Is Wokeness Crisis Proof?

Letters from O'Brien #18

Can Woke Ideology Survive a True Crisis?

I want to convey a few thoughts on what I believe could happen in the coming months, particularly in relation to woke ideology. This primarily concerns the situation in Western Europe.

CONSEQUENCES OF STUPIDITY

To start with, the situation in Europe does not seem to be getting any better. The future of everything from food, to fuel, to electricity is up in the air. Shortages are being realised across certain regions. Government overreach continues to exacerbate the situation. These occurrences have been rather sudden, and unsurprisingly people are having a hard time coming to terms with their predicament. Predictably, most European governments have been pushing the exact same narrative; namely that these problems are a direct result of Russia, and climate change. Needless to say this is a ridiculous story, and does nothing but dance around the real reason these issues exist in the first place.

As far as I can see, radical climate policies implemented over the past decade have turned Germany, France and the UK into a testing ground for ideas which are doomed to fail. And why didn’t anyone notice? Well, they did, but since other nations refused to go along with these policies (such as Russia), food and fuel could simply be imported. Thus, no one really noticed any change at all, and simply assumed that these climate policies were working. In actuality, all these policies have done is put Western and Central Europe in a position of vulnerability. With several large suppliers cut off from the rest of Europe, the effects of climate policy is being felt. This is particularly true in the energy sector, where instability and rising prices are impacting everyone in some way. These huge, sweeping policies limiting energy and food production have done more to aid the supposed enemy Russia than anything they themselves could have done alone.

To make matters worse, there seems to be no letting up on these climate policies. The same radical ideas are being pushed with the same force as before. I believe the only reason anyone has been able to do this is for the exact point mentioned earlier; the blame is still being pinned on Russia and Ukraine. There is a knowing push to suppress this information from going mainstream. For whatever absurd reason (which I will not get into in this letter) the western governments believe that defending the failing model of carbon-resultant global warming is more important than avoiding absolute catastrophe. As per usual, hypothetical people are supposedly at risk, whilst actual people are ignored. One would think that in a time of geopolitical uncertainty and strain, anything that could be done to better the situation at home would be done. This is not the case.

Faith in the woke plays an important part in this. A prime example of this faith can be seen in the Ukraine conflict. Despite being a complex geopolitical issue, it has been reduced to a mere social trend. If one ‘supports Ukraine’ (what does that actually mean?) then he is a good citizen. If one suggests that the issues in Ukraine go beyond mere political decadence, and that the responses to the conflict may be having unnecessary negative effects on the rest of the globe, they are denounced, and told that any suffering experienced in the rest of the western world is ‘worth the price’. Thus far, this ‘suffering’ has been fairly minimal, so perhaps those who push these ideas do not fully comprehend what they are suggesting.

To expand on that last point, I feel that decades of careless, easy living in the west has lead to a proclivity to make irrational and radical decisions with no regard for the consequences. In fact, for decades these decisions have had little to no immediate consequences. They will have future consequences if unaddressed. Thus, life has been relatively easy, with so much being mere abstraction and distraction. This is particularly true for those who are most vocal about ‘pressing issues’ (or, as the joke goes, ‘the current thing’), as I see these people usually occupying either well paying minimal labour jobs (journalists, politicians) or are upper class university students who remain largely unaffected by economic complications. I only highlight this because I am yet to see anyone beyond the champagne socialist types pushing said issues onto the broader public with such enthusiasm. Most others - as one would assume - are too busy working to expend much energy on said things.

This also brings to mind some of Jung’s thoughts. He said that it may be the case that certain individuals who are unable to adapt to changes in reality, or have not achieved what they had envisioned, will slowly move into the realm of fantasy. This withdrawal from reality could happen over time, as the shortcomings of ones own experience are slowly uprooted and replaced with more ‘fulfilling’ ideas, until reality as a whole is supplanted by abstract and complex ideas which the individual has built up as a fantasy reality to live within. In my opinion, if Jung’s theory has some weight to it, there is a certain subset of radically politicised young people who fall into this category. I see these as the overly vocal, overly committed western university students, who’s radical political opinions bear no immediate relevance - or in some cases no relevance at all - to their own life (abortion rights, religion, guns, other ‘current things’). This is in contrast to, lets say, those who have become radical or vocal in their political opinion as a result of certain issues having a direct impact on their lives.

Some developments which play into this pseudo-real attitude include the G7’s announcement of a price cap on Russia oil. While the media attempts to play this off any which way, Russia has what the west wants. The G7 doesn’t get the luxury of dictating terms unless Russia allows them to. That time has passed, and it has passed largely thanks to the willfully stupid actions of western leadership. If price caps were imposed and Russia accepted, this would lead to shortages in the west due to discrepancies in supply and demand. If Russia rejects (which they likely will) the G7 may need to turn to China, who will likely sell at a markup price, just like they have already been doing by marking up and reselling Russian gas. To be fair to the G7 nations, this decision technically makes sense, but only if they were bargaining with another globalist nation, whose reliance depends on inter-connectivity. Russia has moved away from this model, and even as they burn off excess gas and do not have sufficient infrastructure to sell large quantities of oil to China, they seem set on refusing the G7 offer.

Another great example is the recently exposed actions of western leaders in April. Negotiations between Russia and Ukraine began roughly two months into the war. Said negotiations were likely to result in an end to the fighting. However, it was recently revealed that Boris Johnson interrupted these talks with an emergency trip to meet with the Ukrainian leadership. This was mirrored by several other western officials who traveled to Ukraine to ‘offer support’. The negotiations ultimately failed. An early end to the conflict - which could have been reached if both Ukraine and Russia were left to settle matters themselves - was scuttled. Why? Apart from the fact that CBS themselves revealed that only 30% of foreign funding has actually reached Ukrainian forces, I believe a fundamental moral corruption is at work here.

For the first time in a long time, Western Europe is beginning to see and feel the real impact of political idiocy. Business owners are reporting electricity bills far higher than in months previous. Average people are beginning to complain about the noticeable shortages of essential supplies. The general population is - as far as I can see - slowly realising that politicians are putting conflict theory above any attempts to actually nullify societies struggles. Predictions seem to indicate that the current conditions in Europe will worsen before the end of the year. This raises the question, for me at least, will this crisis finally kill woke ideology?

RADICAL IDEAS IN EUROPE

I am unsure, but if I was to make a hypothesis based off of historical events, I believe radicalism may increase throughout Europe. So far the population of the UK, Germany and France have remained hyper-conformist to government policy. This will likely change. I can see some groups following in the footsteps of other Eastern and Southern European nations and removing state policies allowing for intervention and priority of globalism over citizens, instead choosing to return to a more conservative nationalism.

I think radicalism has been somewhat suppressed in Eastern and Southern Europe since people have not been demonised by the establishment for aligning with particular values and beliefs. This should not be surprising, as allowing people to actually speak their mind usually quells radicalism. However in Central and Western Europe there has been a push to censor and demonise those who wish to voice alternate opinions. This will continue to raise a radical reaction on both sides of the political and economic spectrum. I believe that the only thing restraining this amongst some of these nations has been a consistently good standard of living.

It is possible that a return of radical ideas will take place - particularly in Germany - in response to their failing system of socialised democracy. I say this because their current scenario partially mirrors the situation in Germany in the 1920s; economic destruction and the overuse of emergency powers at the hands of the Weimar government lead to collapse, poverty, and humiliation. Weimar culture was chaotic, with a strong champagne socialist upper class allowing for the creation of Critical Theory, experimentation with transgenderism, a push for anti-art and anti-culture, and other reductionistic ideas which held no benefit for the average citizen. As such, the Weimar system was perceived as ‘anti-citizen’, and socialism as being perverted by the elite who both created problems without suffering, and pushed socialist ideology without allowing for the establishment of a proletariat leadership.

Decadent times during the Weimar Republic

The general idea is reflected in western governance today, where governing bodies (who take on the Hegelian role of ‘men of action’) are seen as fundamentally progressive, in that their job is to struggle against history. Individuals (and indeed even a nations well-being) take a back seat to state initiative, since individuals within the society are seen as either inhibiting or regressing history whenever the democratic process is used (since voting impedes legislative movement). This is why ‘democratic’ states have been trying their best to implement forms of bureaucracy, since it bypasses the need for public approval of party-approved legislation. In response to Weimar governance, many Germans turned to classical Marxism and National Socialism, both of which were seen as antidotes to elitism, handing power back over to the German citizen. Both radical ideologies also stood firmly against the free market (which supposedly enabled oppression) and democracy (a western evil unfairly thrust upon Germany to give the illusion of control by the working class).

Today, alternative ideologies are seeing a strong reemergence which would have been unthinkable a few decades ago. Ideas at work are being criticised. People are seeing flaws (often exaggerated, but legitimate). One such example is the criticism of democracy, which (just as in Weimar Germany) comes down to the realisation that the democratic process - often under the label of equality - can lead to bias against individuals, since majority rule can fall under the spell of propaganda. The reasonable response would be a move towards a balanced republic, which would allow for the democratic process whilst retaining a fair representation of the unique individual who’s opinion can be lost in the noise of the majority (aka representative democracy, something we supposedly used to have). However, as in Germany, it is possible that an enraged population will simply reject these ideas all together in favour of radical peripheral ideologies.

This is not an ideal scenario. This is why governments must allow for freedom of speech and opinion, whilst also acting on behalf of their citizens. If this isn’t done, a power shift is almost certain to happen. Whether or not this has been deliberately planned (as some have suggested) is any one’s guess, but an aggravated movement with more than 3% of a regions population onboard will quickly become unstoppable.

THE FUTURE OF WOKE

If such a split away from woke doctrine does occur within Western and Central Europe, this will be the final straw in a slow move away from these ideas which have already been cast away by the Balkan states and Eastern Europe. If all of Europe rejects these ideas - which I believe may actually happen - this will likely lead to a divide between Europe and the United States. This is due to the region specific rejection of the idea in response to living conditions. The United States, if it chooses to continue to go along with the woke faith - will loose influence and allies in Europe, and have to rely solely on Canada, Australia, Japan, and New Zealand. South East Asia is falling under the sway of China, and India is questioning US reliably and longevity.

The United States has, for a long time, provided a stable foundation and demonstration of capitalism and democracy - despite western leaders current attempts to uproot it. Other nations which hold heavy influence on the world stage have not demonstrated this - they oscillate between extremes over time, and thus as the players shift, everything is up in the air. It is understandable why the world wants to do away with Americanism in its current form, with its projection of Critical woke ideas, but this is not in the fundamental character of the nation. The American people must be willing to reject the woke irrationalism which is constantly being forced upon them, and return to an un-blinded standpoint based upon biblical values. (I’d say the same should also happen throughout the western world). To say that the United States is merely an expendable corrupted piece on a global chessboard is simply not true - at least if you have any respect for western values and don’t want to see them swallowed up by dragons.

The average American, I believe, has nothing to do with wokeism and the silent majority do not support it. The current leadership has done their best to give the illusion of wokeism as a reflection of Americanism, and to remove the founding doctrines of the United States. For these foundational doctrines act as an anchor and antidote against radicalism, and thus a corrupted leadership would seek to do away with them altogether. The way I see it, one of the only real options left is to rid America of the woke poison it has been fed, lead the nation out of darkness, and attempt to correct the path the entire western world is currently on - going back to Judeo/Christian roots. Europe also must move away from collectivist ideology, the hypnotic woke religion, and knee-jerk radicalism. Together the ideas of wokeism will have no solid foundation, and will retreat away into Canadian, Australian and New Zealand academia, before eventually dwindling out of existence.