Oh Jesus, as if it matters. Who cares whether TV Christmas commercials feature Muslims, gays, transsexual cripples, rutting donkeys, or anything else for that matter? No one’s trying to insult Christians, upset conservatives or ruin all the yuletide fun. Get over it. Move on.
Social media has been full of this kind of thing since the big stores launched their festive ads, featuring images seemingly designed to infuriate the reactionary bigots of the progressive imagination. And yes, it’s ridiculous that such a trifling matter should provoke so much outrage, but it’s also hard to avoid the suspicion that this is precisely the point.
When you insert your agenda somewhere conspicuous yet trivial, any objection to it looks unavoidably petty. Even non-ideologues will spring to the defence of your propaganda rather than side with fulminating racists. One sneaky attack follows another, and eventually civilisation suffers death by a thousand cuts.
Admittedly, Christmas ads aren’t the ground on which I’d choose to make a stand against the progressive tide, but I didn't pick this fight. If this is how it has to go down, so be it. Allow me, then, to explain for the benefit of the eye-rolling liberals sighing “big deal” why these ads are ‘problematic’.
I’m sure a few people were miffed by the lack of obvious Christian imagery amid the multi-ethnic commercial showcase (Tesco’s advert featured a royal flush of Muslims, Sikhs and gays), but that’s not the real issue here, because religion was hoovered out of large parts of Christmas a long time ago. Nor is that people are appalled at the mere sight of tinsel-draped foreigners and homosexuals, despite what the BBC and the Guardian may think. It’s the pushers of identity politics that are the problem, not the groups they are pushing.
We are frequently told that identity groups should not be criticised, disrespected, imitated, borrowed from, or held to any standards other than their own. We should adjust our way of life to accommodate theirs, and embrace their customs and values as delightful additions to the patchwork of British life. Then we should celebrate the differences between these disparate factions, show them boundless tolerance, and all live happily ever after.
Trouble is, this hands-off approach to group relations is a one-way street. Whereas the majority is expected to keep its nose out of minority affairs, minorities are invited to put their stamp on the dominant culture, and any attempt by the majority to have its own thing is met with howls of protest.
Which isn’t to say that the opposite should be true and the majority should be screwing with minority interests. If Hindus want to celebrate Diwali and Muslims want to celebrate Eid, who is anyone else to meddle? No one would dream of trying to ‘whiten’ their celebrations, but as long as there are double standards in this regard, many will object to being the only ones whose traditions should be done over in the name of inclusiveness - and given the stealth tactics used by the Left, they will suspect that minorities are being used as a weapon against the majority.
A great many people understand that you can’t go down this multiculti identity group route without compromising a country’s values and customs, and changing its look and feel. And they happen to like how their country looks and feels - or how it used to, anyway - and not because they're all haters and imperialists. If minorities should be proud of their identity and their heritage, why the hell shouldn’t the majority? They were never consulted on the changes that have been forced on them, so they’re naturally aggrieved at what has come to pass, and are protective of those traditions that haven't yet fallen to the armies of progress and diversity.
With every victory these armies claim, the guardians of tradition become increasingly sensitive to the appearance of progressive mascots in their midst, seeing them as precursors to another full-scale assault. And they're right to be wary. This, after all, is a society in which a teacher can be suspended for ‘misgendering’ a pupil, citizens who fight with ISIS are rewarded with council houses, and the authorities turn a blind eye to Muslim child-abusers from a fear of seeming racist. Political correctness is not just the stuff of conservative fever dreams; it’s real and it actively works against traditional culture. Little wonder, then, that some want to preserve those areas of life still largely untouched by progressive dogma.
“Yeah, but this isn’t political correctness,” the pushers of PC assure us. “This is just about love and tolerance, and definitely won’t lead to anything else.” To which, most sane people say “pull the other one”. They know how these people work and have seen enough supposedly innocent gestures mutate into full-blown leftist face-slaps not to be fooled again.
As David Cole observes, “Social engineering of the type the left desires is accomplished by a very simple formula. Advance one step, and then promise that this step will not in any way lead to the next step. Wait a brief amount of time, and then advance to the next step, explaining that it’s only logical now that the previous step has become so widely accepted. Simple rule: Swear there’ll be no progression, and then progress.”
Most people get this, so even if the latest suspicious act is as innocent as its protagonists claim, they’ve pulled this shit too often to deserve the benefit of the doubt. Chances are it’s another sly backdoor effort to undermine normalcy and shaft the status quo.
Christmas is important because it’s about family and tradition - things that get up the nose of leftists and which they routinely attack. It’s a touchstone for those who aren’t exactly enamoured with the direction our country has taken; a beleaguered redoubt in a hostile land of screeching SJWs, scheming Marxists and resentful wreckers. So when progressives start messing with it, the backlash they receive is not, as it may first appear, an attack on the victim groups being showcased; it’s a rebuke to the agitators pulling their strings.