How To Delegitimize A Nation, by a Canadian reader at Rod Dreher’s.
In Canada, … many citizens (especially millennials) have adopted what one might call “Aboriginalism” as their sect. To put it simply, this religion is an extreme romanticisation of the people and societies of pre-contact Canada — that is, pre-1534 — and extreme demonization of everything that has happened since. Per this religion, pre-1534 Canada was a kind of Eden inhabited by peoples who possessed none of the flaws of the rest of humanity. …
Sometime around 2015, universities started to preface events with what is now called a “territorial acknowledgement.” In an acknowledgement, the speaker lists the various aboriginal tribes that lived on or near the speaker’s present location, and thanks those tribes for allowing him to use the land. Below is the official statement for Canada’s largest city, Toronto, taken from the city’s website:
We acknowledge the land we are meeting on is the traditional territory of many nations including the Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishnabeg, the Chippewa, the Haudenosaunee and the Wendat peoples and is now home to many diverse First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples. We also acknowledge that Toronto is covered by Treaty 13 with the Mississaugas of the Credit.
If this sounds rather religious, you would be correct. Compare the statement above to the last lines of the Nicene Creed (BCP):
We acknowledge one baptism, for the forgiveness of sins. We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.
White people bad (the solution is obvious):
“Acknowledgments” present a disgustingly warped historical narrative in which groups of peaceful peoples were violently overrun by murderous Europeans. In the words you used to describe 1619, a territorial acknowledgement “radically and ridiculously oversimplifies history to make the historical narrative fit 21st century political requirements.” …
Acknowledgements have replaced the Lord’s prayer and the national anthem:
These statements are now omnipresent. Children in schools are required to recite them at the beginning of each day, business meetings open with them, they are read before football and hockey games, and concerts and lectures invariably begin with one.
Returning to the original discussion of the dissolution of national bonds in our countries, the damage that these statements cause is incalculable. The effect is to present Canada as an illegitimate, criminal state, whose population has no right to live in this hemisphere. Saddled by this original and irremediable sin, non-Aboriginal Canadians can do nothing but confess their wickedness, ask for forgiveness, and pledge to help “decolonize” the country (i.e. raze our institutions).
To make matters worse, it is now common practice in Canada to refer to all non-Aboriginals as “settlers.” An intruder in one’s own home! If we are to agree that a nation should seek to create a civic-minded population that loves its country and is devoted to her service and betterment, acknowledgements have the reverse effect: they breed a people who hate their country and are committed to its eradication. …
All the comrades must move in lockstep, or else:
This phenomenon is an excellent example of the “soft totalitarianism” you are writing about. Territorial acknowledgements help to reveal ideological dissenters not through their actions but through their silence. Were one to fail to recite an acknowledgement before speaking, he would out himself as a “racist” or an “apologist for colonialism.” At my workplace, virtually all employees include the text of our region’s statement at the bottom of emails. I choose to omit one, and the omission is conspicuous. Finally, acknowledgements invariably begin with the pronoun “we,” assuming total ideological adherence.
The question remains: why is self-loathing now a standard feature of Anglophone nations? I would be curious to hear your thoughts on this and to see if you know of anything comparable to these acknowledgements in your country.
The 1619 Project … aims to “reframe” American history. Whether its advocates recognize this or not, the project is about delegitimizing the American nation. …
Lesson: deep down, the Republican Party is the party of slavers, and those who identify with the Republican Party, and vote for them, are white supremacists. …
Donald Trump was elected because of white supremacy. This is the story that Blue America is telling Blue America about the rest of the country. That is the purpose of The 1619 Project. …
What’s in it for the left?
As Peter Shawn Taylor writes in his National Post piece criticizing Canada’s ritual recitation of atonement for dispossessing aboriginals: “Repeat something often enough, and people start believing it’s true.”
His point is that Canadians are being instructed through this secular liturgical act into an ideology that delegitimizes their nation. Similarly, if a majority in the US accept the ideological claim that the American founding is illegitimate because of slavery, then they will affirm the destruction of the institutions and (secular) creeds that bind us as a nation, and their replacement with something else. …
The sad reality:
Nobody dares to speak out, because they don’t want to be called bigots. … There is no creature more gutless than a middle-class white Christian confronted with the contempt of liberals. He is so desperate to have their approval, or at least to avoid their contempt, that he will sit quietly while his institutions are destroyed, secretly hoping that Somebody Else will defend them. But that’s a story for another day.
People do realize, don’t they, that there’s almost no country on the face of the planet today that doesn’t feature cultural and ethnic displacement somewhere in its history? Imagine how territorial acknowledgments would work in the U.K. The Queen rises at her next Jubilee, “We acknowledge, as Saxon settlers, that we are convened today on the land of the Iceni, Brigantes, Belgae, Caledonii…”
Commenter Seoulite gets it:
That doesn’t matter because it is whites displacing whites (in the modern definition). It only matters when whites displaces non-whites, and not because they care about First Nations or Native Americans. It’s so they can attack whites and their institutions. Why? Because that is what stands in their way when they want to remake the entire continent in their image. It is the power that opposes, so they must destroy it in order to build their Utopia. Just as the Communists had to destroy Christianity in Russia and folk culture in China.
Stop looking for logical or legitimate reasons for any of this. It’s power plays all the way down.
Welcome to Country in Australia has the same purpose, of course. Just more anti-white racism.