The Red Pill Of Victimhood
It seems to me that there is a tendency within people who are in privileged positions to vehemently cry foul when they are called out on their privilege. Take for example the MRA (Men’s Rights Activist) movement. Their whole spiel is that feminism has gone too far, and that in return men are oppressed at the hands of “feminazis”. In this case, anyone who disagrees with the MRA position is either in denial, or is in cahoots with the movement to emasculate men. In today’s society, where many are striving to right the historical wrongs brought about by patriarchy and colonialism, the MRA strives to halt any change that might bring an end to their position of privilege. In short, they fear change, and how that change will affect them. In my digging about on the web on this topic I have seen many occasions where MRAs claim that they are being feminised, emasculated by a society that no longer requires their services in the workplace. In this scenario, men who lose their jobs because of a more efficient and mechanised workplace, then lose their manhood, because in their opinion working and being the breadwinner defines then as masculine, as heads of the household, and as men. They also claim that men now have no rights, that the pendulum has swung too far to the other side, and that women are increasingly in a position of power over men. While some concerns that MRAs have are valid (for example, lack of support systems for men, tendencies to award custody of children to mothers over fathers, and domestic violence against men perpetrated by women), the the validity of their claims is drowned out by, from all appearances, what seems like a bunch of men who are unable to cope with the state of their lives as brought on by themselves. In becoming the victim of perceived oppression, then men feel empowered to “fight against” this oppression. It seems to give them a voice where they apparently otherwise have none.
In a strange parallel, some people are claiming a worldwide underground conspiracy based on racial diversity which is aimed solely at the eradication of “whites”. They call this “White Genocide”, and as with MRAs, if you don’t comply to their claims, you are “anti-white” and are complicit in this “genocide”. Their catch-cry is “DIVERSITY=WHITE GENOCIDE”.
As well as the claim to White Genocide, this movement has a repository of apparent “evidence” that white genocide is occurring. From it, a man named Christian Miller wrote this:
They see white genocide in everything; the current global trend of refugees coming from less privileged countries, in the Israeli-Palestine conflict, in ISIS. They see the election of President Obama as an obvious act of aggression against “whites” in their “white nation”. The White Genocide movement often cite United Nation’s Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide Article 2:
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
- (a) Killing members of the group;
- (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
- (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
- (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
- (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
but with their own addendum of “by any means”. The claim is that the infiltration of non-whites into nations like the USA and those in Europe will dilute the gene pool, effectively killing off whites as a race. And because nobody is talking about it, it’s obviously a conspiracy against whites by “the powers that be”.
Of course, none of this is happening. Firstly, “white” is not a clearcut race. In fact, race itself is an abstract concept often used to discriminate against groups based on skin-colour, cultural grouping or religion. For example, while it’s true Islam is not a race, many discriminate against Islamic people claiming a hatred of the religion when in fact they are just being racist against people of colour who speak a strange foreign language. White is no more a race than brown is, and genetically we all share different levels of the same DNA which gives rise to skin colour, eye colour, et al. That said, racism is real, and rife in the world, so I am not dismissing it at all. What I’m pointing out is that it’s not clear what these people are defending based on the word “white”. The “white” these people speak of is a specific kind of white; they’re talking about Western American and European Caucasians. Skin colour really has nothing to do with it. An African woman with pale brown skin would not be considered white by these people. For them “white” is about a preservation of the privilege they enjoy in their lives, and in fearing they may lose this, they are looking for someone to blame for this. Secondly, their definition of genocide is skewed. They see any interracial mixing as “pollution”, and because they claim this is an organised conspiracy, that it is organised genocide. This definition is off by a mile, and the inclusion of the addendum “by any means” justifies their position of “genocide”, even if it’s not rounding up whites and shooting them. This is much more subtle, and makes it all the more scary to them. To get an idea of what kinds of people we’re dealing with here, check out this site called “Stop Obama Now“, in which the author constructs a very loose case outlining white genocide by stitching together a series of completely unrelated scenarios where whites are harmed or killed.
What is striking in both the cases of White Genocidists and MRAs is that both whites and males are in a position of extreme privilege. In fact, white males are the most privileged grouping of people on the planet. This is undeniable, any way you look at it. What is happening is that with the shift in focus toward those without these privileges, the privileged are seeing noting but oppression. They fear that they will lose their identity in the oncoming tide of equality. It seems that those with the least to complain about often have the biggest voices about the smallest of concerns, whether real or imagined. Both groups use the same symbology to describe their situations: The Red Pill (from The Matrix movie series) symbolises the opening of eyes to see that the world is not what it seems, and that once taken, you can never see the world the same way again, and; the white rabbit (from Lewis Carroll’s Alice in Wonderland books), symbolising entering this strange new world and revealing evidence not seen before. If I was to look at this symbology, I’d say there’s a fair bit of paranoia in both groups.
It all reminds me of a post I wrote way back in 2012, The Hyper-Skeptic Problem, where I addressed the idea that some people take skepticism too far, and in the process invent secret reasons and scenarios for happenings in the world, and of course, nobody knows about it because its a conspiracy. From the article:
It’s difficult to know how someone can arrive at a hyper-skeptical viewpoint. Could it be that there is no way to “know” anything, as all information is presented from information from another human mind (which could also be a delusional mind)? Added to this is the concept of “irreducible complexity”, one where a person may look at a situation, and step-by-step, ask questions that are increasingly out of the realm or scope of the original question or statement.”
White Genociders differ from MRAs in one key way. Unlike MRAs, who do have some valid claims for men’s rights, the White Genocider has nothing but a loose set of conspiracies that stand to justify their white supremacist standpoint. The White Genocider is just a modern day white supremacist functioning under the guise of a social justice warrior. Any attempts to dismiss their diatribes is labeled as “silencing”, and any pointing at historical fact gets us labeled as “delusional”. I think we all know who the delusional ones are here, and it’s not the skeptics of white genocide.
While I feel sometimes that a call for men’s rights is justified, the claim of white genocide is at a minimum laughable, and at most, organised insanity. Its symptomatic of growing feelings of nationalism surfacing all over the world. In Eastern Europe we see the rise of Neo-Nazism. In England we see groups like the English Defence League, a ragtag bunch of racists claiming they are fighting to keep Islamism and Sharia law out of England. Extreme right-wing conservatism is surfacing worldwide, and with it comes the tides of racism and xenophobia. While I can only laugh at the White Genocide crowd, it is worrying that these groups are surfacing. My hope is that we can laugh these groups out of existence before they become more popular.