cultural appropriation," as he was observed to be in possession of an extremely straggly set of dreadlocks. This is a style of hair normally associated with people of sub-Saharan African ancestry.
After film of this incident made it onto social media and went viral, we had the normal knee-jerk reactions from those on the Right:
(a) How dare a Black woman in clothes and using the English language and political correctness (all three invented by non-Blacks) castigate anyone for "cultural appropriation"!My view included and embraced the above two views, but also included the following insight:
(b) Ha ha! Dreadlocks! What a doofus!
Yes, I fully understand the possessiveness of the poor, the tenacity with which they hang on to their paltry rags while trying to steal a few garments from the rest of us."Black" the identity that that young woman has been tricked into identifying with by people like George Soros and his forebears, is essentially fake. And as for the group on which it is based – one of the three main races of the human species, no less – it has produced almost nothing of worth compared to every other group in the World. Even the numerically tiny Australian Aborigines are a dab hand at abstract expressionist painting and rocking those didgeridoos.
As a Scotsman, the most innovative and inventive segment per capita of the White race, I happen to be in the position polar opposite to that of the young lady. Almost everything everybody does every day is some form of "cultural appropriation" from my intellectually and scientifically fecund ethnic peers. It would not only be exhausting but impossible to get enraged by every infraction of non-Scots on the multifarious products of the Scottish genius. For this reason, I prefer to adopt an attitude of benign magnanimity. Bask in it, ye of less talented races and ethnicities!
Stupid as this "Dreadlockgate" incident clearly is, it touches on some important points and raises some interesting issues regarding identity, what drives it, and what it is based on. Those in our movement usually hold identity to be an unquestioned good, but identity implies glorification, and glorification of paltriness or nothingness – as in the case of so-called "Black" achievements – is an evident absurdity.
As for that poor Black woman, yes, cling to that ugly hairstyle by all means, even though it seems best suited to homeless people with limited access to running water, but seeking pride in such things is like seeking sustenance from the wind and salvation in Hell. If the group you belong to is not worthy of pride and a positive identity, then your only authentic option may be the individual route but that is never easy.
There is one other thing that should be mentioned. Most of those Blacks obsessed with "Black pride" tend to be racially mixed – in fact (and let's call this "Liddell's Law") the more mixed the more proud they are of being "Black." This seems true for this young woman and her beta-male hanger on. As we see with Africans, real Blacks don't indentify, they simply belong...to this or that tribe. Identifying is a much more complex and self-aware process, and clearly includes an element of not belonging.
"Black Pride" is therefore a White-and-Jewish-invented-and-funded exploitation of racially mixed people's sense of not belonging. This young Black woman almost definitely has some White and possibly even Scottish blood if she's lucky. Malcolm X certainly did, as do most talented Black musicians. (Coincidence? I think not.) So, another option for her is to do a 23andMe and get in touch with her non-Black self and therefore the more laudable elements of her complex racial identity. As a template, take me. I am an actual descendant of King John, and although the amount of Royal blood in my veins is infinitesimal after the intervening 30 or so generations, I still have an intense dislike of Robin Hood!
|Malcolm X: a quarter haggis, a full kebab.|
But religion is not for everybody. So, what is the mainly Black, half-glass-empty, non-religious person in search of a collective identity to do?
You could do worse than support the old deracinated idea of American civic nationalism now being dusted off and trotted out by Donald J. Trump (50% Scottish), even though that form of retro-nationalism implies a dominant, 1950s-style White core somewhere in the background.
Or, perhaps, instead of seeking a Black identity predicated on past achievements that simply don't exist, how about seeking greatness in the future with an aspirational and futuristic Black identity?