The notion that Western civilisation proclaims its superiority while simultaneously confessing its inferiority, is a striking paradox that defines much of modern geopolitics. On one hand, Western powers project an image of moral and ideological dominance, intervening in global affairs to reshape other societies in their image. On the other, Western elites foster a domestic narrative of self-abasement, portraying their own populations as ethically deficient and obligated to atone through open borders, diversity mandates, and self-sacrificial policies. This apparent incoherence, arrogant foreign policy paired with self-loathing domestic rhetoric, has left many questioning the motivations of the Western leadership class.
As I see it, the elites' promotion of "wokeness" is a strategic tool to elevate themselves to a morally superior status, distinct from both their own populations and the rest of the world. However, this stance is not only discriminatory and inconsistent but also serves a darker, spiritual agenda that ultimately betrays even the elites themselves.
Western foreign policy exudes a sense of supremacy. From military interventions to cultural exports, the West often acts as if its ideology, liberal democracy, human rights, and market-driven values, is universally superior. Other nations are deemed morally inferior if they deviate from this model, justifying sanctions, regime change, or outright war to enforce compliance. This external rhetoric assumes a civilisational high ground, positioning the West as the judge of global morality.
Yet, domestically, the narrative flips. Western populations are bombarded with messages of guilt and inferiority. Through politics, media, education, and corporate initiatives, the native citizens of Western nations are portrayed as inherently flawed, tainted by historical sins like colonialism or systemic oppression. This internal rhetoric demands atonement through policies like unrestricted immigration, preferential treatment for non-Western groups, and the suppression of traditional values. The native population is expected to sacrifice resources, cultural identity, and even personal freedoms to support those deemed morally superior by virtue of their non-Western status.
This contradiction, global arrogance versus domestic self-abasement, creates a bizarrely conflicted existence for Western leaders. They jet-set across the globe, wielding power with a sense of entitlement, while preaching humility and self-denial at home. The question is: how can such incoherence be sustained?
The key to unravelling this paradox lies in the identity of the "we" in Western discourse. The Western leadership class, elites in politics, finance, media, and academia, see themselves as a distinct, morally superior caste, separate from both their own populations and the rest of the world. Their promotion of "wokeness" (a shorthand for progressive ideologies emphasising diversity, equity, and inclusion), is a deliberate strategy to cement this superiority.
Wokeness allows elites to claim the moral high ground by championing causes like social justice, environmentalism, and global equity. They position themselves as enlightened stewards, uniquely capable of rectifying the world's wrongs. By condemning their own societies as racist, patriarchal, or environmentally destructive, they distance themselves from the "tainted" masses, elevating their own status as moral judges. This self-elevation justifies their interventions abroad, imposing "superior" Western values on other nations, and their domestic policies, which prioritise non-Western groups over native populations.
However, this stance is deeply discriminatory and inconsistent. Wokeness purports to champion equality, yet it creates a hierarchy where elites reign supreme, non-Western groups are fetishised as morally pure, and native Western populations are relegated to the bottom, burdened with guilt and obligation. For example, policies promoting unrestricted immigration often demand that native citizens subsidise newcomers' housing, healthcare, and education, even as public services strain and local communities suffer. This is not equality but a discriminatory transfer of resources, rooted in the assumption that Westerners owe a debt to the world, a debt the elites conveniently exempt themselves from paying.
The inconsistency is stark in the elites' lifestyles. While preaching austerity, diversity, or environmental sacrifice to the masses, they indulge in private jets, multiple residences, and extravagant consumption. They impose regulations, like carbon taxes or housing restrictions, that burden ordinary citizens but leave their own wealth and mobility untouched. This double standard reveals wokeness as a performative tool, not a genuine moral framework. It's a mechanism for elites to justify their power, wealth, and control while cloaking their actions in altruistic rhetoric.
At the material level, the elites' behaviour is coherent when viewed as a quest for global dominance. By promoting wokeness, they create a narrative that legitimises their authority over both foreign and domestic populations. Abroad, they destabilise rival nations through cultural and economic influence, framing their interventions as moral imperatives. At home, they weaken national cohesion by fostering division and guilt, ensuring that the masses remain too fragmented to challenge their rule. Policies like mass immigration or "equity" mandates erode traditional structures, family, community, nation, that might resist elite control.
The elites' conviction of their own superiority is reinforced by their access to vast resources, secret intelligence, and global networks. From their lofty vantage point, they believe they see "farther and deeper" than anyone else, justifying their right to remake the world. They view themselves as hard-nosed realists, willing to make tough choices, like economic disruption or cultural upheaval, for the "greater good." Yet this good is defined by their own ideology, which conveniently aligns with their personal enrichment and power.
The apparent incoherence of wokeness, its simultaneous arrogance and self-abasement, makes sense when viewed through a spiritual lens. The elites, despite their self-perceived superiority, are pawns in a larger scheme driven by malevolent spiritual forces. These forces, motivated by hatred of divine creation, seek the destruction of humanity and the earth itself. The elites' obsession with global control, their willingness to sacrifice entire populations, and their reliance on deception and coercion align with this demonic agenda.
Wokeness, in this view, is a tool to sow discord, despair, and moral confusion. By promoting ideologies that pit groups against each other, native vs. immigrant, Western vs. non-Western, elite vs. masses, the elites feed a cycle of resentment and suffering that serves these spiritual entities. The "snake-eyes" of the leadership class, their cold, calculating demeanour, reflects their entanglement in this destructive plan. Yet, they are dupes. The demonic forces they serve have no loyalty to them, and the global destruction they enable will ultimately consume them and their descendants as well. Unlike humans, theseentities require neither people nor the planet, thriving instead on the chaos and pain they generate.
From a nationalist perspective, the elites' use of wokeness is a betrayal of the nation-state and its people. Nations are built on shared history, culture, and values, yet the elites undermine these foundations by choosing global agendas and non-Western groups over their own citizens. The discriminatory nature of wokeness, elevating some groups while vilifying others, erodes the social contract that binds a nation together. Policies that demand native populations sacrifice for outsiders, while elites enjoy unchecked privilege, are not just inconsistent but an affront to national sovereignty.
A nationalist would argue that the nation-state should prioritise its own people, preserving cultural cohesion and economic stability. The elites' jet-setting, globalist lifestyle, detached from the struggles of ordinary citizens, reflects a disdain for the nation they claim to lead. Their promotion of wokeness as a moral cudgel is not about justice but about consolidating power, weakening national identity to make way for a homogenised, controllable global New World Order.
In short, the paradox of Western civilization's simultaneous claims of superiority and inferiority is resolved when we see wokeness as a tool of elite self-elevation. By portraying themselves as morally superior, Western leaders justify their global interventions and domestic control, discriminating against their own populations while indulging in personal extravagance. This inconsistency is not a flaw but a feature, designed to entrench their power. Yet, at a deeper level, their actions serve a demonic agenda that seeks humanity's destruction, including their own. From anationalist view, this betrayal of nation and people demands resistance, a return to values of sovereignty, cohesion, and self-reliance. The elites may see themselves as masters of the world, but their pursuit of a "good" world through wokeness leads only to chaos, revealing them as both perpetrators and victims of a far darker plan.
https://charltonteaching.blogspot.com/2025/07/is-it-ultimately-incoherent-when.html