White Privilege vs Anarchist Entitlement isn’t a solution

Sir John A MacDonald prior to the attack with pink paint

Those demonstrating on the street in cities like Portland, Toronto, New York and London are true believers.
They’ve bought into the neo-Marxist canon that they are the oppressed fighting back against the oppressors and, in doing so must erase the symbols of the system which created said oppressive state.

Of course, it’s about more than statues and plaques: it’s also about tearing down the infrastructure of the oppressor, the police, the banks, capitalism, jails and the courts.
In carrying out their agenda through destruction and lawlessness the anarchists are exhibiting the flipside of the same White Privilege they abhor: Anarchist Entitlement.
We can so we will and we shouldn’t be held accountable to the consequences because we say our cause is just.
Anarchy is the cause but anarchy is an unstable system, it soon gives way to mob rule which then morphs into an Totalitarian Authority which decides what is necessary and what is not.
We’ve seen it in China, Cuba, Venezuela and many other countries and it’s not just leftist driven. The Authoritarian Right has done much the same in Nazi Germany, Franco’s Spain and Mussolini’s Italy.
Which brings me to the curious case of three people arrested and charged criminally in Toronto for throwing pink paint on two statues during yet another ubiquitous BLM protest.
Jenna Reid, 35, a Ryerson University professors, Danielle Smith, 47, Dan Gooch, 35, at Toronto District School Board elementary school teacher, are charged with mischief under $5,000 and conspiracy to commit a summary offence.
It was a righteous bust. Police observed them throwing pink paint on statues, then followed them to a van where they were caught pink handed with more paint, presumably to attack more statues.
Thus the mischief charge for throwing paint and defacing public property and the conspiracy charge regarding plans to keep going.
One hopes in vain that on conviction Reid and Gooch and might be fired or at least suspended for their criminal acts but don’t hold your breath. Of course, if someone in their position tweeted or texted or dared to say they thought BLM actions were excessive or that they believed in only two genders, you can be sure the braying mob would lay siege demanding their terminations.
While they are Criminal Code offenses, they are summary charges and thus relatively minor and assuming they have no past conviction and aren’t free on bail pending similar charges, there’s little doubt they’ll be handed fines, ordered to perform community service or perhaps, even have to clean up the damage, though by the time the get to court this will have already been done. In that case, maybe they could be presented with the invoice for the clean up.
That’s if they go to trial and if they get convicted. The Crown is already under pressure to drop the charges with supporters saying the offenses are trivial. One even argued that splashing pink paint on two statues was the equivalent of frosh week antics which included stickering statues.
He then went on to demand a 50% cut to the Toronto Police budget, the closing of police stations and the removal of all statues he found offensive.
It’s good to know his is the only agenda that matters, I guess.
One hopes the Crown will proceed, though in past cases with Extinction Rebellion protests which closed bridges and blocked roads they have simpered and run away.
The Mainstream Media is playing into the activists’ narrative with headlines like those in the Globe and Mail: “Calls grow for Toronto police to drop charges against protesters who defaced statues.”
Sure. These are the same people who are also demanding a 50% cut to the Toronto Police Budget, closing of jails, closing of police stations and the removal of all statues they find offensive.
The media campaign started early. It’s predictable. First, you claim they were badly treated by police and denied their rights, then you claim in any event the cause is just and the acts complained of are trivial and not worth public prosecution.
The three accused played their role admirably. Refusing to sign the promise to appear releases it made it it seem as though they were being held without charge in a denial of their rights. Their collaborators, of course bought into it, massing outside 52 Division downtown where two of the accused were being held and railing against said police brutality.
Except it wasn’t true. Such was the level of misinformation the activists gained by getting out in front of the story and forming their own narrative, Toronto Police Chief Mark Saunders felt compelled to issue a statement forcefully calling out the lies as “false narrative about the access to counsel and the custody of these three individuals.”
He said each accused was eligible for release by signing a promise to appear in court. All three refused the release conditions though they are standard fare:

“Some have chosen to perpetuate a false narrative about the access to Counsel and the custody of these three individuals. As is the case in all similar arrests, each of these individuals was provided the opportunity to sign a release, agreeing to appear in court. Each had access to counsel in the mid afternoon. Despite two indicating they would seek release, they later refused and instead chose to remain in custody for many hours longer than was required and in to the evening and early morning hours. It is important in these critical moments that the truth be told by all sides.”

The Chief continued, “We record these processes, and the moment that Counsel was selected, access was provided. It is unfortunate that a narrative has been manufactured that does not further the very real issues we are facing with Anti Black systemic racism, and the dialogue around the police and the community.”

He continued, “The Toronto Police Service is committed to being as transparent and accountable as possible, but the reality is that there is a lot of misinformation being put out there on this matter with the intent to create division, instead of uniting people.”

The Chief said, “Most of the many protests in Toronto, which have been successful in getting people’s attention and focus, have been peaceful and lawful. I expect and hope that will continue. The Toronto Police Service supports the right of the public to demonstrate and protest and we will always be there to keep the peace. We just ask that the truth be told when we have these moments as a city.”

Following the booking of the charges, each of the three arrested individuals were informed that they were eligible for release. Two indicated they would choose that option.

The TPS facilitated calls to Counsel for each individual and each spoke with Counsel between 3:30 and 3:59 pm on Saturday afternoon, once their preferred Counsel responded to repeated calls from police.
That afternoon, all three refused to the release conditions, which are standard and include a promise to appear in court.

Each arrested individual could have been released during the afternoon of Saturday, July 18, 2020 but they declined.

The proceedings are recorded and will be provided as evidence for court proceedings.

In the early hours of Sunday, July 19, 2020, all three agreed to be released. The females were released from 55 Division at 1:09 am and 1:47 am, and the male was released from 14 Division at 2:29 am.


And so now the calls for the charges to be dropped grow louder, based on falsehoods.
Here’s the point. Don’t do the crime, if you can’t do the time, in other words there are consequences to actions and if you believe your cause is just then be prepared for those consequences.
If you want to change the system you don’t do it from outside, you have to be inside the system to effect change.
These activists attack the concept of White Privilege as if every White person has some kind of advantage over POC or FN.
How about turning this around? Why is it that every wokester believes that their just cause and their agenda is the only truth that matters and that it entitles them to break the law by vandalizing and destroying both public and private property?
You might say its Anarchist Entitlement, a privilege by another name and it’s just as unacceptable as the Authoritarian Right because the Totalitarian Left is not a solution either.


1 thought on “White Privilege vs Anarchist Entitlement isn’t a solution

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *