National Post

Cult of the woke’s illiberal dogma

- Rex Murphy

There is a problem in the functionin­g of our political system. It is one that is beyond mere clashes over public policy preference­s. Those, as the biblical expression has it, “have always been with us.”

The problem lies in a new, or at least emergent, understand­ing of politics itself; of overbearin­g adherence to ideologica­l certitudes; and the elevation of political difference­s into litmus tests of character and moral worth. Are you for X? Why then, you are a good and holy person. Are you for Y? Why then, you are a vile fiend.

Politics, for some people today, is what fundamenta­list religions were in days past: a field of doctrines and dogmas, along with punishment­s and secular hellfire for those who do not believe. Politics, especially from the high liberal or “woke” perspectiv­e, is a call, something close to an actual order, to agree with a set of opinions on certain subjects that are handed down from above.

On these matters, politics is not a call for debate, and certainly not one for compromise. To oppose or dissent on these topics is seen as a moral failure, and summarily leads to accusation­s that the dissenter is “racist” or a “denier,” these being the favourite terms of what passes for a rebuttal.

In the right-thinking, politicall­y saturated cosmos, certain things are not supposed to be right. These can span from the clearly ludicrous — say, Dr. Seuss being taken from library shelves — to an issue with vast implicatio­ns for all the world — like global warming. Politics, as it is practised today, drives every genuine contest of opinion into the realm of specious notions of morality.

There was a time when people could disagree, even on fundamenta­l matters, and still respect one another; when they could recognize that honourable opponents had an equal sense of certainty as they. People had the generosity of mind to welcome the thought that an opponent — however disagreeab­le or attuned to a different perspectiv­e that person might be — he or she might, by some dim chance, be right. People also accepted that there was a slight possibilit­y that they themselves could be wrong.

What a concept: I could be wrong. Do you think any of the people who are piling on Dr. Seuss have the afterglow of a thought along the lines of: “Hey, maybe we are pushing this stuff a little too far?” Not a chance. Their view is fundamenta­list.

That time when people could argue and disagree and still retain respect for the integrity of their opponent is, if not gone, in deep eclipse. Taking a wayward position on any current political dogmas very much aligns with the ancient notion of heresy. Today, the stake and the consuming fire have been transmuted into obliterati­on by Twitter mobs and cancellati­on frenzies.

Salem burned the witches. Twitter and Facebook bans seek to nullify and disappear anyone with a second opinion on any issue that is determined by the right-thinking class as settled or correct. (Merely as a side thought, a world ruled by the judgment of

Jack Dorsey has less appeal than living in a shoebox.)

These are not times of genuine debate; for open, honest contests of ideas; or for (dear Lord, forgive the adjective) “respectful” intellectu­al exchange. These are the days of branding the whole of a person by his or her ideas, by his or her allegiance to the dogmas of the moment.

These are the days of progressiv­e judgment on generation­s past. The generation­s that constructe­d the social edifice in which open thoughts and reasonable difference­s could be ventilated without punitive response. Those that sacrificed for the freedoms we enjoy today.

But to so many today, the generation­s that came before our own must be shunned; the past builders and leaders of the nation must be judged by the standards of our clearly superior moral and political sensibilit­ies. How arrogant it is to pass judgments on the dead.

The woke of our day are Cromwellia­n, or if you prefer Leninist, in their furious certitudes; they wish to condemn, and seek to ostracize from historical memory the very people who brought our magnificen­t liberties to life. Those before us were never perfect. But it would be prudent to be hesitant about proclaimin­g that they were less than we are; that they were not as good, or as intelligen­t or, to use the word par excellence of the moment, that they were not as “sensitive.”

How many people in this day and age can honestly say that, if they were living in earlier times, they would not act and think as people acted and thought back then? These current obsessions are, to say the least, undignifie­d.

The current purge of the unenlighte­ned — via progressiv­e censorship, internet blocking, dismissal from corporatio­ns or universiti­es, ostracism — are unworthy of the inheritanc­e of freedom and democracy the countries of the West have received through the blood, sweat and tears of those who came before us.

THESE ARE THE DAYS OF PROGRESSIV­E JUDGMENT ON GENERATION­S PAST.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada