The BAFTA Tourette's meltdown thing

The fatigue is real.

I was going to ignore the incident outlined below. I assumed it was a minor hiccup, a media-driven moment and to some extent that’s what it was. But there are some conclusions we can draw from these events, hence this short piece.

---

At the recent BAFTA awards in Britain the film I Swear won applause and recognition. It documented the life of John Davidson who suffers from Tourette’s syndrome.

Davidson attended the awards and shouted out the word “nigger” as two black actors presented an award, Michael B Jordan and Delroy Lindo.

The outburst was caught by the microphones and broadcast over the airwaves causing something of a fuss in the days afterward.

The presenter apologized as did the BAFTA people later. Views were split. Many understood the vagaries of Tourette’s and how it would often trigger language the individual could not control.

Most of us are sympathetic to this kind of thing. We make a minor adjustment to otherwise impolite or shocking behaviour if there are mitigating circumstances.

But not everyone.

We were told while the man had a condition all it really did was demonstrate how widespread anti-black racism was in the country.

The actor Delroy Lindo even issued a press release later thanking everyone for their support at what had been a difficult week.

The imported sensitivities around race and racism are becoming tedious.

One-sided performative anti-racism

The reaction tells us a lot about race relations in the West. No reasonable person would have seen anything except a mentally ill man saying impolite things in keeping with his disorder. And many did exactly that, sympathizing with his predicament. In a very public space, nervous, the centre of attention.

These are challenging conditions for anyone never mind someone with Tourette’s.

But some were having none of it. They didn’t see mental illness and nor did they see racism, they saw vulnerability.

White Europeans are the only group that routinely care about others, the basis of anti-racism. Other cultural groups are indifferent. Most favour their own and view this as normal. Consequently, they consider out-group preference as abnormal.

This characteristic of Europeans is ruthlessly exploited. And that is all the agonizing over the Tourette’s incident at the BAFTA awards was. The usual suspects sensed blood in the water and some of them were indulged by our establishment spokesmen who never miss a chance to prostrate themselves before the multicultural altar of anti-racism like members of a cult.

European nations have been conditioned for decades to view in-group preference as uniquely evil despite being practiced by every healthy society in existence. Conversely in-group preference among minorities within our societies is not just tolerated but actively encouraged and even funded by taxpayers as a necessary corrective to their minority status and perceived disadvantages.

Only white people are subjected to anti-racist efforts, and only white people can be castigated for being racist, hence the sensitivities around Davidson’s outburst.

In Western nations there are no pro-white groups advocating for white interest. In Britain alone there are multiple NGOs and charities that swing into action to destroy and ruin any individual or group attempting to create organizations canvassing for the interests of the indigenous people of Britain no matter how mild.

Some are funded by the British government itself, others from more mysterious sources. All of it is driven by white Europeans even if some minorities enjoy its benefits. This is white natives condemning their own in an almost psychotic break from the reality everyone else lives in.

We sometimes need to remind ourselves how unusual this behaviour actually is; a perverse masochistic indulgence most cultures view as mental illness, to actively subvert one’s own people while aggressively championing outsiders, including immigrants raised elsewhere who may be hostile to our way of life.

It is inconceivable to the Chinese or Indians anyone would favour others rather than their own. It is considered bizarre they would win social approval from their contemporaries for doing so instead of condemnation and punishment.

The BAFTA Tourette’s incident was just the latest in a long line of one-sided public judgments we are subjected to as if we alone can be hateful towards others.

This message is continuously broadcast and no one is off limits if it supports the approved narrative, not even the disabled.

Behold the pathetic

The incident is a microcosm of race relations in the West. We are not targeted because we are racist but because we are sensitive to accusations of racism.

We are an easy target too because we are decent and we care for others. Our enemies have weaponized our caring attitudes.

The BAFTA moment is small beer but is animated by the same reservoir of callousness that drives the rest of the grievance industry. They know they can rely on European societies to be defensive when accused of racial insensitivity.

Of course there is another response we could consider, to end special considerations for outsiders. This seems a stretch; compassion for others is part of our DNA. But the application of universal justice was a property of high-trust homogenous societies we no longer live in. Others clearly play by more selfish rules and we ignore this at our peril.

Other groups have no qualms favouring their own and damning others while they are at it. We see it every day.

Had John Davidson been a black fellow shouting racist comments at white or Asian actors the exclusive focus would have been his disability. Any hint of rebuke from white observers would have itself been taken as a sign of racism. We are so racist we even hassle the disabled. We would have been roundly condemned.

The media fell over themselves to issue apologies for the offensive remarks and naturally took time to remind us racism against any group was reprehensible. On the surface it sounded reasonable as it often does.

But normal people would have told detractors to shut up. The man is disabled. Make the appropriate accommodations and move on. Our media class are unable to do so as it violates their belief systems around inclusion, their obsession with demonstrating their sophisticated ability to rise above in-group bias.

The more this happens the more we sense how limited our establishment has become, how in the thrall of ideology they seem to be. They cannot now easily manage normal real-world events such is the power of their self-imposed cultural limitations.

A guy with Tourette’s should be easy to accommodate in a culture obsessed with victims. But it forced them to navigate a grievance hierarchy of their own making the rest of us don’t care for. How do I behave? Do I sympathize with his disability to show compassion, or condemn his hate? These are the corners they have painted themselves into.

It makes us wonder what else governs their thoughts. What other weaknesses define them? What else can’t they do?

That said, some signs are positive. Many groaned when celebrities shared their suspicions about the real drive behind the outburst, the latent, pervasive, implicit anti-black racism that really defines Britain.

They cut Davidson no slack. Their need to perform overrode any sense of decency for a man with a mental condition.

It did not go down well.

A small chorus of people steeped in the language of practiced grievance are beginning to look increasingly absurd and out of touch. It is obvious they jump on any chance to abuse the only demographic who care about others in meaningful ways.

This begs the obvious question, why do we care? And perhaps more importantly, how long will we continue to do so?

This is something our detractors seem to be overlooking.

---