The oppression Olympics – follow the money

Intersectionality has become a woke mantra for the oppression Olympics

As a society we cannot look anywhere without someone or some group claiming some type of victimization. Words like “marginalized”, “oppressor” and “racialized” have become part of the verbal tool-kit of the race and gender hustlers who, make no mistake, aim to profit from weaving, at best an exaggerated story and at worse a largely fabricated narrative.

There are far too many examples of this disingenuous story-telling on which to shine a light so I will just select three to examine. Buckle up, this may get bumpy.

FREE -FREE PALESTINE! (from Hamas?)

Ever since the October 7 attack by a group of Hamas-led terrorists I have had a desire to take in information from both sides to create an informed opinion. Forming an opinion is quite easy. You seek out a diversity of opinions on a subject and determine the credibility of not only the material but the source. What I have found on one side is a subset of that dogmatic toolkit of words I mentioned in the opening.

Me and my friends often played drinking games (shh, don’t tell my kids) where we would be forced to take a drink every time we heard a word. I do not suggest you do any version of this game with the words “genocide” or “occupier” or “settler colonialism” or “apartheid state” as the triggers to take a drink when you watch any interview featuring a pro-Hamas… oops, I mean pro-Palestinian speaker. I promise, should you play this drinking game, you will be face first on the floor after a few sentences from the person speaking in support of the Palestinians.

Don’t get me wrong, I do have sympathy for the innocent Palestinians caught in the literal cross-fire of the current conflict between Hamas and Israel (note, I do take issue with the portrayal by the media and politicians of women and children as “innocents”. The assumption from this is that NO women and NO children have/are participating in terrorist activities. That is just patently not true and is designed to play on the emotions of the public.). However, unlike the group of students at Harvard who signed a letter, before the bodies of Israelis (many of whom were civilians) slaughtered on October 7 had even been counted, laying FULL responsibility on Israel – I have critical thought on my side. Turning Israel into the demon in the October 7 massacre, while seemingly justifying the actions of the attackers is in a word… absurd. There is absolutely no justification for the barbarism that occurred on October 7 in Israel. Full stop.

Further to the discussion of the oppression of the Palestinian people in Gaza, who really is oppressing them? Since 2005 when the Israeli government unilaterally exited from Gaza the real oppression of the citizens of that tiny strip of land truly began. You see, Hamas who were elected to govern Gaza in a free election in 2006 have done nothing to improve the life of Gazans. Unless you believe that somehow building a network of terror tunnels beneath Gaza or launching rockets into Israel somehow has improved the life of the average person living in Gaza.

Hamas, which ironically was founded not as a  radical Islamic terrorist group but as a humanitarian aid organization, has done nothing but make life unbearable for the people who put them in power. International aid and support poured into the region after 2006 and most of that has been used not to build infrastructure to support the possibility and hope of a new Palestinian state but rather to fund a truly genocidal goal – the eradication of Israel.

There has been much discussion of Israel’s “blockade” (take a drink) of Gaza by those on the pro-Palestinian side, especially but not exclusively on university campuses. Do some of these useful idiots who masquerade as intelligent students not realize that prior to October 7 thousands of Gazans travelled freely to Israel for work? Do they also not know that one of the border entry points into Gaza, the one at the southern city of Rafah, is controlled by Egypt and NOT Israel? Have none of these people heard of Google?

The leaders of Hamas have profited immensely from the oppression narrative. Many of these individuals are not in the devastated Gaza strip wondering when the fighting will stop but rather they are living in the lap of luxury in Qatar. Remember, follow the money.

I do believe that Palestinians living in Gaza have been oppressed. The question is who is the oppressor? For me (and many rational people) the answer is obvious… Hamas.

D.E.I. (Division – Exclusion – Indoctrination)

OK, I cannot take credit for coming up with the acronym above but it sure does accurately capture the true meaning of the DEI movement that has swept through our society. Nowhere is DEI actually about “diversity”, nor “equity” nor “inclusion”- no matter what the claims in support of this belief from the race hustlers.

What is “diversity”? To the aforementioned race hustlers of the world diversity can be judged by one shallow characteristic – skin colour. OK, yes disabled or LGBT (I refuse to add the rest of the alphabet to the acronym. Consider it my silent hetero protest against the identity politics madness) are also included as a nod to how they have allegedly been oppressed. Now, if you are a trans/disabled/black woman you are at the top of the oppression spectrum known by progressives as intersectionality and thus are coveted by employers, politicians, media and advertisers.

Here is the problem. None of these traits which make up each person operate in a vacuum. Would Lebron James’ or Barack Obama’s family be more disadvantaged than a poor white family from Appalachia? Would the gay black woman who grew up in an upper middle class family in the Forest Hill  area of Toronto be more oppressed than a poor white straight man living in Winnipeg? According to the logic of the race hustlers the answer is a resounding… yes.

The idea that we cannot look beyond immutable characteristics of individuals such as race and sex to help form a real understanding of how that person is or is not oppressed, seems counter-intuitive. Some of the poorest municipalities in the United States are majority white areas. Also, academics such as Thomas Sowell have pointed out that married black couples have far greater household income on average than single parent white households. These two facts support the truth that disadvantage is not necessarily connected to the colour of a person’s skin. Cultural factors such as an absence of fathers in the household or a generational reliance on welfare are just two factors which should be part of the discussion.

The dogmatic doctrine of DEI has led to companies making it a central factor in hiring. Many employees are required to participate in “anti-racism” training (brainwashing?) which at the core is designed to identify the oppressed class and the oppressor class. Simply put, if you are a white straight male you are by default, a member of the latter group. Those in the group need to “recognize their whiteness” and “check their privilege”.

The so-called oppressed group has been told that they are victims. Everything is always about race. According to leading anti-racism academics like Ibram X Kendi and Robin DiAngelo racism is in the air we breathe and the water we drink. Absolutely everything that happens in our society can be traced back to race. Any rational person can see how divisive this ideology can be. Labelling anyone as part of the privileged or disadvantaged group before knowing their stories, which have played a part in shaping their lives, removes any nuance to the debate.

Behind this movement is the almighty dollar. I have pointed out before how many billions of dollars are now dedicated to DEI initiatives. Companies have added entire departments dedicated to promoting this divisive doctrine. Post-secondary institutions now have disciplines and departments fully dedicated to pushing this agenda. Courses like Gender Analytics: Gender Equity through Inclusive Design or Human-Centred Design for Inclusive Design offered at the University of Toronto are just some of the now common cult-like DEI offerings at so-called institutions of higher learning.

There is some hope that the identity politics which has taken hold is being challenged and the pendulum will swing back to a place of sanity. Chris Rufo, a conservative pundit, has coined another acronym – EMC (Equality: Merit: Colour-blindness) which is beginning to receive widespread support. This is the concept that these three pillars should be the over-arching consideration for companies and universities when the hire/promote/admit individuals. What a novel concept – the most qualified candidates will get the job/promotion/spot in a program REGARDLESS of their group identity – equality instead of equity.

The US Supreme Court also cast a vote for the EMC side of the debate by striking down the common use of affirmative action admissions at post-secondary institutions. (The irony of affirmative action admission standards is that it disproportionately negatively impacted Asians more than any other group. So much for white privilege) Hopefully, the Supreme Court ruling will help turn off the DEI money faucet.

BLM (Buy -Luxury-Mansions)

Looking back at the events of 2020 I believe that a fire was ignited. Some will say that it was a purposeful fire – like a controlled burn. I maintain that the fire was more like wildfire – devouring everything in its path, an out of control conflagration, one which society is collectively still fighting to get under control.

Some may argue that this actually began in 2017 when the #MeToo movement gained momentum with a some high profile cases. Harvey Weinstein, Bill Cosby and Matt Lauer were just three celebrities who were exposed as abusers. These A-list celebrities made it easier for women (and in a few cases, men) to come forward with their stories of abuse.

However, if MeToo was the kindling, George Floyd was the gasoline which caused the societal blaze we are still dealing with today. The problem is that, as it is with many causes, there are those who seek to sow false narratives and profit from these narratives. In the case of the tragic events surrounding the death of George Floyd those people have become known in many circles as “race hustlers”.

These race hustlers are comprised of both individuals and groups. At the top of the food chain of these profiteers is one group that was founded over ten years ago but only gained widespread acceptance in the wake of the George Floyd incident. That group is of course Black Lives Matter or BLM for short.

I mentioned these leeches in the previous section on DEI but I did not provide a definition. Let me step back for a moment and explain the meaning “race hustlers”. When you think of a hustler you get an image of a con artist who has one real goal – to separate a “mark” from their money. So a race hustler is simply someone who uses race to profit in an unsavory way.

I remember all the black squares appearing on social media in the wake of George Floyd’s death. I also remember anyone like me who said let’s wait to hear the whole story before we make a conclusion being publicly shamed and ridiculed for not getting in line with the narrative that white police officers were “hunting” young black men on the streets of the United States, and yes even here in Canada. Rationality and critical thinking made me conclude that this narrative was not only false, it was dangerous and divisive.

The black squares on social media paved the way for the race hustlers (the black square and the response to those who resisted to post it reminded me of this scene from a Seinfeld episode). They had been given the legitimacy to push their narrative which led to the majority of the population in many western countries to feel a collective guilt for the death of George Floyd. Guilt often is wielded by some to get the public to open their wallets.

For those of you who go grocery shopping or to the LCBO to grab a bottle of wine, think how often you are greeted by a request for a donation to a variety of charities. It doesn’t stop with the more formal requests inside the store but it often continues with you being greeted by a request from presumably homeless individuals for money as you exit the building. I have learned to numb myself to the feeling of guilt when asked for money regardless if the request comes from a legitimate charity or a less fortunate person because if I didn’t say “no” I might soon become the person looking for help.

The death of George Floyd led to the type of guilt gouging mentioned above multiplied many times over. The difference this time was that the guilt was coupled with judgement for those who didn’t feel right about what was going on around them. The emotion of the events had led people to just throw away their ability to question the legitimate nature of those who seemed to be sowing the seeds of guilt and division. The proverbial fox was in the hen house.

BLM collected, by some calculations, almost $100 million USD in less then one year. Wallets were not just opened, they were emptied. And it wasn’t just guilty individuals, it was corporate guilt as well. Companies, big and small, were falling over each other to give to BLM or other similar charitable organizations.

So what happened to all that money? It went to help at-risk black communities or fund programs designed to improve the lives of those experiencing “systemic racism”, right? Guess again. The money donated has essentially evaporated and the only real beneficiaries seem to be individuals connected with BLM. Don’t believe me, read it for yourself .

I could write multiple posts about the shadiness and outright fraudulent activities of BLM but I don’t want to get mired in the muck of this (Marxist) organization. Let me just say I am glad that I was one of those that kept his wallet firmly closed to this corrupt organization.

All three of the cases briefly outlined above have one cynical thread in common – cash. Remember these sage words of wisdom before you support any initiative – and definitely the three discussed in this piece – “a fool and his money are soon parted”.

One Dad With a Blog

Breaking the silence

I have been gone from this space for some time. This has been a self-imposed exile while I ponder everything related to who I am and what principles I deem important enough to express and defend. The reason I am back is that I believe just saying something is not enough – one must stand behind that belief in a real and measurable way. In layman’s terms – put up or shut up.

A brief history of what led me to pause my writing each time in this space is encapsulated in chronological order below. Some of the dates may not be exact but the events are accurate:

  1. Pause #1 (2015) – I was made aware through third-party sources that my ex-wife (well, she wasn’t my ex-wife yet at the time) was upset at some of the content of my blog. In an effort to not make the relationship (which was already frosty at best) any more acrimonious (and also to shield our two children from any of the discussion which would probably devolve into “he said – she said”) I shelved my blog for the first time.
  2. Pause #2 (2017) – I received an anonymous email from a source who indicated that my blog had become the topic of some negative discussion in an online forum. The individual who sent me the email indicated one of the people who objected to the content of my blog was a fellow employee at the GTHL. Other members of this unnamed online forum who shared similar negative opinions encouraged the alleged GTHL employee to speak with my boss in an effort to get me fired. Since I only had recently begun my position I thought it would be prudent to stop writing… again.
  3. Pause #3 (2022) – I had only recently begun writing again and once again the heavy hand of cancel culture threatened me again. My boss at the GTHL summoned me to a meeting (well it was actually a Zoom call since we were not in the office full time due to Covid). During the meeting he revealed to me that someone in the mainstream media (let’s just call him RW) had contacted him and asked his opinion on the content of my blog, specifically my takes on race and gender which have dominated so many spaces over the past several years. My boss indicated that he read my blog and did not see any issue with the content but others may not necessarily agree with his sentiment (or my opinions). To protect my livelihood I stopped writing… again

So on three separate occasions I have allowed the “woke mob”, an online entity I had vowed would not silence me, to do just that. This left me questioning not only my character but the world that has emerged in the past decade. What message was I conveying to my still relatively young children who are supposed to look to their father for moral guidance? I have been torn – go along to get along or stand up for that in which I believe?

Some life changes have made me choose to stand on principle rather than just to go with the flow. Most notably, I left my position with the GTHL in the fall of 2022. That decision was made partly due to the Diversity, Equity and Inclusion mandate which had permeated much of society, including workplaces almost everywhere. Imagine coming to work every day knowing that the focus of almost everything you did would have a DEI backdrop. This was further compounded given that some of the narratives surrounding this objective were at best exaggerated and at worst fabricated (I will not get into the discussion in this particular post but maybe, just maybe I will in a future post). Don’t misread what I am writing to mean that I don’t believe that there are issues in society related to race, gender and sexual orientation that need to be addressed but I do not believe, like noted “race hustlers” such as Ibram X Kendi and Reverend Al Sharpton, that racism/sexism are baked into the system. The process of doing my job had become mentally exhausting given my conflicting beliefs to the all-encompassing DEI agenda.

I think the tipping point for me was sitting in a DEI workshop with all the staff at the GTHL. I remember listening to the material which in essence told me that everything should be looked at through a racial lens. I was the oppressor due to my skin colour (and my gender). Unless I acknowledged this I would be in effect contributing to racial bias and discrimination.

This goes against everything I have ever believed to be true – that people should be judged on their character – not by the colour of their skin. The world that Martin Luther King had expressed his desire to live in when he delivered his famous “I Have a Dream” speech during the height of the civil rights movement had been hijacked. Now instead of a society striving for a “colour-blind” world where skin colour would be irrelevant, we are living in a world where we are told to always look at race. The race hustlers I mentioned earlier had successfully created a narrative that when an injustice or slight (whether perceived or real) occurs it depends on the colour of the alleged victim’s (and the alleged perpetrator’s) skin as to whether racism is at the core of said injustice/slight. A rewriting of language where people with white skin could never experience “racism” and a man could never be victim of “sexism” are just a couple of the core beliefs of this twisted ideology. The collective rather than the individual has become more important. Terms like “intersectionality” can determine one’s position in the ongoing victim Olympics. Facts no longer seem to matter (ask Roland Fryer, esteemed Harvard professor about that contention).

The time has come for all of us – regardless of race, skin colour, religion, gender or sexual orientation to stand up and push back against a divisive ideology that has permeated our schools, public institutions, corporations and political offices. Should any one ask why the simple answer is the truth still matters.

One Dad With a Blog