{"id":104270,"date":"2026-08-15T06:00:52","date_gmt":"2026-08-15T10:00:52","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/?p=104270"},"modified":"2026-08-14T21:03:02","modified_gmt":"2026-08-15T01:03:02","slug":"forestalling-collapse","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/2026\/08\/15\/forestalling-collapse\/","title":{"rendered":"“Forestalling collapse is simple: all we need do is reinstate meritocracy within institutions”"},"content":{"rendered":"

John Carter<\/a> discusses the ever-more-concerning collapse in basic competence in western societies, which left unchecked will absolutely lead to civilizational collapse due to the vastly complex interconnection of so many systems that we all depend on day and night:<\/p>\n

Helen Andrews recently wrote an essay for Compact Magazine<\/em>, titled The Racial Crossroads<\/em><\/a>, which has been making waves for daring to use the verboten descriptor “race communism” for the acrimonious racial spoils system that has replaced meritocracy throughout the dying West. It’s very good. You should read it.<\/p>\n

Personally, I prefer the more descriptive “gay race communism”. The progress pride flag is inseparable from the clenched Marxist fist of Black Lives Matter in regime iconography. Moreover, gay race communism is a deliberate subversion of the left’s own “fully automated luxury gay space communism” meme.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>

There are zero communists who actually look like this, gay or otherwise.<\/em><\/p><\/div>\n

To be fair, Andrews introduces the concept as “gay race communism”, and even directly acknowledges its coinage by Twitter anon Drukpa Kunley. It wasn’t that long ago that conservative popularizers laundered ideas emerging from the anonosphere without attribution, as a means of hiding their origin and making themselves look more original, and Helen deserves credit for not doing this. Also to be fair, given the focus of Andrews’ piece, adding the “gay” to “race communism” could be seen as an unnecessarily inflammatory complication. It isn’t, but we’ll get to that in due time.<\/p>\n

Andrews spends the first half of her essay detailing how the regulatory framework built by the Civil Rights Act<\/em> created the cultural conditions for the rise of wokeness, affirmative action, and DEI initiatives. The official explanation given for anti-discrimination laws was that they were well-intended correctives to the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow. Affirmative action was to be an explicitly temporary measure to give American blacks a helping hand, with the understanding that \u2013 after a decade or at most a generation of assistance \u2013 they would no longer need a thumb on the scale. Once racism was defeated, we could all live in utopian colour-blind race-neutral Star Trek<\/em> liberalism, judging one another by the content of our individual characters and no more concerned by the phenotypic differences of ancestral population groups than we are by sartorial quirks. Kumbayah and such. This isn’t an original argument: the same points have been made by Christopher Caldwell in his 2021 book The Age of Entitlement<\/em>, and of course most directly by Richard Hanania in his 2023 book The Origins of Woke<\/em> (whom Andrews doesn’t mention, possibly because everyone hates Hanania now).<\/p>\n

The central point of Andrews’ essay is the following:<\/p>\n