OK hand sign and bowl-cut hair declared official hate symbols by ADL
As of September 26, the Anti Defamation League (ADL) has officially declared the “OK” hand sign and bowl-cut haircuts hate symbols in their databases.
The ADL had previously been hesitant to declare the ‘OK’ hand sign a racist hate symbol due to its frequent and popular use. However, due to the frequency of use by various extremists or online creators trying to be edgy, the symbol has been too greatly associated with white supremacy to ignore any longer.
“At this point, there is enough of a volume of use for hateful purposes that we felt it was important to add,” says Oren Segal, director of the ADL’s Center on Extremism.
Segal also says that context will be very important in determining whether the hand sign is being used in a hateful way.
“Because of the traditional meaning of the “okay” hand gesture, as well as other usages unrelated to white supremacy, particular care must be taken not to jump to conclusions about the intent behind someone who has used the gesture,” the ADL wrote on their website.
The ADL has also acknowledged that many actual white supremacists have gotten tired of the OK sigh and have acknowledged that the entire OK sign being white supremacy was part of a 4Chan trolling operation.
“The ‘okay’ gesture hoax was merely the latest in a series of similar 4chan hoaxes using various innocuous symbols; in each case, the hoaxers hoped that the media and liberals would overreact by condemning a common image as white supremacist,” the ADL writes.
“In the case of the ‘okay’ gesture, the hoax was so successful the symbol became a popular trolling tactic on the part of right-leaning individuals, who would often post photos to social media of themselves posing while making the ‘okay’ gesture.”
Despite knowing that the OK sign was never meant to be hateful, merely a meme, it has been logged into their databases.
“Even as extremists continue to use symbols that may be years or decades old, they regularly create new symbols, memes and slogans to express their hateful sentiments,” Anti-Defamation League CEO Jonathan Greenblatt said in a statement.
Additionally, bowl-cut haircuts have been added to the hate symbols database, due to their connection to Dylann Roof.
Though bowl cuts haven’t seen popular use in real life, the ADL determined that the use of the haircut for avatars and logos of select white supremacist groups or content creators was enough to deem it a white supremacist hate symbol.
Ever anxious to find another thing to blame on bias, The New York Times, CNN and other outlets are blaming #Megxit on racism. When the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, Harry and Meghan, announced their intention to depart from the British royal lifestyle and set out on their own, the tabloids balked and theories materialized as to why anyone would leave all that pomp and circumstance behind. This latest theory is that the racism inherent in British society and in the royal family itself was so horrific that the couple had to move to a country where the Prime Minister donned blackface for a laugh at parties.
“Her treatment has proved what many of us have always known,” writes Afua Hirsch for The New York Times. “No matter how beautiful you are, whom you marry, what palaces you occupy, charities you support, how faithful you are, how much money you accumulate or what good deeds you perform, in this society racism will still follow you.”
There’s a drive in media to control this narrative, to make it about race. So much so that when the BBC declined to do so, that was the story about the story.
CNN points out that “As Duchess, she hasn’t made race an issue. Others have.” And that’s exactly what so many outlets are doing.
The assumption that the press’s persistent pursuit of the Duchess is all about race doesn’t hold up. The greatest British pastime is squeezing the royals in a vice until they pop. They did it with the other ladies who dared join the storied House of Windsor, and they’ll do it with the next generation, too. It’s hard for many of us across the pond to understand even a little why anyone would care about a family of people whose claim to fame is that their blood is better than ours, but the Brits are confusing in so many ways.
There’s been a mixed reaction about the leave. Some women who have always wanted to be princesses wondered how Markle could ever step away.
Still, others proclaimed it a move in keeping with Markle’s American heritage.
Or chalked it up to that deep desire in all of us to abandon our family and their expectations.
But the leave seemed to have way more to do with lifestyle preference than discrimination. In fact, there’s no end to the many, hypothetical reasons that Meghan and Harry would want to leave Britain, their responsibilities as royals, and all the rest. They will be able to make more money outside the confines of the royal rules than within them, and it jettisoning the British Isles for the commonwealth of Canada, they leave the worst tabloid hounds behind them.
The message from Harry, a man who is not in line for the throne anyway, is that he doesn’t want his family to experience the same kind of nightmare that he went through with the incessant hounding of his mother to her own death. The loss he suffered at such a young age has stayed with him. In the work he does, furthering the work of removing land mines, speaking out for the disadvantaged, his mother’s legacy lives on.
Since taking the reigns as Duchess, Meghan has been clear about how much she’s not into it. She spoke candidly on a BBC documentary in fall 2019, saying “I’ve said for a long time to H… it’s not enough to just survive something, right, that’s not the point of life. You’ve got to thrive. You’ve got to be happy, and I’ve tried to adopt this sensibility of a stiff upper lip … I never thought this would be easy, but I thought it would be fair.”
The restrictions of royalty were more than they wanted for their life, and since the entire concept of a monarchy is pretty silly anyway, why not step away from something that’s meaningless into a life where they can create meaning for themselves. The question becomes if that’s even possible.
“Harry and Meghan want to ‘carve out a progressive new role for this institution,” writes Dominic Green for Spectator US. “But there is no progressive new role for monarchy, other than renouncing titles and hereditary privileges, returning the palaces and parks to the people to whom they once belonged, and then rejoining us, the great unwashed, as Mr. & Mrs. Harry Windsor, the friendly and unassuming mixed-race couple down the street, him good with his hands, her always happy to join in with a singalong around the piano, and little Archie playing in the front yard. None of which is going to happen.”
The predilection of blaming everything on race doesn’t make much sense in a society where a race didn’t play a factor in a woman becoming the Duchess of Sussex in the most prominent and visible royal family in the world. Sure, she got a tough time, but everyone gets a rough time. The press picks on those characteristics that they can easily caricature, and all they really care about are clicks. If you don’t like what they’re saying, don’t click, and they will come up with something else.
The following is an excerpt from The Victim Cult: How the culture of blame hurts everyone and wrecks civilizations, by Mark Milke, published by Thomas & Black, 2019. Milke, PhD., is an independent policy analyst, author of six books, and dozens of studies published in Canada and the United States.
Appropriating the British in Hong Kong
When I first visited Hong Kong in 2013, almost every politician, civil servant, and business leader I met emphasized three priorities they wanted the territory to retain vis-à-vis the regime in Beijing: 1) capitalism; 2) the rule of law, including the British legal code; and 3) Hong Kong’s strong anti- corruption stance that dated from reforms in the 1970s.
I was in the territory on business for a think tank, to check on how Hong Kong planned to retain its lead in providing economic freedom to its citizens. For decades, the territory, whether under the British who left in 1997 or even under the Chinese government, was the premiere economic dynamo of East Asia. Hong Kong had prospered through a combination of good policy and benign neglect when the British were in charge. Successive governors and civil servants under the British chose the framework for capitalism; it was in contrast to the socialist drudge imposed in Great Britain in the post-war world until the government of Margaret Thatcher arrived in 1979. Luckily for those living in the territory, while the United Kingdom was enduring self-inflicted poverty, London seemed to neither notice nor interfere in the experiment in East Asia.
Hong Kong’s prosperous rise is now legendary; but what struck me about the three priorities was how, in interactions with politicians and civil servants over two decades of policy work, their equivalents in Canada never mentioned those as priorities, much less articulated them as critical. Yet here was a Confucian-based culture, composed mostly of non-British and non-Europeans, who understood and valued the most consequential, positive aspects of the British legacy. Relevant to debates in the West over colonialism and ongoing allegations of imperial guilt, Hong Kong’s leaders were uninterested in such sensitivities but the opposite: They wanted critical vestiges of past British colonialism and ideas strengthened, not abandoned. To wit, in 2019, when Hong Kong protesters rallied against even more interference from Beijing, protesters in Hong Kong raised a British flag.
In the West, to understate it, pro- “appropriation,” pro-British, and pro- colonial sentiment is not popular among the chattering classes. From some college students to many in academia and a plethora of those in journalism, politics, and business and more than a few leaders in Canada’s aboriginal community, Western civilization writ large is assumed to be the cause of multiple ills. Complaints range from American college students who rage about institutional racism (long outlawed) to the faulty cause-and-effect links for why remote reserves are poor and beset by tragic pathologies and from those who, along with the others, mistakenly see established Western norms and ideas as inimical to human flourishing.
In Canada, the authors of the 2015 truth and reconciliation report and the 2019 report into missing and murdered indigenous women and girls are in anti-Western civilizational sync with the anti-Western college protest-culture. Both reports were clear that for any poor statistic and tragedy spotted among aboriginal peoples today, Western civilization and those who represent it, alive or dead, are to blame. In assigning responsibility for various enunciated ills, the truth and reconciliation report cited Europeans 65 times; “white” in 86 places; culture or cultural 403 times; education (as in examples of past harm or the need to re-educate Canadians) 498 times; and church, churches or Christianity in 633 instances. Genocide was also referenced 31 times. The commissioners also demanded that the Pope apologize. Similarly, in the 2019 report, “Christian” was mentioned in 52 spots, “European” in 82 references, “genocide” in 509 instances, and “colonization” or “colonial” 678 times. “Aboriginal men” or “indigenous men” were mentioned just 35 times, and then most often to argue they too were modern-day victims of colonialists.
The 2015 report was blunt that its central conclusion could be “summarized simply: The main policy direction, pursued for more than 150 years, first by colonial then by Canadian governments, has been wrong.” Note that the argument was not that selected policies were wrong and racist but the “main policy direction” was—i.e., everything up to and including the present day. The various authors instead were convinced that Western civilization—ill-defined to conceivably include every variance from the British to the French, German, Spanish, Portuguese, and Dutch empires, which the British themselves would oppose—were all lumped together in one anti-Western narrative of blame.
The totality of anti-Western grievances is now obvious in our public squares. In Canada, statues of British historical figures have been removed with increasing regularity: The city of Halifax removed its founder’s statue, of Edward Cornwallis in 2018, after demands by local First Nations because Cornwallis, as was the brutal practice at the time by all sides, offered rewards for scalps. This was horrific, but as Peter Shawn Taylor wrote at the time of the statue’s removal in 2017, “Recent academic research shows both French and British colonial governments paid for scalps long before Cornwallis landed in Halifax. And many Indigenous peoples were ‘lifting the hairs’ of their enemies for centuries before that.”
In Victoria, in 2019, a statue of Canada’s first prime minister, John A. MacDonald, near City Hall was removed, given his 19th-century views on race and for the promotion of residential schools (though 70% of Canadians opposed the removal). Five years earlier, Mayor-Elect Lisa Helps (the mayor who would later preside over Macdonald’s removal) refused to swear allegiance to Queen Elizabeth II in a city itself named after another monarch in a province where the flag contains elements of the British flag.
In the United States, on the Columbus Day long weekend in 2017, New York City’s finest were assigned to guard not the president, a visiting dignitary, nor a Hollywood celebrity but a statue—a seventy-six-foot-tall figure at the Manhattan traffic circle, named after the 15th-century Italian explorer, Christopher Columbus. The reason for the on-guard order: vandalism of other Columbus statues in recent years. Those included one in Central Park with its hands painted red, symbolic of the assumed blood-guilt asserted by activists; in Baltimore, where a Columbus statue was attacked with a sledgehammer; in Detroit, where a hatchet was sunk into Columbus’s head.
The attacks on MacDonald and Columbus and what they represent—the arrival of the British and Europeans—are surface examples of a now-familiar trend: the claim of victimhood due to a real or assumed historical wrong. Any nuance about clashing civilizations and not only the harm but useful, positive ideas and cultural transfers that can result—the Hong Kong example as a real-time exhibit—are lost in what is now a simplistic black-and-white, good-versus-evil caricature of human history.
From The Victim Cult: How the culture of blame hurts everyone and wrecks civilizations. Published by Thomas & Black. Copyright 2019 by Mark Milke. Foreword by Ellis Ross.
The city of Perth, Scotland was terrorized by what some are calling “unacceptable” and “racist” propaganda posters stuck onto lampposts and drainpipes this past weekend.
The signs, which read, “It’s okay to be white,” were called “atrocious” by Member of Scottish Parliament (SMP) John Swinney, who said the stickers “had no place in Perth or any other part of our country.”
Regional authorities are investigating the matter.
Perth Against Racism, a local civil rights group, said the appearance of the “It’s okay to be white” signs made the community feel “unsafe.”
“It’s sickening and disgusting to know that people think like this,” said one member to the group, who went on to say that she was worried for the safety of her non-white daughter.
“Although no complaint has been made to police regarding these posters, they have been brought to our attention and officers are currently looking into the matter,” Scotland Police told the BBC.
This is not the first time that these signs have whipped on hysteria from those who claim to be anti-racist activists. The posters, which frequently spark outrage, have their roots in infamous online imageboard 4chan. According to KnowYourMeme, the slogan was originally launched as a “proof of concept” to demonstrate that signs with the phrase posted in public places would be accused of promoting racism and white supremacy.
Since October 2017, 4chan users began promoting the idea of posting the slogan in public places as a “proof of concept” that a “harmless message” would cause a “massive media shitstorm.” That idea has since proven incredibly effective.
What the slogan inadvertently shows is a type of anti-white racism, as some have posted that they white “NOT” between the first two words, while others tear down the signs altogether.
The Arab Palestinian Association of Ontario (APAO) held an event in Mississauga, Ontario that featured children performing a dance routine glorifying violence according to the B’nai Brith Canada .
Some of the controversial lyrics included, “pull the trigger” and, “We replaced our bracelets with weapons.” They went on to say, “We attacked the despicable ones.” The lyrics resemble those of another controversial song that was brought to attention by Palestinian Media Watch in 2010. An additional song allegedly persuaded “commandos” to use their rifles during a “jihad” gathering.
The Post Millennial was in touch with Chief Media Relations and Communication Officer, Marty York, who commented, “The promotion of violence to young children is always deeply disturbing, but especially so when it takes place in an overwhelmingly peaceful country like Canada. No Canadian child should ever be taught to ‘exchange bracelets for weapons‘ or ‘pull the trigger.’”
Elizabeth May was among the speakers of the event and is quoted by B’nai Brith Canada, as asking event participants to, “explain to the Canadian Jewish Community, which is full of fine, fine people who think they understand the situation” that the government, along with the military, are, “engaging in an absolutely immoral project of dehumanizing the people they don’t want to see there.”
Chief Executive Officer of B’nai Brith Canada, Michael Mostyn, commented saying, “The indoctrination of children to glorify a life of violence is deeply disturbing,” he went on to note, “So long as Palestinian children are taught to ‘replace bracelets with weapons’ and ‘pull the trigger,’ true peace between Isrealis and Palestinians will be near-impossible to achieve.”
“The fact that these attitudes have apparently been imported to Canada is a cause for great concern.”
B’nai Brith noted that a previous video was released by the APAO on Friday featuring Florida Pastor Rick Wiles saying, “The Israeli Zionists are acting like Nazis.”