There's a particular hatred the far-left in Canada holds for Rex Murphy. It's mostly because he occupies a position in the Canadian media -- a contributor for the CBC and host of Cross Country Checkup -- that suggests to them that he should be one of them. But he is unequivocally not one of them.
This becomes most evident whenever he takes aim at one of the far-left's sacred cattle. When he does so a single sentence uttered by Murphy can leave the far-left quivering in outrage.
Such was apparently the case when Murphy took aim at one of the far-left's most recent sacred cattle: the so-called "white privilege" theory. (It doesn't really measure up as a theory, but I've already been over that.) That provoked sputtering outrage from David Bernans of the Montreal Media Coop. In the course of his diatribe, Bernans manages to prove everything Murphy says about the promoters of "white privilege" "theory" to be absolutely correct.
"Rex Murphy offers us this pearl of wisdom in his latest National Post column:
'It is bitterly ironic that the anti-racist message has been reduced to this: You have all that you have only because you have white skin.'
No Rex. You have all that you have because of your truly unparalleled talents as an apologist for the wealthy and powerful. No person of any race or gender can suck up to powerful interests with as much self-righteousness and ostentatious erudition as you. You are a sycophant extraordinaire.
You have no qualms with knowingly misrepresenting the white privilege thesis in your hard-won column at the National Post. It's true Rex, you cannot explain every single advantage that every white person has only by reference to white privilege. Therefore, white privilege does not exist. Case closed. That must really put the National Post editorial board and other predominantly white institutions at ease."
This particular outburst left me with a new appreciation for much earlier in Murphy's column, when he wrote the following:
"For if there is one movement, that by its humourlessness, its obsessive mania and its blindness to its failings, chokes on its own goals, it is the so-called anti-racism movement."
Because he couldn't handle Murphy espousing on the many, many shortcomings of "white privilege" "theory" peddling "anti-racists" (each of these terms framed separately because they are all separately absurd) Bernans finishes his "rebuttal" with a racially-charged remark.
That shouldn't surprise anyone, though: it's what new-age racists like David Bernans do.