Shiloh Hendrix and the Defiance of the New, Liberal Social Order

Most readers of this publication are hopefully well aware of the important sociological concept known as defining deviancy down. This concept posits that if deviant, marginal behavior is not properly sanctioned by stigmatization and other negative sanctions, including, in some instances, civil and even criminal liability, society loses its ability to regard that behavior as deviant. Over time such behavior becomes mainstream, and what was more deviant, at times even unthinkable, then becomes deviant, but nonetheless exhibited on the fringes of behavior in that society. This is complemented by two important phenomena. The first is the Durkheim Constant, which posits that every society has a fixed quotient of deviant behavior. This means an Amish community or Quaker settlement on one hand and Sodom and Gomorrah or modern San Francisco will have vastly different norms and mores, but the quotient of behavior each society regards as deviant will be the same.

This is related to the second phenomenon, one which Robert Bork set forth at the end of the introduction to Slouching Towards Gomorrah; as deviancy is defined ever further down, so that few social taboos and restraints are left as fringe or deviant, formerly normal behavior then becomes deviant. This is exhibited in modern American society and European society as an occupied set of vassal states under the American empire in a wide range of circumstances. Opposition to miscegenation used to be mainstream, just as being in favor of segregation was. Beyond that, disapproval of a wide range of new phenomena in the modern world is also met with increasing stigma, including aversion to transracial adoption and opposition to so-called gay marriage. As the tables have turned with the cultural revolution and march through the institutions, these are now regarded as socially deviant, as utterances not fit for polite society. What society regards as profane, unacceptable speech has shifted as well. “Fuck” used to be the worst word a person could utter, and it would have been unthinkable for citizens to go about in public with attire featuring that word or other profanity. While such swear words are still censored on the increasingly arcane medium of broadcast television, most hardly bat an eye. If someone utters the word “n*gger,” however, it can be a national scandal, replete with social media witch hunts. The same applies to other racial epithets. Even the word “faggot” is retaining a similar tinge of the forbidden.

These preambles help explain the reaction to the matter concerning Shiloh Hendrix. For those unaware, Hendrix is a 36-year-old woman and mother in Rochester, Minnesota. She was at a local park when an incident with a black child compelled a Somali immigrant, Sharmake Beyle Omaro,¹ to start filming. He confronted her for calling the child a “n*gger.” Before the clip ends, she flips off the accuser, sticks her tongue out, and repeats the epithet several times. She also explained that she caught the black child stealing from a bag with various accoutrements for her son, and then states this is why she used the epithet and has no remorse or regret for doing so. The outrage mob has named her, and launched its usual mob tactics to ruin her life. Up to that point, it was very similar to the Amy Cooper matter, except the latter never uttered epithets and never really did anything that ought to contravene liberal orthodoxy.

This instance however has turned out quite differently. Hendrix set up a GiveSendGo crowdfunding campaign, with the first goal set around something like $20,000. At the time of this writing, the campaign is just over $300,000 with a goal of a cool one million. Figures in the dissident right are promoting this, and so far are doing so with remarkable success. How ever much one objects to profanity or lack of decorum and manners, this phenomenon shows a vanguard, dynamic opposition to the left that seeks to take initiative from the left. If not taking away the left’s ability to set the terms, to set what is socially acceptable and what is not only unacceptable but outrageous, these efforts are at least disrupting the left’s initiative in setting the terms for discourse and the rules of engagement, and are doing so in significant, important ways. This reaction removes or at least diminishes the incident for the sort of wokescold smartphone hunting that has become a social phenomenon, whereby minorities and “good,” leftie whites chomp at the bit to record the newest outrage, post it on the internet, then watch the fun in destroying the lives of people they disagree with, or even with people who simply do not abide by their established orthodoxies to their satisfaction (as happened in the Amy Cooper, Central Park bird watching fiasco).

For decades, weak, pathetic conservatives, who have done little to nothing to stop the inexorable march of modern leftism, have spent an exorbitant amount of time and space paying lip service to liberal orthodoxies, replete with disclaimers against racism, the absurd and unconvincing proposition that conservative policies more closely align with the teachings of Martin Luther King, Jr, that the democrats are the real racists, so on and so forth, ad nauseum. The response to the Shiloh Hendrix affair marks an abrupt departure from this losing tactic, as it has unleashed a devastating counterattack that neutralizes the left’s bid to destroy this woman’s life for daring to defy leftist orthodoxies.

The left, which has exhibited a far superior understanding of power and the nature of moral conviction, understands the importance of the moment, which explains why there is a growing campaign urging GiveSendGo to shut down the campaign. The left understands what it means to redefine deviancy as it has been defined the furthest down possible, and is scrambling to ensure that such outbursts continue to incur very negative sanctions and stigma. Despite whatever misgivings one may have about Hendrix and her crude, vulgar demeanor, whether it is that a woman like Hendrix deserves a million dollars (or $300,000 at the time of writing), or objections about aggressive hand and arm tattoos, or disapproval of a mother swearing profusely in front of her son, a small child, it is imperative that the left fail in their effort to neutralize this counter attack. This is a critical first step in neutralizing a key phenomenon described in the introduction to this essay, that as society defines deviancy ever further down, formerly mainstream or acceptable behaviors and positions then become deviant. Particularly in the wake of the collective resentment if not ancient hatred that blacks, on the whole, exhibit towards whites, this is imperative. Such an ancient hatred is not only exhibited in the breathtaking vitriol and animus that many racial minorities have expressed for Hendrix, but in a wide range of matters bound up in racial animosity, from the Kaylee Gain Maurnice Declue matter², the murder of Austin Metcalf at the hands of Carmelo Anthony, and even black solidarity for Orenthal Simpson during his murder trial three decades ago, whereby blacks, on the whole, celebrated his acquittal despite most conceding he was guilty.

How ever this unfolds, real opposition to the left must continue to disrupt the left’s ability to set the terms of discourse, establish the rules of engagement, and dictate inverse social standards where the obscene, vile, and absurd are embraced and what used to be every-day, normal inclinations are deterred from being uttered in public. While it is true that spewing profanity and even epithets was not acceptable behavior before 1960, everyone knows that this is really about Hendrix’s understandable aversion to blacks collectively as well as the righteous resentment of being confronted by a Somali immigrant who has no right to be there. This surprising, dynamic counterstroke disincentivizes the social media witch hunt craze that uses viral videos to wage personal destruction against those the left disfavors. This is what this reaction to Shiloh Hendrix is about. And if her supporters are able to carry through with momentum, they will have degraded the left’s ability to wage witch hunts and decide what is socially acceptable and what constitutes a social pariah. Vorwärts, voran!

Those who enjoyed this essay might find “A Close Examination of "That's Racist" and Other Invectives” also insightful.

PLEASE NOTE: Readers who appreciate the insight and perspective set forth in this essay are urged to consider offering a paid subscription or even a founding member subscription, provided such expenditures are not unduly burdensome. Readers who enjoyed this article and found it informative and insightful are also encouraged to signify their favor for this and other writings by clicking on the “like emoji,” as well as sharing this and other articles to those who would find this and other essays and articles interesting, insightful, or provocative.

Follow Richard Parker on twitter (or X if one prefers) under the handle (@)astheravencalls. Delete the parentheses, which were added to prevent interference with Substack’s own internal handle system.

1. As the link demonstrates, this individual was charged with raping a 16 year-old. Those charges were dismissed, however.

2. For those unaware, this matter concerns a black juvenile, Maurnice DeClue, who engaged in a school yard fight with a white adversary, Kaylee Gain. Declue, weighing perhaps twice as much as her adversary, quickly overpowered the white girl. She then straddled her, grabbed her face and repeatedly bashed the back of the girl’s skull against the pavement. The video is shocking in its violence, even for those who have seen some of the worst things the Internet has to offer. DeClue’s family as well as large contingents of black individuals and organs of the so-called “black community’ defended Maurnice, sating she “dindu nuffin.” Despite what is clearly attempted murder, Maurnice DeClue received six months probation. Coverage of this result and the current state of Gain has been suppressed by mainstream media.