Abortions mostly regretted - new study

One of the goals of my blog that springs from my journalistic background is to cover important news that other outlets have ignored for dubious reasons. That is why Truth is part of my title here.

One such instance relates to a peer-reviewed article in Cureus, part of  the Springer Nature group of academic publications, that explores the impact of an abortion on the woman involved. 

A previous research study of the same subject did get blanket coverage by mainstream media, but this latest one has received barely a centimetre of news space, such is the state of the media, where narrative overrules the search for a greater understanding of reality.

To the details:

Three years ago, newspapers in the US and UK were full of headlines such as “Most women do not regret their abortions, study finds” (Guardian Jan 13 2020) and “The majority of women feel relief, not regret, after an abortion, study says” (CNN Jan 15 2020).

The lead author of the research cited, based on the Turnaway study, where women were recruited at abortion clinics to participate, asserted that “All the claims that negative emotions will emerge over time, a myth that has persisted for decades without any evidence to substantiate these claims, it’s clear, it’s just not true.”  — Source

But the news that is being ignored is that a study just out contradicts that finding and highlights another reason why women are, in fact, harmed by abortion, and how they mostly wish to avoid killing their baby.

This study, which applied a more sophisticated methodology, found that  “33% [of participating women] described their abortions as Wanted, 43% as Inconsistent [meaning, inconsistent with their own values and preferences] 14% as Unwanted and 10% as Coerced.”

That means 67 per cent of women who had undergone an abortion regretted having had one.

The details as to how this finding arose are crucial to an understanding of the character of the act of abortion. Dr Helen Watt, a Senior Research Fellow at the Bios Centre in the UK and  a former Director of the Anscombe Bioethics Centre, Oxford, provides this analysis:

[Cureus study] authors David Reardon, Katherine Rafferty and Tessa Longbons are critical of Turnaway research methodology as used by the group Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health. Reardon, Rafferty and Longbons’ own survey of US women has a high participation rate: 91 percent of women in a more general survey completed an abortion survey after confirming a past abortion, so almost three times the Turnaway rate of 31 percent. 

This is important, as low participation rates – common in abortion research – can skew the data. Moreover, when women are invited at the clinic to participate in a study, those with the most negative feelings at the time may be the least likely to say yes. Those who do agree to participate may drop out due to stress such studies can create – i.e. those women worst affected by abortion may not complete the study, if they ever begin it. 

In contrast, the Cureus participants are an older group of women (41-45) who were not approached at the clinic to participate, but were more randomly selected, and were reflecting on their abortion at a distance. This may help account for the much higher rate of participation. As the study authors comment, “A narrow age range was chosen to eliminate the confounding effects of age while capturing the experience of women who have completed the majority of their reproductive lives.”   

Cowardice of pro-choice activists

An additional finding is telling, regards the failings within both the family and within society as a whole in the care of the vulnerable: 

Significantly, 60 percent of women testified that they would have continued their pregnancy if they had had more financial security and/or more emotional support from others. 

These findings are condemnation of the cowardice of the pro-abortion activists who are happy to further the trendy "my right reigns supreme" mentality rather than strive to serve women and children by undertaking the hard battle to compel cultural and especially corporate elites to ensure women have personal and financial support at a crucial period of their lives.

Watt focuses much of her report on the key finding of abortion being so frequently under pressure: 

This should alarm everyone. Regardless of anyone’s views on abortion, it is very concerning if women are having abortions unwillingly, particularly if this goes against their beliefs. It is no surprise that those who have unwanted abortions are particularly likely to experience detrimental effects on their emotions and mental health, as indeed the study confirmed.

Choosing an abortion – perhaps under serious pressure – does not mean that one is morally happy with the abortion at the time, much less that one will be happy with it afterwards. It is a common human experience to make choices that do not reflect one’s values, and such experiences, as in the case of abortion, can have lasting ill-effects. 

In view of the stakes for the woman, the onus is clearly on society to offer and publicise pregnancy and parenting support from both the State and the voluntary sector. We must build a culture where women are empowered to resist abortion pressures, and also where partners, family members and others are more supportive of the woman’s desire to take her pregnancy to term. 

Unwilling abortions chosen under pressure store up unhappiness for the woman concerned. Even those who sincerely believe they made – or tried to make – the best decision they could in their situation may still be very adversely affected. 

There is, indeed, some agreement among abortion researchers that ambivalence and seeing the pregnancy as wanted or meaningful may lead to adverse effects. A study by Donald Sullins found that 14.7 percent of abortions were of wanted pregnancies, and that these abortions were particularly prone to have such effects as depression and suicide ideation.

Women’s thoughts and feelings about their abortions can be complex – unsurprisingly, given the event the woman is processing. Abortion is not a trivial matter, as many women are very aware. The “satisfaction” found in the selective Turnaway group may simply not reflect how most women feel.   

Moreover, research based on the Turnaway study and published by the same researchers in the same journal as the research which garnered all the approving headlines was given far less publicity when it found that 96 per cent of women who were refused abortions did not regret having their child five years on (and the figure is 98 per cent for those who were raising the child). 

International research

A further paper by some of the same researchers involved in the Cureus study, out last month in the International Journal of Women’s Health, states:

An important finding is that women who have a birth in their first pregnancy have uniformly higher rates of mental health services utilization prior to that first outcome than women who abort the first pregnancy. Following a first pregnancy abortion, however, women have significantly higher rates of mental health utilization than do women in the birth cohort.

This IJWH paper's introduction states: 

There is an extensive international research literature which links induced abortion to an elevated risk for a range of mental health problems. A German case-control study by Jacob et al. concluded that abortion was positively associated with an increased risk of psychiatric conditions.1 A companion study by Jacob et al. compared groups of women with first abortion births and abortions and found abortions to be predictive of depression, adjustment disorder and somatoform disorder.2 Studies from Finland, Italy and China found an increased risk of suicide and suicidal ideation following induced abortion. Gissler et al. found a two-fold risk of suicide in spite of new guidelines implemented in Finland to monitor for post-abortion mental health.3 Lega et al studied women in ten Italian regions and found that an abortion was significantly more likely than a live birth to be followed by suicide.4 Luo et al. found that unmarried females from three Chinese cities had double the odds of suicidal ideation following abortion, while controlling for numerous demographic, behavioral and attitudinal factors.5 The dose–response relationship for women who have more than a single abortion has also been addressed in terms of mental health consequences. McCarthy et al. concluded that women with two prior abortions experienced more perceived stress and depression at 15 weeks gestation than did women with only a single prior abortion.6 A Korean study by Wie et al. concluded that women with three abortions experienced an elevated risk for suicidal ideation even while controlling for depression.7 In a US study that extensively controlled for demographic variables and other pregnancy outcomes, Sullins found that induced abortion was associated with an overall elevated risk of mental health problems, and that 8.7% of the prevalence of mental disorders was attributed to abortion.8

Go to the paper itself for access to the citations. It has open access.

Natural Law and Scientific Evidence

💢 With Natural Law being the subject of my previous post, a second serious consideration from The Cureus study's findings concerns the insight offered into the morality of abortion, given the extent of regret among the women who have done away with their baby. 

Regret or other negative emotions or their absence may in fact tell us something interesting about the morality of abortion. For, if our emotions can be signs through which we are made aware of ourselves and of moral reality, then they may (albeit fallibly) tell us something about the morality of abortion also. (Source) 

💢 For background on the lead author of the Cureus study, go here and here. The fact that both of the new studies produce overall results that reflect the pro-life stances of their authors does not diminish the strength of their findings. To disparage researchers purely for their findings reflects an anti-science attitude in the maligner. The study's methodology, the handling of data, and then the conclusions as linked to the data are the crucial elements in weighing research evidence.

The weaknesses mentioned above in methodology of the Turnaway study has allowed many in the scientific community to fault its findings, no matter how strenuously activists ply the study's conclusions in pushing for the loosening of political oversight over  the protection of human life. 

💢 See also: The Embrace of the Proabortion Turnaway Study: Wishful Thinking? or Willful Deceptions?

Ω Leave a comment and, if you like this blog, read the same posts at my Peace and Truth newsletter on Substack, where you can subscribe for free when a new post is published.

Natural Law: Light to save our kids

Young people are the most affected by the fluidity of life promoted by those at the commanding heights of WEIRD culture, whether in North America, Europe or in those nations that have succumbed to the new colonization in the form of the antihuman ideologies thrust upon us.

The ideological propaganda is not always overt as the media and the education system from kindergarten to college do not challenge but rather promote the latest fashionable lines that the young must sing. And so we have  far-reaching policies and practices that impel the next generation toward sets of behaviour that the young are taught publicly to accept without question, with dire consequences as to their escalating lack of self-esteem or sense of personal agency.  

Principles other than self-invention and the right to do what one likes have gone by the board. Instead we have society itself, and sadly it's the United States that is the most toxic in this way, breaking down protections for the vulnerable.

Here is one list that itemizes just of few of the instances where the young are left to float in a foul social ambience.

💢Easy availability of the abortion pill in the US at the local pharmacy (for now with a prescription, soon over the counter);

💢 The fight for the rights of minors (children) to change sex;

💢 The right of officialdom over parents to determine sex change decisions of minors.

💢The pronoun wars, affecting even kindergarteners, and it is left to confused parents to clean up the mess in the form of the young ones' bewildered comments;

💢 Drag queen story hours ‒ there have always been neighbourhood transvestites, but the aggressive nature of the new breed of men who identify as women goes far beyond the humourous and colourful  pantomime style of performing in front of children that older generations knew.

Make your own list as a family as to matters the short-sighted foist upon society that harm the young.

Go here for solutions:

​​​​​​So what do we do? And how on earth do we explain such madness to the children in our family?

​​The answer to many of these questions can be found by following something called Natural Law.

​​​​​​Here is Natural Law in a nutshell...

👍 The natural law is simply the universal moral law, accessible to all people by the light of human reason.  

👍 Natural law is not the same as the “laws of nature” like gravity, nor is it simply “what happens in nature” or “what feels natural to me.” It is the law of God revealed in our very humanity, written in our consciences. 

👍 Natural law is not an arbitrary set of rules. Instead, it is like an “instruction manual” that tells us how to live according to the design of our human nature, providing our lives with meaning, peace, and joy. 

The greatest benefit of natural law is that it is not arbitrary. God loves us, so not only his positive commandments but also the moral laws we discover through reason will always correspond to what is good for us as human beings; they will never just be a set of nonsensical, disconnected, inconsistent, incoherent rules. 

If anything, it is our culture that is arbitrary, because it reduces morality to mere popular opinion or the will of the powerful. Children who are raised in this culture of moral relativism, especially those who lack the stability of an intact family, can quickly become disoriented and lost.

Yet, if we can provide them a moral foundation through the natural law—if we can help them see that the way they should act corresponds to the way they are made—they will feel safe and secure in the truth, even as the rest of the world stumbles in darkness. Children who understand God’s created order and how “everything fits together” are more likely to become holy, healthy, and happy adults, leading others to Christ and eternal glory as well. 

These pointers to a solution to the difficulties children and young people face come from a practical book Made This Way: How to Prepare Kids to Face Today’s Tough Moral Issues. I bought this book myself, and it is, indeed, an asset as it is written mostly by a mother, with further explanation from an experienced explainer of Christian doctrine.

Ω Leave a comment and, if you like this blog, read the same posts at my Peace and Truth newsletter on Substack, where you can subscribe for free and be notified when a new post is published.

Wokeism heaps absurdity upon absurdity

Machiavelli: People yield so readily to the desires of the moment... Photo: PxHere

The stark nature of the hold Wokeism and its intolerant ideology have over professionals such as doctors and teachers, and especially over the cultural elite, grips American literary critic and non-fiction author David Rieff with a mounting concern. He comments on one absurdity of the outcome:   

Hannah Arendt wrote that, “Social non-conformism as such has been and always will be the mark of intellectuals, be they artists, writers or scholars. Intellectually non conformism is almost the sine qua non of achievement.”

But what has been growing in importance over the course of the past half a century at least, and has by now acquired a hegemonic authority in arts, culture, and the Academe, is the ‘massification’ of non-conformism. 

But of course if everyone is a non-conformist, then no one is, and if everyone is part of the avant-garde, then by definition there will no main body of the force, and no rear guard, even if this obviously means there can be no avant-garde either, at least in either the connotative or the denotative meaning of the term.

As for Arendt’s holding up of the concept of achievement, she meant achievement in the sense of accomplishing something ‒ producing a wonderful work of art, writing a brilliant essay, etc. But in the 21st century, achievement is not understood as accomplishment except in the very different sense of self-fulfillment. 

And in principle everyone is capable of that, not least because the only legitimate judge of success is...oneself and [there is] absolutely no question of a recusal.

In a later entry in his Desire and Fate Substack Rieff writes of a second absurdity:

The prevailing conformism of the Academic-Cultural-Philanthropic Complex is non-conformism. Since this is a contradiction in terms ‒ and somewhere deep down even the so-called non-conformists of our day must realize this ‒ the only way to keep the charade going is to weaponize it with speech codes and bowdlerized language so that the words needed to express the blindingly obvious facts of the matter are no longer accessible to us. 

ChatGPT, with its well-documented refusal to countenance the unpleasant or the disturbing, offers a glimpse of how this world of bogus non-conformity, of bureaucrats who think they are Spartacus, will be ordered.

Ω Leave a comment and, if you like this blog, read the same posts at my Peace and Truth newsletter on Substack, where you can subscribe for free and be notified when a new post is published.

Webb's evidence of the generous Creator

The Rho Ophiuchi region. Credits: NASA, ESA, CSA, STScI, Klaus Pontoppidan (STScI)

The first anniversary image from NASA’s James Webb Space Telescope displays star birth like it’s never been seen before, full of detailed, impressionistic texture. The subject is the Rho Ophiuchi cloud complex, the closest star-forming region to Earth. 

It is a relatively small, quiet stellar nursery, but you’d never know it from Webb’s chaotic close-up. Jets bursting from young stars crisscross the image, impacting the surrounding interstellar gas and lighting up molecular hydrogen, shown in red. Some stars display the telltale shadow of a circumstellar disk, the makings of future planetary systems.

The young stars at the centre of many of these discs are similar in mass to the Sun or smaller. The heftiest in this image is the star S1, which appears amid a glowing cave it is carving out with its stellar winds in the lower half of the image. The lighter-coloured gas surrounding S1 consists of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, a family of carbon-based molecules that are among the most common compounds found in space.

The Rho Ophiuchi cloud complex is approximately 390 light years from Earth, which is peanuts when compared to the vastness of space, though it would still take 14,500,000 years of travel to get there using current technology. For more big numbers see later the calculations covering stars and galaxies in the universe.

Webb’s image shows a region containing approximately 50 young stars, all of them similar in mass to the Sun, or smaller. The darkest areas are the densest, where thick dust cocoons still-forming stars. The huge bipolar jets of molecular hydrogen occur when a star first bursts through its natal envelope of cosmic dust, shooting out a pair of opposing jets into space like a newborn first stretching her arms out into the world. In contrast, the star S1 has carved out a glowing cave of dust in the lower half of the image. It is the only star in the image that is significantly more massive than the Sun.

The pinhead dots of light from a myriad of stars in the NGC 5068 galaxy

A Webb image from last month is that of part of the NGC 5068 galaxy.

NASA says that it hopes the data being gathered of galaxies like NGC 5068 can help to "kick-start" major scientific advances, "though what those might be remains a mystery".

How many stars are there in the universe? The answer is an absolutely astounding number. There are approximately 200 billion trillion stars in the universe. Or, to put it another way, 200 sextillion. That's 200,000,000,000,000,000,000,000! (Source: Astronomy.com)

Ethan Siegel in Forbes explored another instance of massive numbers. He states that in the estimates of how many galaxies there are in the observable universe there is a huge discrepancy between the lower limit of 176 billion derived by a Hubble eXtreme Deep Field image of a limited area and the estimates produced by simulations for the observable universe based on these three components:

the ingredients that make up the Universe,

the right initial conditions that reflect our reality,

and the correct laws of physics that describe nature.

The remarkable answer? With the state of scientific knowledge we have at present, two trillion galaxies should exist within our observable universe, Siegel writes. Two trillion versus 176 billion means that more than 90% of the galaxies within our universe are beyond the detection capabilities of even what has been humanity's greatest observatory. We shall have to wait to see what the Webb craft can teach us of the splendours of the universe.

One thing more from NASA for the number-crunchers:

Our Sun is one of at least 100 billion stars in the Milky Way, a spiral galaxy about 100,000 light-years across. The stars are arranged in a pinwheel pattern with four major arms, and we live in one of them, about two-thirds of the way outward from the center.

Most of the stars in our galaxy are thought to host their own families of planets. 

Ω Leave a comment and, if you like this blog, read the same posts at my Peace and Truth newsletter on Substack, where you can subscribe for free and be notified when a new post is published.

Feed the hungry, shelter the homeless...

The Corporal Works of Mercy are found in the teachings of Jesus and give us a model for how we should treat all others.  They are charitable actions by which we help our neighbors in their bodily needs. They respond to the basic needs of humanity as we journey together through this life. 

They comprise one way of putting faith into action. They are a means of increasing our understanding of how God is among us, so that the poor and needy are more clearly seen as Christ himself as in Matthew 25:31. The seven Corporal Works of Mercy are listed below.  After each work of mercy there are also suggestions and words of advice for living them out in our daily lives.  

Feed the hungry

There are many people in this world who go without food.  When so much of our food goes to waste, consider how good stewardship practices of your own food habits can benefit others who do not have those same resources.

Having delicious food at Thanksgiving or Christmas dinner? Donate to a Thanksgiving or Christmas food drive so everyone can have something to eat.

Research, identify and contribute financially to organizations that serve the hungry.

The next time you make a recipe that can be easily frozen, make a double batch and donate one to your local food pantry or soup kitchen. 

Try not to purchase more food than you are able to eat. If you notice that you end up throwing groceries away each week, purchasing less groceries would eliminate waste and allow you to donate the savings to those in need.

Give drink to the thirsty

Many people locally and afar do not have access to clean water and suffer from the lack of this basic necessity.  We should support the efforts of those working towards greater accessibility of this essential resource.  

Donate to help build wells for water for those in need

Organize a group of children involved on a sports team (e.g. soccer) or a summer camp. Invite them to collect bottled water to distribute at a shelter for families. If parents can be involved, ask them to accompany their children in delivering the water to the families. 

Do the same for youth and young adult groups.

Make an effort not to waste water. Remembering to turn off the water faucet when you are brushing your teeth or washing dishes can help, especially in regions suffering from drought.

Shelter the homeless

There are many circumstances that could lead to someone becoming a person without a home.  Community and political action to respond to the upsurge in homelessness in many places needs our contribution of time and talent. Those without homes can discover through us the love of Jesus, as we, or our representatives, affirm their worth and help in seeking a resolution to the challenges they face.

See if your parish or diocese is involved with a local homeless shelter and volunteer.

Donate time or money to organizations that build homes for those who need shelter.

Many homeless shelters need warm blankets for their beds. If you can knit or sew that would be an extra loving gift.

There are millions of children and families who are on the move, fleeing from war, illness, hunger and impossible living conditions, and searching for peace and safety. Engage parish groups of children, youth, young adults, and families in doing some research on the causes and challenges that these families face to survive.

Seek ways to provide shelter for the homeless locally, regionally, nationally or internationally.

Visit the sick

Those who are sick are often forgotten or avoided.  In spite of their illness, these individuals still have much to offer to those who take the time to visit and comfort them.

Give blood

Spend time volunteering at a nursing home – Get creative and make use of your talents (e.g. sing, read, paint, call Bingo, etc.)!

Take time on a Saturday to stop and visit with an elderly neighbor.

Offer to assist caregivers of chronically sick family members on a one-time or periodic basis. Give caregivers time off from their caregiving responsibilities so they can rest, complete personal chores, or enjoy a relaxing break.

Next time you make a meal that can be easily frozen, make a double batch and give it to a family in your parish who has a sick loved one.

Visit prisoners

People in prison are still people, made in the image and likeness of God.  No matter what someone has done, they deserve to know the love of  God and the power of His word.

See if your parish, or a nearby parish, has a prison ministry and if so, get involved.

Volunteer to help out or donate to charities that give Christmas presents to children whose parents are in prison.

Bury the dead

Funerals give us the opportunity to grieve and show others support during difficult times.  Through our prayers and actions during these times we show our respect for life, which is always a gift from God, and comfort to those who mourn.

Send a card to someone who has recently lost a loved one.  Make your own card and use some of these prayers.

Visit the cemetery and pray for those you have lost.

Spend time planning your own funeral, with a focus on finding our hope in the Resurrection.

Give alms to the poor

Donate money to organizations that have the ability to provide support and services for those in need.  Do research and find organizations that put people in need first, rather than profit. Don't forget to help the people God puts in front of you.

Skip the morning latte and put that money in funds devoted to helping the poor.

Find a charity that is meaningful to you and volunteer your time or donate to it. 

During Lent, or at a specified time suitable for your family, give up eating out at restaurants.  Pack your meal and donate the extra money to charities.

Participate in international charities.

Ω Adapted from a resource prepared by the United States Catholic Bishops. See the original here. 

Ω Leave a comment and, if you like this blog, read the same posts at my Peace and Truth newsletter on Substack, where you can subscribe for free and be notified when a new post is published.

To wonder is to fully enter the living world

Over cities and towns, just like one "That floats on high o'er vales and hills". 

Delightful originality in the bunching and shading. What can you see in the shapes?

It's time to look upward and to enjoy the gift.

Goethe knew it when he exclaimed: “I am here, that I may wonder!” In the same spirit, Hermann Hesse writes:

Wonder is where it starts, and though wonder is also where it ends, this is no futile path. Whether admiring a patch of moss, a crystal, flower, or golden beetle, a sky full of clouds, a sea with the serene, vast sigh of its swells, or a butterfly wing with its arrangement of crystalline ribs, contours, and the vibrant bezel of its edges, the diverse scripts and ornamentations of its markings, and the infinite, sweet, delightfully inspired transitions and shadings of its colors — whenever I experience part of nature, whether with my eyes or another of the five senses, whenever I feel drawn in, enchanted, opening myself momentarily to its existence and epiphanies, that very moment allows me to forget the avaricious, blind world of human need, and rather than thinking or issuing orders, rather than acquiring or exploiting, fighting or organizing, all I do in that moment is “wonder,” like Goethe, and not only does this wonderment establish my brotherhood with him, other poets, and sages, it also makes me a brother to those wondrous things I behold and experience as the living world: butterflies and moths, beetles, clouds, rivers and mountains, because while wandering down the path of wonder, I briefly escape the world of separation and enter the world of unity.

This is how the natural religion  and the “responsibility to awe” which spring from opening our hearts to all that the world is are stepping stones to a deeper understanding of creation as a gift from God, who in it declares a loving presence as part of an eternal relationship. 

One thing more:

Ω My thanks to Maria Popova for inspiring this reflection. Read her piece in full here.  Sign up to enjoy and support her artistic endeavours.

Ω Enjoy also: Canticle of Brother Sun and Sister Moon, Francis of Assisi

Ω Leave a comment and, if you like this blog, read the same posts at my Peace and Truth newsletter on Substack, where you can subscribe for free and be notified when a new post is published.

Critical Theory: The Roots of Wokeness revisited ....... Will this Wokeist era change things?

It's never too late to learn about what we are getting ourselves into. Although, in this case, that statement is not quite accurate because it's not "we ourselves" who are the principals involved but it's a group of philosophers and academics who have picked up a trendy train of thought and run with it in all directions, so harming social institutions and personal lives by trying to impose a whole new culture.

The British-born American journalist and political and social commentator, Andrew Sullivan, is one who has stoutly opposed this trendy attempt to foist a new regime on society, noting the outbreak of a new kind of language in mainstream American media in the mid-2010s: "Here’s a list of the most successful neologisms: non-binary, toxic masculinity, white supremacy, traumatizing, queer, transphobia, whiteness, mansplaining. And here are a few that were rising in frequency in the last decade but only took off in the last few years: triggering, hurtful, gender, stereotypes."

As to the ominous nature of this explosion of new terms, Sullivan writes: "Maybe some of these terms will stick around. But the linguistic changes have occurred so rapidly, and touched so many topics, that it has all the appearance of a top-down re-ordering of language, rather than a slow, organic evolution from below."

Then comes his anguished observation:

We need to understand that all these words have one thing in common: they are products of an esoteric, academic discipline called Critical Theory, which has gained extraordinary popularity in elite education in the past few decades, and appears to have reached a cultural tipping point in the middle of the 2010s.

Most normal people have never heard of this theory—or rather an interlocking web of theories—that is nonetheless changing the very words we speak and write and the very rationale of the institutions integral to liberal democracy.

Sullivan, in his 2020 essay I am quoting from, which is entitled "The Roots of Wokeness", draws on the book Cynical Theories: How Activist Scholarship Made Everything About Race, Gender and Identity. He summarises the book's achievement:

What the book helps the layperson to understand is the evolution of postmodern thought since the 1960s until it became the doctrine of Social Justice today. Beginning as a critique of all grand theories of meaning—from Christianity to Marxism—postmodernism is a project to subvert the intellectual foundations of Western culture. The entire concept of reason—whether the Enlightenment version or even the ancient Socratic understanding—is a myth designed to serve the interests of those in power, and therefore deserves to be undermined and “problematized” whenever possible.

Postmodern theory does so mischievously and irreverently—even as it leaves nothing in reason’s place. The idea of objective truth—even if it is viewed as always somewhat beyond our reach—is abandoned. All we have are narratives, stories, whose meaning is entirely provisional, and can in turn be subverted or problematized.

Interlocking oppressions as key theory

The applied form of Critical Theory, termed Social Justice, taps into its Marxist ancestry in declaring that "truth was a mere function of power, and then in seeing that power used against distinct and oppressed identity groups". Sullivan explains:

The core truth of our condition, this theory argues, is that we live in a system of interlocking oppressions that penalize various identity groups in a society. And all power is zero-sum: you either have power over others or they have power over you. To the extent that men exercise power, for example, women don’t; in so far as straight people wield power, gays don’t; and so on. There is no mutually beneficial, non-zero-sum advancement in this worldview. All power is gained only through some other group’s loss.

It's worth noting that Social Justice activists have been accused of cowardice in the face of corporate power because of their abandonment of the Marxist class struggle. They have done so, as Sullivan observes, "in favor of various oppressed group identities, [....] And in this worldview, individuals only exist at all as a place where these group identities intersect. You have no independent existence outside these power dynamics. [...] An assertion of individuality is, in fact, an attack upon the group and an enabling of oppression."

This brings us to the rationale for Critical Theory's assault by means of a soft totalitarianism on the foundations of Western civilization, in fact, on those of all models of human society that offer the possibility of personal fulfillment, which Wokeism doesn't:

Just as this theory denies the individual, it also denies the universal. There are no universal truths, no objective reality, just narratives that are expressed in discourses and language that reflect one group’s power over another. There is no distinction between objective truth and subjective experience, because the former is an illusion created by the latter. So instead of an argument, you merely have an identity showdown, in which the more oppressed always wins, because that subverts the hierarchy.

These discourses of power, moreover, never end; there is no progress as such, no incremental inclusion of more and more identities into a pluralist, liberal unified project; there is the permanent reality of the oppressors and the oppressed. And all that we can do is constantly expose and eternally resist these power-structures on behalf of the oppressed.

Truth is always and only a function of power. So, for example, science has no claim on objective truth, because science itself is a cultural construct, created out of power differentials, set up by white cis straight males. And the systems of thought that white cis straight men have historically set up—like liberalism itself—perpetuate themselves, and are passed along unwittingly by people who simply respond to the incentives and traditions of thought that make up the entire power system, without being aware of it. There’s no conspiracy: we all act unknowingly in perpetuating systems of thought that oppress other groups. To be “woke” is to be “awake” to these invisible, self-reinforcing discourses, and to seek to dismantle them—in ourselves and others.

As an aside at this point in Sullivan's analysis, it seems more logical to talk about "Wokeism" rather than "Wokeness". The use of "-ism" denotes the existence of a manifesto of ideas and theories lying behind a social movement, whereas "-ness" suggests simply an alertness or concern relating to the subject under discussion. Would anyone use Marxness as a descriptor? The woke world sucks from an ideology affecting all of society. Activists seek a revolution, one affecting institutions but also complete acceptance of their definition of the nature of the human person. That's what's at play here, not a push for a mere take-it-or-leave-it change in social custom. 

Distorted view of diversity

Back to the main exposition. Attention to material reality goes by the board under the "woke" regime, and Sullivan is at his eloquent best in exposing the implications:

There is no such thing as persuasion in this paradigm, because persuasion assumes an equal relationship between two people based on reason. And there is no reason and no equality. There is only power. This is the point of telling students, for example, to “check their privilege” before opening their mouths on campus. You have to measure the power dynamic between you and the other person first of all; you do this by quickly noting your interlocutor’s place in the system of oppression, and your own, before any dialogue can occur. And if your interlocutor is lower down in the matrix of identity, your job is to defer and to listen. That’s partly why diversity at the New York Times, say, has nothing to do with a diversity of ideas.

Within critical theory, the very concept of a “diversity of ideas” is a function of oppression. What matters is a diversity of identities that can all express the same idea: that liberalism is a con-job. Which is why almost every NYT op-ed now and almost every left-leaning magazine reads exactly alike. Language is vital for Critical Theory—not as a means of persuasion but of resistance to oppressive discourses. So take the words I started with. “Non-binary” is a term for someone who subjectively feels neither male nor female. Since there is no objective truth, and since any criticism of that person’s “lived experience” is a form of traumatizing violence, that individual’s feelings are the actual fact. To subject such an idea to, say, the scrutiny of science is therefore a denial of that person’s humanity and existence.

To inquire what it means to “feel like a man”, is also unacceptable. An oppressed person’s word is always the last one. To question this reality, even to ask questions about it, is a form of oppression itself. In the rhetoric of Social Justice, it is a form of linguistic violence. Whereas using the term non-binary is a form of resistance to cis heteronormativity. One is evil; the other good.

Becoming “woke” to these power dynamics alters your perspective of reality. And so our unprecedentedly multicultural, and multiracial democracy is now described as a mere front for “white supremacy.” This is the reality of our world, the critical theorists argue, even if we cannot see it. A gay person is not an individual who makes her own mind up about the world and can have any politics or religion she wants; she is “queer,” part of an identity that interrogates and subverts heteronormativity.

A man explaining something is actually “mansplaining” it—because his authority is entirely wrapped up in his toxic identity. Questioning whether a trans woman is entirely interchangeable with a woman—or bringing up biology to distinguish between men and women—is not a mode of inquiry. It is itself a form of “transphobia”, of fear and loathing of an entire group of people and a desire to exterminate them. It’s an assault.

No respect for personal agency

Sullivan's essay is rich with ideas that have been borne out by events since he wrote it. The next quotation from it is historically pertinent: 

 For me, these theorists do something less forgivable than abuse the English language. They claim that their worldview is the only way to advance social progress, especially the rights of minorities, and that liberalism fails to do so. This, it seems to me, is profoundly untrue. A moral giant like [Black activist and politician] John Lewis advanced this country not by intimidation, or re-ordering the language, or seeing the advancement of black people as some kind of reversal for white people. He engaged the liberal system with nonviolence and persuasion, he emphasized the unifying force of love and forgiveness, he saw Black people as having agency utterly independent of white people, and changed America with that fundamentally liberal perspective.

The gay rights movement, the most successful of the 21st century, succeeded in the past through showing what straights and gays have in common, rather than seeing the two as in a zero-sum conflict, resolved by prosecuting homophobia or “queering” heterosexuality. The women’s rights movement has transformed the role of women in society in the past without demonizing all men, or seeing misogyny as somehow embedded in “white supremacy”. As we have just seen, civil rights protections for transgender people—just decided by a conservative Supreme Court—have been achieved not by seeing people as groups in constant warfare, but by seeing the dignity of the unique individual in pursuing their own happiness without the obstacle of prejudice.

Though the United States is enveloped in the most toxic display of Wokeism, this cult-like ideology has spread among the educated elite of most WEIRD countries, and the rest of the world is being ravaged  by the aggressive cultural colonialization of institutions under the hegemony of the American academic and political system. 

Moreover, though it's common to see now the fightback conducted by women, parents, consumers and political leaders, those who occupy the commanding heights of Western cultural and corporate entities will not give up lightly on their crusade. We can expect the soft totalitarianism of Wokeism to stiffen as an act of self-preservation.

Ω For those with access to Andrew Sullivan's blog on Substack, see his essay here. 

Ω Leave a comment and, if you like this blog, read the same posts at my Peace and Truth newsletter on Substack, where you can subscribe for free and be notified when a new post is published.