Awful Truth #4: The only land a people are entitled to is that which they can take and then hold.
“The past is a foreign country: they do things differently there.”
—L.P. Hartley, The Go-Between
“We cannot escape our origins, however hard we might try, those origins contain the key—could we but find it—to all that we later come.”
—James Baldwin, Notes of a Native Son
This awful truth is a cruel reality proven time and time again throughout history. There are no indigenous people. Land was either taken by one group from another group, or if formerly empty, the land was occupied. For the first to arrive in an unoccupied land, the taking part was straight-forward. This did not abrogate them of the duty to then hold it, nor did it make them indigenous. It certainly did not grant them eternal immunity from a future fate not to their liking.
I’m not sorry to tell you that it is staggeringly delusional to think every group, be it tribe, clan, or some other type of social division, was going to stay forever within its specified border, set at some arbitrary date in our past, as determined by some sort of Woke boundary commission. I would not be here today to write this, nor you to read it, if that were the case. The human race itself might not be here. Perhaps, instead, the dandelions would’ve risen up and evolved themselves to ignore such self-imposed limitations, spread out and fulfilled the destiny thus abrogated by mankind, taken and lost lands among their kind.
This didn’t happen. We as a species were compelled by our human nature to successfully occupy every niche on Earth, to go where we were not. This urge is also what led groups, at the tribal or much larger scale, to occupy or otherwise control lands in which they found other humans already there. Perhaps, this was the inevitable result of the human brain paired with the innate survival instinct present in all animals. Until relatively recently, this instinct, when manifesting itself geopolitically, meant conquest and colonization and, yes, horrible atrocities.
People came to their present location from somewhere else. In the beginning, we all came from Mother Africa, and ended up where we are now by a myriad of different paths, none of them easy or pleasant. These paths comprise the thing we call Life. Harsh and wonderful Life. This is true for both groups and individuals. Except for lands previously unoccupied by humans, the new arrivals came into conflict with the present inhabitants. What occurred next decided both their destinies.
Empires are the extreme example of this phenomenon, whether the motivation to create them arose out of God, greed, glory, or geopolitical calculation. I have always been fascinated by the history of empires, including those which conquered my own ancestors. Every race has had empires. Those of the Europeans are more in our public consciousness by their being relatively contemporaneous and that some vestiges as yet exist (e.g., French Guiana). These empires were remarkable achievements when one considers what was required: bravery, conquest, logistics, organization, governance, and ruthless audacity. This was especially true when they expanded into far away, unknown lands.
The British Empire is an extraordinary example. It is amazing that so few ruled over so many. A portion of a small island in Europe conquered the rest of the island, and eventually ruled one-fourth of the entire world, during which time it went from enslaving people to actively freeing them. As happens with every empire, it ultimately perished and is now comprised of only its homeland and a few splinters of holdings elsewhere.
Spain was conquered by Carthaginians, then the Romans, and finally the Moors. After gaining its freedom it then became a huge empire, which at its peak rivaled the British Empire in size and reach. It, too, waxed, then waned. Should we rue the fact that the Aztecs did not sail to Spain and preemptively conquer the Spainards? Their failure to do so led to their demise. Is the reason this reverse conquest didn’t happen because the Aztecs were possessed of Woke mores and modern-day compassion, and, therefore, they did not want to obtain Aztec-privilege over Iberia? Their grisly human sacrifices and subjugation of others in Mesoamerica proves this a foolish notion. The answer is simpler: They were an empire that fell to a more capable and audacious one.
The Woke and other fools complain that certain empires unfairly put themselves in a position of “White privilege” over those who were conquered or colonized. No duh. That’s what empires of every race did—achieve “privilege” over others. This accusation merely states the obvious fact regarding every conqueror in history. That the Woke are shocked by this reality reveals their ignorance of history and their inherent childishness, which are manifest in an insistence that history be retroactively subjected to their modern-day self-declared enlightenment and its attendant demand for retroactive justice.
They puff out their chests and aver a desire to fight a present-day battle against the past. This is particularly comical because should we invent a time machine and transport the Woke back in time, they would not only be too cowardly to actually fight against past injustices (as defined by modern standards), but would likely find themselves active participants in committing atrocities. The Woke are fascists, so we shouldn’t expect decent behavior by them in the past when they behave so deplorably in the present. (Their reaction to the mere existence of an essay such as this proves my point.)
What is commonly referred to as “White privilege” is no different than the privilege earned by the Egyptians, Hittites, Persians, Mongols, Khmer, Aztecs, Incas, Ottomans, Ashanti, or Zulus. The aggressor’s privilege was merited by courage, ruthlessness, and prowess. Geopolitical fairness in the modern sense of the concept did not exist for much of human history. The living learn from the dead—and we pray do better in both the present and future. The dead are under no obligation to somehow learn from the living and then repent their sins.
Absent a time machine, the Woke fancy themselves self-righteous necromancers, for they intend the dead be disinterred to face an overdue reckoning for their crimes. But their potions are too weak, perhaps the eye of newt or wing of bat were past their expiration dates, so the dead remain unreanimated in blissful slumber. Therefore, it is only by proxy in the form of the living innocent who are made defendants, so that the Woke may hold their shrill show trials and mete out their silly destructive injustice.
The Woke are obsessed with the notion that fallen European empires must be held accountable for their past sins. Why just them? If that is to be the case, then we must, in fairness, go back and hold every empire accountable and determine their crimes and victims. This would be impossible to sort out, let alone adjudicate. This is why wallowing in the past is a ridiculous undertaking, only done by those who intend to use it as a weapon against others in the present, with their own intentions of subjugation and iron-fisted rule—an Empire of Wokeness. We are already witness to this empire’s conquistadors, Inquisition, and caprice. It shall not be a benevolent empire, of that I am certain.
Here’s another unpleasant fact: Empires were built by committing atrocities, and no people on Earth are innocent of this—either at an individual, tribal, or larger-scale level. One committer of atrocity was supplanted by another who was perhaps better at doing these terrible deeds.
An important point to remember is that throughout history, up to this very day, atrocities are often committed by people against members of their own race, and these horrors are morally no better or worse than those committed by a people against a different race. Any racial component, whether deliberate or inadvertent, is nothing more than another example of the vagaries often integral with human actions.
Europeans fought other Europeans with comparable, if not worse, savagery as was done by them against non-Europeans. Civil wars—that by definition occur among the same people—are no less terrible in demonstrating the depravity that human beings are capable of inflicting on each other.
Empires shaped human history. So did religion, slavery, genocide, plague, famine, natural disasters, and every manner of woe visited upon mankind by nature or himself. History is the rough road that got us here to the present, and the road included empires and atrocity. It is not a road we can somehow revisit with the intent of smoothing and straightening out the path already trod.
Instead, there’s the road we stand on today and the one in front of us we must try to make better, since it’s the road our feet must trudge upon. The road ahead shall certainly have its terrible stretches, as well. Some of these are sure to be hard as hell, but let us not make it unnecessarily so by the deliberate folly of mankind, which is often the aggregate of our individual purposeful follies.
The condition the human race would currently find itself absent any or all of these past empires can never be known. We might ask ourselves what would’ve happened if so-called privilege possessed by one group over others had never occurred. Would we by now have colonies on Pluto or, instead, remained lice-ridden savages in caves? I suspect our advancement would be far less than at present, if at all.
There is no constructive reason for us today to engage in self-flagellation about these past empires. We should reserve our emotional powder in case the situation occurs where someone tries to create one today. Would the Woke rise up and join us in a fight against a modern would-be conqueror? A real fight of blood, fire, and steel, not one of inane platitudes, shrill demands, and silly TikTok videos. I doubt it, especially if the wannabe Genghis Khan happens to be transgender.
History is something to be studied. It can be compared to our modern ethos, but we should not subject history to what amounts to a criminal trial in which due process is impossible and subsequent punishment is by necessity applied to those not responsible. This contravenes the right to due process in a particularly vile manner.
We have no choice but to accept that people once conquered, colonized, enslaved, assimilated, and exterminated each other as a matter of routine, because that’s what actually happened. We claim nowadays that these practices are abhorrent—and laughably swear we wouldn’t engage in them, smugly proclaim we’re far better and more enlightened than our forebears. A knowing smile comes to my face whenever I hear someone make such a declaration.
Don’t be fooled into somnolence believing these things could never occur again. The Woke fully possess the characteristics found in those past committers of atrocities. Their moral certitude and sanctimony, maniacal delusions, willingness to deprive others of human rights, and pathological desire for absolute control over our lives would serve them well as overseers, slave traders, or camp guards. Their identify politics and propaganda machine makes the one run by Joseph Goebbels look amateurish by comparison.
The Woke have no qualms about denying us basic rights: freedom of speech, due process, protections against cruel and unusual punishment, criminal or civil statutes not applied retroactively, equal treatment under the law, and statutes of limitations. There is an important caveat related to the latter right: People must not be punished for crimes committed by their ancestors. Ignoring this caveat, there shall be endless strife, which is exactly what our betters desire. Strife is a weapon they gladly use against us in order to keep us un-united.
No apologies are owed by the aggressors who achieved empire or privilege. They’re not around to give them anyway. A modern apology for long-ago sins is patronizing to the recipient and empty atonement for the giver, regardless of the amount of money or emotive tears tied to the act. It’s no less ridiculous than a baptism ceremony on behalf of a long-dead nonbeliever—which by definition is performed without his knowledge or consent—and thinking you’ve somehow saved his soul, or your own.
It’s political theater of the lowest sort for someone to express the same degree of indignation about history as if he were somehow contemporaneous with a past crime, either as unfortunate victim or self-righteous observer. This is the childish game of entitled college students and others who are ironically afforded the agency for such foolishness as a result of the efforts of those past “evildoers” who came before them, i.e., the ones who explored, conquered, colonized, built empires and nations, improved agricultural practices, advanced science and technology, reduced backbreaking labor, constructed universities, and cured disease. Without the efforts of our “privileged” ancestors the Woke would likely not exist today. They certainly wouldn’t have the leisure to torment decent people with their asshattery.
This awful truth comes with an important corollary: If you want to place blame on someone for the fate of “your people,” such as it is now or long ago, assign it to those of your ancestors who were too weak or unprepared to stave off the horrors that people inflict on each other. If a people ready themselves according to the notion that those who are conquered deserve to be, they can better prepare themselves to avoid that possible fate. Learn from the people of Afghanistan. They are unconquerable.
Do not accept the argument that the more recent victims of atrocity are morally superior to earlier victims, simply based on chronology. People deemed (or who deem themselves) saints are merely charlatans who’ve not been found out. Don’t assume your people throughout their entire history were innocent of doing horrible things to others, including to other members of the group to which they belonged.
We never hear the Woke speak against the loathsome Hindu caste system, which exists to this very day. In 2022, a lower caste (Dalit or Untouchable) child was beat to death at a school in India by a higher caste teacher for having the temerity to drink water from a container reserved for the higher caste children. Another Dalit child was beaten to death by a teacher for the crime of misspelling a word.
I’m not aware of a single White Woke person in a position of influence who spoke out against these incidents. Why not? These are atrocities in the here-and-now to which justice can rightfully be demanded. We have both contemporaneous victims and perpetrators. There exists a horrific caste system in place that we should condemn. I condemn it. Why won’t you? The answer is simple: It’s much easier to condemn and bully the past. It can’t fight back and, thus, provides sanctimony on the cheap.
Work toward an ever-better world. Criticize and demand an end to the caste system. But we should always be mindful that when criticizing the living or dead, since we do so as flawed human beings judging other human beings. Sanctimony is a poor cloak. It is unlikely that your own personal path to the present is a hagiography. Mine sure as hell isn’t. We have a judicial system to deal with present crimes, and which keeps us fully occupied. That is where our focus must remain.
It is impossible to know if there existed an atrocity-free path tens-of-thousands of years ago that would’ve led us to a better world sooner and without sins along the way. If we could go back in time and beseech our forebears not to engage in those actions we today abhor, would things have turned out for the better? Would the world’s history have fewer atrocities or none at all? I doubt it. It is likely we would shed our modern enlightenment and succumb to the new reality in which we found ourselves—then rue the lack of social media on which to share our fate.
Maybe someday there will be a miraculous scientific breakthrough; and then we can ask ourselves, “What if we went all-in and sent back in time a delegation of Woke?” Man, that would be a sight worthy of pay-per-view: A clash of sanctimonious ignorance pitted against a harshest reality. Imagine the look on earlier mankind’s face at the arrival of these time-traveling earnest do-gooders.
Maybe, they would successfully scold our ancestors into adopting their enlightened tenets. First off, they’d insist the term “mankind” be banned and demand everyone state their preferred pronouns. Would these then be the first steps toward utopia?
Nope.
I’m betting if the earliest humans were visited by Woke time-travelers and were somehow convinced their wondrous enlightenment is the epitome of the human condition, we would find ourselves today living our short, brutish lives in caves, ignorant and superstitious, and ruled over by Woke tyrants, with the aforementioned atrocities committed with sticks and stones and the stake, instead of by modern means. But at least we’d be vegan.
Fortunately, the human condition has advanced to where we consider conquest, slavery, and genocide unacceptable practices. That’s a good thing. Yet evil still exists in the world, and always shall, but it is found to largely occur at the interpersonal rather than geopolitical level. There are exceptions to this, as the caste system in India proves. Another example is the horror under which the people of North Korea live—and which the rest of us knowingly stand by and say little about. I shall discuss in a future post, a future genocide that is coming, and for which the Woke bear responsibility. Yes, genocide.
Ignore the truth I offer here at risk of your own and our collective demise. The temptation is to seek redress or revenge for past wrongs. There is no means to accomplish this without creating new wrongs for which some person in the future shall demand revenge and justice. This creates a never-ending cycle of resentment and then settling of scores. There are no just means to assign blame and assess reparations when the guilty and aggrieved parties no longer are alive. We don’t have trials when the murderer is dead 100 years. Those trials are for historians to hash out, but only as a scholarly exercise.
The Woke are big on revenge and reparations and intend these to keep the past wounds forever open. When supposed atonement involves responsible parties and victims who are long dead, this so-called quest for justice is a Trojan Horse used by those with nefarious agendas in order to keep us divided amongst ourselves. Our bettors cannot control us if we’re united. The people who seek to do this are no better than the perpetrators of the past atrocities for which they claim a modern justice is due.
California set up a reparations group, which decided to make amends to those who are descended from slaves. This is an unnecessary divisive mess. It puts blame and punishment on Whites, Asians, Hispanics, and Black non-descendants of slaves (e.g., who immigrated here from African and elsewhere) whose family trees have no historical involvement in slavery, but must have their tax dollars used to atone for the crimes of others.
Are the descendants of those Whites who died on the Union side fighting against the Confederate army to be made to pay twice? This insanity is a vulgar political calculation meant to foment racial animosity. That’s true racism at its most cynical. We should heed a modification of the words of Oscar Wilde who said, “No man is rich enough to buy back his past.” In the case of our collective history, “No people are rich enough to buy back their past.”
So, what do we do about the past, how do we atone for past sins?
Nothing.
Instead, work toward improving the human condition by affording everyone alive today the same rights and responsibilities and protecting these rights going forward. Basic human rights transcend borders, whether these demarcations be that of a tribe or a nation-state. We must also work on improving everyone’s standard of living.
What of the Australian Aborigines or Native Americans, and other relatively recent conquerees? They must be afforded the same rights and responsibilities as everyone else in their home countries. Embrace them as fellow countrymen. E Pluribus Unum (out of many, one) is beautiful wisdom and doesn’t just apply to the United States. It doesn’t have to be stamped on coinage as is done in America, but every nation must hold this ideal for its own people, whether it be a homogeneous or heterogeneous society.
Why did the human race largely stop geopolitical atrocities and come to collectively disapprove of these? One theory, which I agree is plausible, is that it’s because large numbers of people have achieved improved living conditions and see the potential for more of this. When people have a chance at a comfortable life, they don’t want to risk fucking this up by war and conquest. The Woke want to impoverish us, which risks bringing us backwards to the type of living conditions where people feel they’ve nothing to lose and everything to gain by atrocity (again, a later post).
The important thing is not do those horrible things again. Learning history is necessary if we are not to repeat past horrors. This is why scouring the world of physical reminders of these past actions is dangerous. These reminders serve as vital learning opportunities about what people once did to their fellow man. Left in place, it is hoped these pieces of history serve to prevent a recurrence of these deeds. The warning signs are evident: Those who topple statues are possessed of a mindset that can lead us back to ways we believed were behind us.
You may be taken aback by the harshness of this awful truth, perhaps think me a “cruel” person for doing so. It is a necessary harshness, and I do not apologize for it. I am cruel and do not apologize for that either. We must accept this awful truth; otherwise, the recrimination and revenge desired by the Woke and others are never-ending. We can either be slaves to the past, serving our master in terrible ways, or we can learn from the past and do better, now and tomorrow.
The choice is ours. I hope we choose wisely.
Be First to Comment