nazis? Of course, there would be the compensations of family life, a nice house in those new suburbs, a shiny new car, the fabulous panoply of washers, driers, Mixmasters, TVs, hi-fi’s, and power mowers, autumn days teaching Princess dance in her toe shoes, summer evenings presiding over the backyard barbecue and … wait … was that all? Is that where it ended? Flipping hamburgers and wieners in a joke-bedizened apron and a clownish chef’s hat?
Well, yes, for a lot of them. This was what life had to offer after the stupendous adventure of World War Two. A whole generation of heroes slipped into a permanent semicoma, soothing their boredom and anomie with heavy doses of hard liquor – their beloved martinis – and living out the rest of their days in an alcoholic fog. This, Calthrope said, explained why the world they built for us – the suburban sprawl universe – was so incoherent, brutal, ugly, and depressing: they didn’t care about what they were building. They were drunk most of the time, in a stupor. (This also, he added with wicked parenthetical glee, explained feminism: a whole generation of daughters raised by emotionally remote, perpetually plastered fathers.)
These theories admittedly veer into burlesque, but there is still much to admire in them. The Stupor Theory especially comports with the phenomenon known among histories as The Victory Disease, the condition in which a nation’s military triumph carries with it the demoralizing seeds of its own later destruction. In The Geography of Nowhere I argued that the building of suburbia as a replacement for towns and cities in the United States was just such a self-destructive act. I attempted to describe the tragic process. I argued that the living arrangement Americans now think of as normal is bankrupting us economically, socially, ecologically, and spiritually. I identified the physical setting itself – the cartoon landscape of car-clogged highways, strip malls, tract houses, franchise fry pits, parking lots, junked cities, and ravaged countryside – as not merely the symptom of a troubled culture bit in many ways a primary cause of our troubles.”
It was a numb world by design.
It celebrated everything weak and hated everything strong. … at least in White people. The rules never applied to anyone else. Non-Whites were encouraged to nurse grievances and strengthen their identities. Whites were to become deracinated individualists and consumers.
“We seem to be reaching another turning point. The violence that traumatized the West between 1914 and 1945 evoked a powerful, American-led response that was anti-fascist, anti-totalitarian, anti-colonialist, anti-imperialist, and anti-racist. These anti imperatives define the postwar era. Their aim is to dissolve the strong beliefs and powerful loyalties thought to have fueled the conflicts that convulsed the twentieth century.
In those years, fierce gods trampled the benign managerial habits of commerce and the liberal norms of free consent and democratic deliberation. Strong and dark gods stormed through Europe, eventually setting aflame most of the world and bringing death to millions.
We continue to define ourselves culturally, even spiritually, as anti-totalitarian, anti-fascist, anti-racist, and anti-nationalist. I call the atmosphere of opinion that sustains these anti imperatives the “postwar consensus” …
By “strong gods,” I do not mean Thor and the other residents of the Old Norse Valhalla. The strong gods are the objects of men’s love and devotion, the sources of the passions and loyalties that unite societies. They can be timeless. Truth is a strong god that beckons us to the matrimony of assent. King and country, insofar as they still arouse men’s patriotic ardor, are strong gods. The strong gods can take the form of modern ideologies and charismatic leaders. The strong gods can be beneficent. Our constitutional piety treats the American Founding as a strong god worthy of our devotion …”
This was the high tide of postwar liberalism. It produced the smug triumphalism of scholars like Louis Hartz. This period which lasted from 1945 to 1965 was confident and conformist. America’s elites were dismantling “racism” at the United Nations and by desegregating the military and by integrating public schools with the Brown decision. The Western European empires were dissolving. Third World nations were gaining independence. Culturally speaking, the “anti-racist” therapies which were everywhere in American culture and were slowly deracinating Whites and weakening White racial attitudes.
The Second Reconstruction was a series of Supreme Court decisions and lower federal court rulings and federal civil rights laws passed by Congress that eliminated segregation and white supremacy in the South. The most important of these were Smith v. Allwright in 1944 which struck down the white primary, Morgan v. Commonwealth of Virginia which integrated interstate transportation in 1946, Shelly v. Kraemer which ended restrictive covenants in housing in 1948, the Brown decision in 1954 which integrated public schools, Gayle v. Browder in 1956 which integrated public transportation, Loving v. Virginia which struck down the South’s anti-miscegenation laws in 1967 and Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg in 1971 which began forced busing to achieve desegregation.
Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1957, the Civil Rights Act of 1960, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the Civil Rights Act of 1968 to eliminate segregation. All of these bills were passed only by lopsided sectional majorities. Over 90% of Southerners in Congress opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 which brought down Jim Crow. The near unanimous opposition to integration by the White minority in the South was overwhelmed by near unanimous support for it by the White majority in the North and West.
In popular memory, the event that we remember as the Civil Rights Movement is presented as a mass grassroots uprising led by blacks that overwhelmed the Jim Crow system. In reality, Martin Luther King, Jr. was a creature of the liberal establishment who was portrayed as a hero by the liberal media. He framed the argument for civil rights and against racism in the same moral terms that had entered the mainstream through Gunnar Myrdal’s book An American Dilemma. The liberal establishment had officially pushed civil rights reform since the Truman administration and most of the time civil rights activists like the Freedom Riders were challenging state laws that had already been struck down by federal courts.
The Baby Boomers grew up in this world and rebelled against their parents in the 1960s and 1970s. They were the first generation which was raised on the “anti-racist” therapies that had proliferated in the universities and the news and entertainment media. It wasn’t the Boomers that gave us the Civil Rights Movement. The Boomers were in college or about to enter college at the time. It was the Greatest Generation who gave us integration. It was their children the Boomers who embraced modernism and gave us the counter-culture and began the second phase of the postwar era.
There is a simple explanation for the student activism and cultural radicalism of the late 1960s and early 1970s. This is when the Baby Boomer generation came of age who were uprooted and raised in the suburbs and metropolitan areas on the values of the television and who were the first generation in American history to attend college en masse. By 1970, the number of Americans attending college had doubled to 8 million. More and more of these college students, not just in the United States, but all over the West, were majoring in the social sciences where they were exposed to the cultural ideals of the New Left. In Britain, more students were studying sociology than law or economics at the time. Their parents were engaged in an epoch defining struggle with the Soviet Union – capitalism vs. socialism – and embraced the materialism and consumerism of postwar America. Growing up in such a world, life seemed like a stifling corporate rat race. The Boomers had never known the poverty of the Great Depression and the formative years of their youth were the postwar boom: the Thirty Glorious Years.
The Boomers rebelled against their parents by rejecting the idea that the meaning of life was being a “cog in a machine” or working for “the Man.” They rejected the materialism and conformism of their parents, the alienation of the artificial communities in which they were raised and especially being drafted to fight in the Vietnam War for the sake of containing communism. The Boomers embraced the radicals of their day on the New Left who told them to do drugs, experiment with their sexuality, to live off the “fat of the land,” to embrace “love” and “peace” and “tolerance” and reject “racism,” to find authenticity in non-White minority cultures, to reject norms like being clean cut and dressing in suits in favor of wearing blue jeans and men growing their hair out and especially the left-libertine ethic of expressive individualism which glorified the lifestyle of individual autonomy and self expression and chafed at any kind of limits to both. Long after joining and becoming the liberal establishment, they maintained their self-image as rebels. The Boomers inherited an affluent country and basically squandered it. As the Boomers aged and joined the workforce, the values of the counter-culture became the mainstream culture.
The abstract, atomistic, anti-statist philosophies of mainstream conservative liberalism and libertarianism which glorify the entrepreneur, the free-market and economic growth and are both centered on maximizing the freedom of the liberated, deracinated middle class individual and consumer are fully compatible with the ethos of modernism – the dominant intellectual trend of the era, which was mainstreamed by its popular music – which rejects authority and tradition in favor of self-interest, self-expression, self-achievement, self-realization, self-fulfillment and self-advancement. It produced a generation of narcissists detached from the American past and oblivious to the future who lived their entire lives in the present. If you believe the highest goal in life is individual freedom and in a social ethic in which everyone’s self-defined quest for individual freedom and self-expression is tolerated, then you will be indifferent to abortion, adultery, drug addiction, gender dysphoria, hedonism, miscegenation, divorce, gay marriage and sodomy and so on which are nothing but individual lifestyle choices.
In this second period of the postwar era, which in hindsight can be thought of as the First Great Awokening, the summer season which lasted from the mid-1960s through the mid-1980s, the Civil Rights Movement, the counter-culture and the “anti-racist” therapies put down much deeper roots in our culture. It was during this period that the borders were flung open and abortion was legalized. We began to reconstruct our society around the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.’s vision of colorblind utopia. The Left swiftly moved on from colorblindness into the world of multiculturalism and identity politics. The Right moved into the vacuum and adopted colorblindness as the liberal ideal of anti-racism in the Nixon era.
The cultural turmoil of the 1960s and 1970s provoked a major backlash among the American middle class and working class that fueled the growth of the mainstream conservative movement. The Thirty Glorious Years also came to an end in the mid-1970s. These trends came together in the 1980s when Ronald Reagan was elected president and the third period of the postwar era began, the fall season, which has been a time of unbridled individualism, decadence, polarization and weakening of institutions.
The embedded liberalism of the Thirty Glorious Years (the economic paradigm which dominated America from the New Deal through Reagan), which had managed relations between labor and capital and distributed income, was replaced by a new neoliberal consensus. Whether Republicans or Democrats were in power, the result of elections always produced more autonomy whether it took the form of more social liberalism or economic liberalism. Wall Street and Corporate America were deregulated. Tax rates came down. Wages stagnated and income inequality ballooned. The effect was to create a bloated oligarchy and upper middle class. The ranks of the poor also grew due to both immigration and downward mobility. The middle class shrunk, corporate power grew and oligarchy ripened into a Second Gilded Age.
As the Greatest Generation and Silent Generation aged, the Baby Boomers began replacing them in the American political, cultural and economic establishment. Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush were the last Greatest Generation presidents. Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Donald Trump were all quintessential Baby Boomer presidents. They were all born in 1946. Barack Obama is younger, but he is also a Baby Boomer who was born in 1961. The Baby Boomer generation has guided America since the 1990s. They grew up in the Cold War on MLK’s Dream and have built the world that came after it. In addition to being a period of rising income inequality and atheism, political polarization and cultural decadence, it has been a period of tremendous demographic change and further deracination of White Americans epitomized by Boomer Bill Clinton’s blasé celebration of impending White minority status in the 1990s.
The demise of the Soviet Union was interpreted by the American establishment as the absolute vindication of liberal democracy and free-market capitalism now in its neoliberal form. America was the world’s reigning superpower. The Baby Boomers had done nothing to guide America to its position of world dominance, but basked in the moment and celebrated the globalization of the world economy which was extended through the Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama presidencies. They plunged America into over 20 years of protracted war in the Middle East and the Crash of 2008 while also waging a 24/7/365 culture war for at least thirty years at home.
As the offspring of the Boomers and Generation X, this is the world in which the Millennials and Generation Z were born into and grew up in during the 1990s and 2000s. Uniquely, it is a world in which political correctness or Critical Social Justice Theory has been allowed to spread like a cancer through American education and create a generation of Woke Torquemadas. It used to be enough to give lip service to Martin Luther King, Jr’s dream of colorblindness and not to utter explicitly racist sentiments to navigate through life in the mainstream. White identity has always been explicitly repressed to deracinate Whites. Cancel culture has always been been a feature of the postwar era because “anti-racism” has always been an adjunct or enforcer of liberalism. No one seemed to mind as long as the SPLC and the ADL and the mainstream media was enforcing the dogma against recalcitrant racists like Revilo P. Oliver, Sam Francis or John Derbyshire who was cancelled for The Talk: The Non-Black Version.
This catastrophe didn’t come out of nowhere:
1/n Spent some time on LexisNexis over the weekend. Depending on your political orientation, what follows will either disturb or encourage you. But regardless of political orientation, I’m sure we can all say ‘holy fucking shit’— Zach Goldberg (@ZachG932) May 28, 2019
2/n Here’s ‘holy fucking shit’ #1 pic.twitter.com/KRVBl6ucIo— Zach Goldberg (@ZachG932) May 28, 2019
(#6) So many of these graphs look the same that, without the title, it looks like I’m simply reposting a single chart pic.twitter.com/iEoKxpubi1— Zach Goldberg (@ZachG932) May 28, 2019
(#7) If you’re looking for a job in a booming industry…. pic.twitter.com/nERSV7N2eH— Zach Goldberg (@ZachG932) May 28, 2019
(#8) Some of these terms (such as the one below) turn up so many results that I had to limit the search to a single news source pic.twitter.com/zw08WqX2GI— Zach Goldberg (@ZachG932) May 28, 2019
#14: One important thing to keep in mind is that only results for articles which LexisNexis has inventorized are going to turn up. For instance, the trend below technically begins in the 1980s; but only a handful of articles that LexisNexis has for this period mentions ‘racism’. pic.twitter.com/BkKyxberK7— Zach Goldberg (@ZachG932) May 28, 2019
#15: Clear Charlottesville effect pic.twitter.com/wi2nJoJXli— Zach Goldberg (@ZachG932) May 28, 2019
#16 Our future is intersectional pic.twitter.com/YNWk8XZ8g5— Zach Goldberg (@ZachG932) May 28, 2019
#17 ‘Unconscious bias’ is more frequency referred to than ‘implicit bias’, but had to check pic.twitter.com/TVTL3hu1nI— Zach Goldberg (@ZachG932) May 28, 2019
#18 During the 90s, the number of articles (at least on LexisNexis) mentioning ‘political correctness’ ranged from 4 (1990) to 380 (1990). 2007 was the first year this number entered into the 1000s (1056), which is where it’s stayed since 2013. pic.twitter.com/UmEDEwPt4U— Zach Goldberg (@ZachG932) May 28, 2019
And here’s the number of NYT articles mentioning ‘diversity’ pic.twitter.com/4mjOOrcebK— Zach Goldberg (@ZachG932) May 28, 2019
Original NYT Racism graph was actually an undercount. The search was generated with racism in quotations (and quotations should only be used when connecting two words). Here’s the corrected figure. Let me see if other graphs are similarly affected. pic.twitter.com/9C26W12ock— Zach Goldberg (@ZachG932) May 29, 2019
The ‘privilege’ NYT graph was also an undercount. Obviously, the word ‘privilege’ need not refer to social/racial privilege. I nevertheless find it interesting that its use has grown tremendously over the past few years. It could be just a coincidence, but I’m skeptical. pic.twitter.com/AilEduyvAZ— Zach Goldberg (@ZachG932) May 29, 2019
Update #2: Okay, I’ve finished one of them. Once again, using ‘the’ as a search term, I tabulated the number of results for NYT each year between 1980-2018. In the end, it seems that ‘racism’ mentions grew both in absolute terms *and* as a percent of all listed articles. pic.twitter.com/alCo8bZaXP— Zach Goldberg (@ZachG932) May 29, 2019
After all these Millennials graduated who had been indoctrinated in political correctness and Critical Social Justice Theory and had internalized it, they went on to be hired by mainstream institutions. As they gave up Christianity for atheism, Social Justice became a substitute religion for them in which they prove their virtue by harming others because anti-racism is a practice and life commitment.
This is how we arrived at our present moment, the beginning of the winter season of the postwar era, an era of destruction brought about by “anti-racist” extremism.
“Racism” hasn’t become worse. We have simply redefined the term to make it more elastic and raised a generation to see it in everything. Over a half century after the demise of Jim Crow, “white supremacy” is stronger than ever. “Systemic racism” can be seen in everything from Confederate statues to Uncle Ben’s rice. Half the country is certain that Donald Trump is a “racist” and “white supremacist.”
The last decade has been a darkening period with income inequality, cultural degeneration, domestic terrorism and political polarization hitting new highs. America elected Barack Obama as our first “post-racial” president and followed up by electing Donald Trump to “Make America Great Again.” The United States is now more deeply divided than it was during the War Between the States.
This isn’t a moment like the Civil Rights Movement or the “Summer of Love” which is how Seattle’s mayor Jenny Durkan saw CHAZ. The 1960s were a time of utopian optimism. It was the peak of the Thirty Glorious Years. American well being was at all time high. America’s trust in institutions was also at all time high. It seems ludicrous to us now, but that was an America that declared a War on Poverty and a War on Racism and a War on Drugs. The mindset of that age was such that these were seen as realistic goals.
What do you get when you combine political and cultural disintegration and economic collapse with a rapidly diversifying population that has been stoked by tribalism and racial grievances? What do you get when you combine that with a witch hunting Social Justice mindset? The burden of “anti-racism” was already growing to the point of becoming intolerable before any of this happened. It did not emerge from nowhere to challenge liberalism. It has been its bodyguard throughout this entire era.
The impossible expectations and unacceptable demands being made upon White Americans of our current “anti-racism” movement can only lead to an inevitable conflict. A team of enemy scientists could not have created a set of ideas in a lab more toxic and sure to create racial discord and conflict than Critical Social Justice Theory going mainstream. As a therapy (destroying the lives of others for fun on a daily basis to assure yourself of your own virtue), it will lead to a drug overdose for not even the most extreme White Nationalists see a racial dimension in so many mundane interactions.
“Anti-racism” was the defining idea of the post-World War II era. It was the Spirit of the Age and racial equality was its monumental project. It is not unlike watching the Rapa Nui people of Easter Island destroying themselves in the process of erecting their stone monuments. It was the greatest monumental project in world history – more expensive than erecting the Panama Canal, the Hoover Dam, the Manhattan Project and the Apollo 11 moon landing combined – and it was a failure.
Rather than accepting, processing and reflecting upon this failure, we will double down and destroy ourselves and stoke a similar crisis in other liberal Western countries. In doing so, America will lose its grip on the world and the post-World War II era will come to a crashing end.
Note: I’m not sure what will come of electing a senile Joe Biden in November who would be a Silent Generation president. He would be taking over the reins from Trump at an older age than when Leonid Brezhnev and Yuri Andropov died at their posts in the Soviet Union.