It was a cavalcade of cancel culture, featuring a Who’s Who of Wakefield’s woke elite at their virtue signaling best.

Last week’s online “public forum” on the Wakefield Warrior logo was utterly predictable in its participation and tenor.

In fact, I did predict it.

In a column last January, I said, “There will be an orchestrated, coordinated campaign of emails, letters, texts and phone calls designed to give the impression of an avalanche of support for eliminating the Warrior logo.”

And that’s exactly what you saw at last week’s forum.

If you are a logo supporter and came away from it feeling depressed, it’s because you went in trusting that it was on the level, when all along the whole objective was run up the score and allow the School Committee to say, “We had a public forum and the overwhelming majority spoke in favor of changing the logo.”

What you saw last Thursday was a well-choreographed piece of performance art designed to overwhelm and discourage anyone who believes the Wakefield Warrior logo is a local tradition worth preserving.

Trust me. All those people coming together to denounce the logo was not just a happy coincidence. It was neither spontaneous nor reflective of true public sentiment. It was an organized attempt to pummel you into submission.

Let’s look at the affiliations of the anti-logo speakers.

There were three members of the Wakefield Human Rights Commission. Three more were members of the anti-logo Youth Council, along with the mother of one of the Youth Council members. There was a member of the Environmental Sustainability Committee as well as a member of “Sustainable Wakefield.” The local Unitarian minister spoke, as well as a former School Committee member who opposes the logo. Two women who spoke against the logo are hosting an event at the library this month called “Conversations About Whiteness.”

All of them represent links in the chain of Wakefield’s woke network. They know each other. They talk. Their convergence on last week’s forum didn’t just happen out of the blue.

As usual, they overplayed their hand. They could have presented a number of anti-logo speakers just large enough to be convincing but not so many that it looked obviously staged. But they couldn’t help themselves. In trying to make it appear that everyone in town hates the logo, they gave away the game.

So, why didn’t the pro-logo people do the same thing and organize their own parade of speakers?

My guess is that people who favor preserving tradition tend to think and act more independently and less communally. They’re not activists by nature, like, say, members of the Human Rights Commission or the various environmental groups who spoke last week. The pro-logo people were content to be left alone to appreciate their town’s heritage. They didn’t go looking for this fight.

In fact, most agree that there are more pressing matters than changing a logo that school officials should be focused on right now. Maybe someone should tell the School Committee, who initiated this at the behest of the Youth Council. They are jointly responsible for this “monumental distraction,” to coin a phrase.

Another reason for last week’s lopsided forum was technology. Older people, retired people, and ordinary people who work with their hands are not familiar with Zoom technology. But guess who is very comfortable with Zoom? Younger people and those who serve on elite boards and committees, like members of the Human Rights Commission, the Youth Council and various environmental committees.

If you doubt that technology was an impediment to participation, just watch the forum. Even the Zoom-savvy speakers were having trouble. There were lengthy delays before each speaker could be heard. Forum moderator Bill Carroll confessed that he hosted the Zoom forum from the WCAT studio instead of from home because he knew he’d need the staff’s technical help.

How many other people were in the same boat? How many didn’t participate because they couldn’t figure out how?

Which brings us to the timing of this move to eliminate the logo. Why now, in the middle of a pandemic, when the disruption of normal lines of communication favors certain demographics? The answer is contained in the question.

Another reason for doing it right now is because they currently have the votes on the School Committee to get rid of the logo. That’s why they’re afraid to wait until after the April 27 Town Election. The voters might elect people who will actually represent their interests.

Up next, we have the Native American “panel” event on March 17. (That’s St. Patrick’s Day, speaking of cultural insensitivity.) This event is being organized by members of the School Committee with the help of ultra-woke State Senator Jason Lewis, who is currently pushing legislation to cancel the Native American off the state seal and the state flag.

How do you suppose that event is going to go?

These events are billed as “educational.” And for sure, there are lessons to be learned from these affairs. The most important take-away is that the anti-logo forces may not be many in number but they are highly-organized, very determined and they don’t let up.

Just as they marshaled their troops to last week’s forum, they will make sure their supporters are registered and show up to vote in the Town Election on April 27, when the Warrior logo question will be on the ballot.

Those who support the Warrior logo are going to have to do the same and more if there’s going to be any hope of saving it.
—
[This column originally appeared in the March 4, 2021 Wakefield Daily Item.]