People are Squares

Immigration, Enculturation, and the Endless Propagandizing of Anti-white Identity Politics Rhetoric

Photo by Kelly Sikkema on Unsplash

By James Pew

Imagine a giant box. Inside are thousands of little squares moving around in a complex sequence. The overwhelming majority of squares, maneuvering in complementary patterns, are various shades of red - orangish red,  yellowish red, dark red, bright red, matte, and glossy. There seems to be no limit to the variety of reds. As well, there is a pattern where those of a similar red seem to move together in clumps and in similar directions, and the whole complex appears functionally integrated.

The box has many openings. From these openings enter new squares of many different colours and sheens, moving at different speeds, and in different directions - some are various shades of red, but many are of non-red colours like blue, green and pink. If one observes the activity in the box long enough, they will notice that, for example, as the pink squares enter the box from one of its openings, they tend to cluster around each other, and move as a group toward the clumps of pinkish-red squares that were in the box before they arrived. 

The pinkish-red squares help with the enculturation of the newly arrived pink squares. Soon the pink ones take on a similar pinkish-red hue, and begin moving fluidly within the clumps and clusters of all the other squares. Can the reader also imagine a situation where this whirl of squares, in their hypothetical box world, experiences an influx of blue or green squares, at a rate that would overwhelm the natural processes of self-sorting and enculturation described in the case of pink squares?

But why would the blue or green squares need to move in slowly, get next to reds, and take on a bit of redness, before a harmonious co-existence of squares can take place? Because it is not just the hue of the squares that are different, but the speed and direction they naturally tend to move in. If Blue or Green squares are  brought into a situation where they are outnumbered and surrounded by reddish squares that move at specific velocities and subtle varieties of pre-established patterns, then the new Blue or Green squares are more likely to establish complementary patterns, and eventually take on a little redness. Why? Because it is in the nature of most squares to want to thrive in any environment they find themselves. In many ways, square survival is about fitting in, not standing out.

Co-operation, toleration and co-existence between the variety  of squares depends entirely on the rate of enculturation of immigrating squares. If the box is overwhelmed with squares that don’t conform or adjust in some way to established patterns of movement, the chaos will cause the sides to break and all squares will spill out onto the floor.

A chorus of multi-coloured inert little squares moving around like flocks of birds is a strange abstraction, but easy enough to visualize. If a yellow square enters by way of an opening, it gravitates to the yellowish-red community and attaches itself. It begins moving in concert. Soon the yellow square turns yellowish-red and becomes indistinguishable from its cohort, who gesticulate in a pattern of synchronicity, creating a general condition of consonance among the greater community of squares.

Now imagine 300 white squares bursting through one of the openings all at once. Instead of those white squares feeling slightly insecure in their numbers and seeking out a community of light-red squares, they feel confident in their group and find it more expedient to establish an enclave in the corner of the box with just the white squares that arrived together. The enclave is separate from the activity in the center of the box, so the newly arrived white squares don’t have the sense of being immersed and outnumbered the way the pink squares were. Meaning the process of enculturation has been prevented for white squares. 

The white squares may think they can exist in their enclave, but they still need to move through the masses of reddish squares from time to time. And although the white square enclave is in the corner and set apart from the main swoon, the space it takes up never-the-less interrupts the flow of the mostly reddish squares and causes them to reorient their pattern of movement. Not a huge deal, but as more white squares flood in and naturally gravitate toward the white square enclave, the space they take up gets larger and larger, causing further disruptions to movement patterns among red squads, which damages the already strained unanimity between the self-segregated white squares and the majority of the reddish squares.

The limited exposure the white squares have to the reddish squares prevents them from ever really fitting in, and learning how to move through the reds without causing disruptions to their pattern of motion. No squares believe that white squares should be forced to move in the directions and pace of the reddish squares; all agree that would not be nice. So the segregated state of the white squares entrenches and the problem is deferred to a future date. 

Of course I would prefer to be discussing people. Not abstractions involving a maelstrom of weird semi-autonomous hypothetical squares. But most people can’t have these discussions. In the real world talk about the movements of people (immigration), involves either believing people of European ancestry are racist and xenophobic and must be subject to perpetual intersectionality derived re-education, re-adjustment and re-distribution; or believing that anything less than a total lifelong commitment to the colour-blind club, means you are a raging identity politics ideologue.

Sorry, people; friends & readers, enemies & allies - my views don’t fall along such binary lines. As I tweeted out to the twit-sphere earlier today:

Writing from a perspective critical of anti-white rhetoric is not the same as  from a white supremacist perspective. It is possible to defend against anti-white hate and also not be a racist. I’m not sure the public conscience is able to imagine this yet though.

In the same way, a charge of white supremacist is earned by those who criticize immigration policy, or who advocate for integration and enculturation. In the minds of far too many there exists no nuance when it comes to these issues. Immigration is not a question of yes or no. It is a complicated issue with many questions. And the various groups, and types of people, who share society have disparate concerns about it.

Questions about the quantity and the speed of immigration are fair because these factors directly affect the quality of integration/enculturation. Which directly affect the existing communities new-comers immigrate to. It is authoritarian madness when woke anti-racists demand unregulated open borders, while claiming that attempts to enculturate immigrants amount to white supremacist assimilation. It seems even more outrageous that not only do woke activists call for no limits on the immigration of people specifically meant not to be assimilated, but they also subject new arrivals, and everyone else, endlessly to the propagandizing of anti-white identity politics rhetoric.

A woke person, viewing the box of whirling squares, would say that dominance in the number of reddish squares is evidence that the society is not diverse. It’s a red square supremacy they would proclaim. But they would be making a judgment based on hue alone, and not considering the variety of complimentary movement patterns and the cooperation required in order to make the community of squares flow. Inside the box, like in the real world, the most important diversity cannot be seen, only understood. Sometimes abstractly.

___________

Reach out to me through Twitter or Facebook if you would like to organize with other Canadians and become part of the pushback against the great illiberal subversion.

If you appreciate the work I’m doing please consider becoming a paid subscriber.