Meet the academic left, part 3,047. In which a Cambridge lecturer in “postcolonial studies” complains, publicly and at length, about being addressed by a college porter as “madam,” as is the custom.

It’s racist, apparently.

And yes, the madam in question, Priyamvada Gopal, has been mentioned here before.

Heather Mac Donald on leftist contradictions: 

The same left-wing establishment that in the morning rails against American oppression of an ever-expanding number of victim groups in the afternoon denounces the U.S. for not giving unlimited access to foreign members of those same victim groups. In their open-borders afternoon mode, progressives paint the U.S. as the only source of hope and opportunity for low-skilled, low-social-capital Third Worlders; a place obligated by its immigration history to take in all comers, forever. In their America-as-the-font-of-all-evil-against-females-and-persons-of-colour morning mode, progressives paint the U.S. as the place where hope and opportunity die under a tsunami of misogyny and racism… In pressing for an immigration policy determined by the desire of hundreds of millions of foreigners to enter the U.S., progressives implicitly acknowledge that the left-wing narrative about America is false.

Toni Airaksinen on feminist nutrition: 

Two professors argue in a newly published anthology on “feminist nutrition” that “athletic performance” and “longevity” are simply “Western values.” 

The authors, Allison Hayes-Conroy and her sister, Jessica Hayes-Conroy, are unhappy that dietary literature, which they wish to “decolonise,” rarely devotes space to activist issues such as “strikes and boycotts,” knowledge of which is apparently essential to any attempt to lose weight or correct a vitamin D deficiency. The ladies are also unhappy that farmers markets are “spaces of whiteness” and therefore oppressive.   

And via R. Sherman, Bret Weinstein describes his career-changing encounter with the Mao-lings at Evergreen: 

Everything is racist. Just confess, for God’s sake.

So, to summarise. If you dismiss people based solely on their skin colour, that’s racist. But if you don’t dismiss people based solely on their skin colour, that’s racist too. Having a family dinner on Columbus Day is an act of “covert white supremacy,” and loaning money to people who are likely to repay you, as opposed to those who aren’t, is also racist and proof of “white supremacy.” If you have reservations about unlimited immigration, that’s racist. If you suggest that non-white people can be racist, that’s racist. If you fail to be outraged by so-called “cultural appropriation,” that’s racist. And if you dare to argue that you aren’t in fact racist, that’s racist too.

Oh, and if you don’t instantly believe whatever a brown-skinned person says, anything at all, however improbable – including the demented conspiracy theories of one Dr Dwight Turner – then obviously you’re seething with “unconscious racism.”

Andy Ngo on paying the price for other people’s intersectional piety:

[Portland bakery owner, John] Blomgren’s chronology matches and corroborates [his employees’] version of events. However, having established that his staff had done nothing wrong did not alter Blomgren’s decision to fire them. “In this situation it doesn’t really matter that the two staff members working are not themselves racist because the call they made to deny [student and activist, Lillian Green] service caused her to feel like she had been discriminated against,” his statement explained. “Sometimes impact outweighs intent and when that happens people do need to be held accountable.” The bakery has since deleted this statement and denies firing the employees to “save face or to appease anyone.”

If the word accountable has a perverse and sour ring to it, it should. “Dismantling the white supremacist hetero-patriarchy,” as Mr Blomgren puts it, is apparently something that small eateries should do now, ostentatiously, above all else, and is best achieved, it seems, by firing female employees for the sin of doing their jobs. Mr Ngo covers the escalating drama, and others, in some detail, and none of it is particularly encouraging. But it does reveal quite a lot about who such people are, the psychology in play, and the consequences of prostrating yourself in front of relentlessly spiteful “social justice” bedlamites.

The section on Cameron Whitten, one of Portland’s more prominent “social justice” activists, is also worth highlighting:

“I think he’s actually a sociopath,” speculates ‘Alex,’ a Portland-based social justice activist who has worked extensively with Whitten and witnessed his strategic use of baseless accusations of racism to take down opponents and manipulate allies. Fearful of retribution given Whitten’s growing influence, Alex spoke to me on condition of anonymity but provided evidence of their relationship. “He’s created a chilling effect in Portland. People are scared of him and no one knows how to intervene.” Alex expressed sympathy for Blomgren and said Whitten selects his targets carefully — mainly white progressives who are likely to trip over themselves when accused of racism. Some of them offer him money or career opportunities.

If you think the word sociopath sounds a bit strong, do read the whole thing.

In the comments, Rafi notes that the above bears a striking resemblance to a protection racket, which it pretty much is. It certainly seems to have attracted the kinds of personalities that you’d expect to find involved in one. And if you encourage the credulous to cultivate delusions of collective guilt, and to contort themselves, abase themselves, in order to conform – and if you do it institutionally, systemically, in the name of progressive education – then it’s hardly surprising that moochers, narcissists and marginal personalities waste no time in exploiting it.

Previously, this and this.

A quick test. Can you guess the occupation of the person quoted below? 

OK, officially, I now hate white people. I am a white people [sic], for God’s sake, but can we keep them – us – out of my neighbourhood?

Yes, once again, via Facebook, an educator speaks. Specifically, Rutgers University history professor James Livingston, following a visit to the Harlem Shake burger restaurant, which was, in his words, “overrun with little Caucasian assholes who know their parents will approve of anything they do.” In this case, the children of unsightly and problematic pallor were sliding on the floor and singing loudly. Activities that no brown-skinned child has ever indulged in, and which, naturally, the professor felt obliged to racialize:

Slide around the floor, you little shithead, sing loudly, you moron. Do what you want, nobody here is gonna restrict your right to be white.

And nothing enhances the purchase of a burger quite like a crescendo of racial animosity:

I hereby resign from my race. Fuck these people. Yeah, I know, it’s about access to my dinner. Fuck you, too.

While the professor claims that his vehement dislike of white people, and especially white children, is only now official, readers may arrive at their own conclusions. “I just don’t want little Caucasians overrunning my life,” the educator subsequently explained: 

Please God, remand them to the suburbs, where they and their parents can colonize every restaurant, all the while pretending that the idiotic indulgence of their privilege signifies cosmopolitan — you know, as in sophisticated “European” — commitments.

So, to recap. Our white-and-woke educator is upset, one might say fuming, that white people – other white people, that is – are “colonizing” his neighbourhood. Unlike him, you see, those other white people are privileged and indulged, and presumably crawling with mites. And unlike him, they should be remanded to the suburbs, where they belong.

Oh, and by the way, here’s Jelena Pasic, the Croatian-born owner of the restaurant in question. Readers are invited to speculate as to how Ms Pasic might feel about some neurotic, racist wanker trying to shame away her customers.

Update: