Link back to comment

Thanks for the informative, entertaining and compelling article, Peter. I think all your points are well made and broadly in agreement with thoughtful and prominent voices I'm familiar with on the U.S. right like Ben Shapiro and National Review. Even in the centre there seems to be agreement that this form of identity politics fits the technical definition of racism, with the debate being over how important that is. Three questions I'd like your thoughts on:

1. A "race war", as you put it in your last paragraph, isn't possible so long as our society continues to be numerically and politically dominated by whites. This is why so few people take anti-white racism seriously and why most people (me included) can't look at a "smash the white man" banner, held by white men, without grinning. Is there really reason for so much alarm?

2. If, for the sake of argument, we accept the premise that racism = prejudice + power, it follows that as the power of whites decreases relative to non-whites with demographic and political change, prejudice against whites increasingly fits the definition of racism. Theoretically, this makes the problem self-correcting, with anti-white prejudice likely to diminish in response to these changes. Do you agree?

3. My main concern in all of this is not potential violence or a descent into leftist authoritarianism, because it seems that counter-acting forces are marshalling strongly in response to the overreach you've documented, but rather, that our ideological and philosophical divisions have become so great that a conversation across the divide is practically impossible. Are there any strong supporters of identity politics you've found it possible to have productive conversations with?