FEATURED
OPINION: Kendi’s latest book more of same old false racism charges against conservative views
Being against abortion, pornography, and DEI are all forms of “great replacement theory” ideology, according to Ibram Kendi.
The Howard University professor’s newest book “Chain of Ideas” is likely to do well among liberal readers. It is easy to follow, with short chapters written in a conversational tone.
The book is not dense on academic theories but takes examples from the news and uses them to support Kendi’s thesis, which is that “great replacement theory” is driving support for authoritarian leaders.
This theory holds that liberal elites are seeking to flood countries with foreigners to change the political system. Kendi argues that across the world, people are buying into this theory which is leading to social division and unrest. And this is getting in the way of an equal and just society.
Chapters follow a regular pattern – a present-day politician is introduced, compared to Hitler, and blamed for murders by an actual racist killer. Trump, of course, receives a good amount of fire from Kendi.
Impressively, it is currently the 16th best selling book on Amazon under “Political History,” and ironically comes out just in front of “Mein Kampf” and sandwiched between two books by libertarian theorist F.A. Hayek.
Its success is unfortunate, because the book is typical Kendi fare, dressing up his antipathy toward conservative values under the guise of academic research. It also contains several internal contradictions that undermine his argument.
But even moderate Republicans who find themselves more favorable to loose immigration laws or who think Trump is an aspiring strongman may be surprised to find they are actually bad people, too.
Beginning with the prologue, and acting on a hunch, I catalogued every time Kendi explained what “great replacement” supporters believe. The list is exhaustingly long, covering basically every conservative belief, and at times contradicting itself.
In addition to the aforementioned beliefs, the list includes: opposing vaccine mandates, affirmative action, and NATO. It also includes supporting the Tea Party, parental rights in education, and controlling the border.
Verboten ideas include saying white Christians are under attack, that Greece is the birthplace of Western Civilization, and referencing a country’s Christian roots. Innocuous ideas like redesigning passports, supporting sex offender registries, or pointing out crime by migrants are all part of the conspiracy, says Kendi.
His book then is a great act of irony – the point he is making is that people in all countries should come together and treat each other equally and not allow authoritarian leaders to divide them. Yet the book is a constant stream of attacks on commonly held views, where Kendi himself “others” people, to use a fashionable term, who disagree with him.
In his zeal, he finds himself trapped. Take chapter 74. He criticizes Canadian politicians and activists who opposed COVID lockdowns and vaccine mandates. But soon after, he criticized Hungary’s Viktor Orban for using “this public health crisis to shore up his electoral dictatorship.”
Kendi likes some authoritarian tactics, though. Commenting on the trucker convoys in Canada, who protested a vaccine mandate, he sounds like the exact “great replacement” supporter we’re supposed to oppose. He writes approvingly of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s decision to end the convoy by using the “Emergencies Act.”
Under this law, Kendi writes favorably, Trudeau was able to “force people off the street, ban people from public assembly, and freeze protesters’ bank accounts.” Later in the book, he endorses the idea of banning certain political parties – an idea most people would consider authoritarian.
And the contradictions abound.
Kendi criticizes zero sum thinking, which forms basis for his own philosophy
The second part of Kendi’s thesis is that people are wrong to view migrants as a threat to their way of life, both culturally and economically. It is not a zero-sum game, Kendi argues. Immigrants do not take economic opportunities away from citizens, he says.
He is right in some respects – law-abiding immigrants can expand the economy by working, buying goods, and investing in homes. An influx of thousands of immigrants into a small town would likely displace citizens looking to rent apartments or buy houses, but might not have the same effect in a large city.
In the long run, more houses or apartments would be built to accommodate the need. I’ll acknowledge that both restrictionists and supporters of looser immigration can make strong arguments about the economic and cultural consequences of their policies.
But Kendi has popularized the idea of a zero-sum economy. If he wants to know why some people believe others only gain if someone else is losing, he should read his own book, “How to be an Antiracist.”
“A racist policy is any measure that produces or sustains racial inequity between racial groups,” according to Kendi.
“By policy, I mean written and unwritten laws, rules, procedures, processes, regulations, and guidelines that govern people,” he wrote.
This is a zero-sum approach, where if a policy happens to only benefit one racial group, everyone else is losing because inequity grows as a result, even if unintended.
Say one year Chicago decides to invest $10 million paving streets and installing new street lights in a Hispanic neighborhood, so property values go up. But if they don’t do the same thing that year in a black neighborhood, that means the wealth gap grows and Chicago’s spending turns out to be a “racist policy.” So goes the logic of Ibram Kendi.
There are other issues. Kendi criticizes America First Legal for filing lawsuits claiming discrimination against white people, and in doing so downplays the existence of anti-white discrimination. But he has infamously argued in favor of discrimination to achieve racial parity.
“The only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination,” he wrote in the original version of “How to be an Antiracist.”
“The only remedy to present discrimination is future discrimination,” he wrote. Later versions use different wording.
The book boils down to this: if Kendi likes your values, you’re a good guy.
Child rapists like Joseph Rosenbaum, who attacked Kyle Rittenhouse, are praised as “antiracist” “demonstrators.”
When Kendi doesn’t like your values, you’re a bad guy. Legal groups that oppose anti-white discrimination are demonized, as are pro-lifers and opponents of vaccine mandates.
In his book he warns against ostracization and the othering of people based on beliefs – he should spend some more time reflecting on his own views and less time starting new “antiracist” centers.
MORE: Kendi ‘antiracist’ center is racist by his own standards
