Last we checked, apartheid was an odious thing relegated to the past. But it looks like South Africa's system of racial segregation is making a whiz-bang comeback—not in Johannesburg, but in Toronto.

Last week, the Toronto Sun reported that City of Toronto officials are taking applications for the city’s new "black-mandated" shelter. Translation: everyone from would-be employees to potential homeless clients could very well be excluded from such a shelter based on race.

Welcome to New Apartheid. Looks about as savoury as New Coke.

Naturally, City Hall has decreed that experience in running a shelter is not a requirement for those submitting applications. Which is to say, if you brandish the right identity politics, you're in like Flynn. Bye-bye meritocracy, it was nice knowing you.

As for the ostensible policy reason behind such a race-based shelter, the Sun reports that the city's shelter and support services division said the new shelter will help make Toronto's services "reflective of the diversity of the city." Diversity? Isn't a shelter that excludes all races except one the very opposite of diversity?

But here's where it gets really kooky: this initiative is led by a majority of paid staff and board members who "self-identify as black or are of African descent."

Did you catch that? They are recruiting people who are not necessarily black but rather self-identify as black.

But what does that mean exactly? We think it means that anyone of any race can qualify as a black man, as long as they simply say they're a black man.

Then again, that didn't work out so well for Rachel Dolezal, the former director of the NAACP chapter in Spokane, Wash.

Dolezal is a white woman who has long self-identified as a black woman. This wasn't a goof, nor was it meant to be mean-spirited. Dolezal was genuinely enamoured with black culture and wanted to be part of it. But she was pilloried and even bullied in both the social media and media classic realms for her false pronouncements that she was black.

At this point, can someone kindly explain the rules to me when it comes to "self-identification"? Which is to say, why is it A-OK for a 300-lb, bearded Bubba to self-identify as a woman in order to play female sports or invade a female shelter? Why are such gender-bending grifters lauded by the left? "Trans rights matter! Trans women are real women!" Right?

Yet, if one identifies as a member of a different race? Uh-oh. See that object on the horizon? That's a cancel culture asteroid heading your way. Your extinction event awaits. Just ask Rachel Dolezal.

But by golly, it's all so confusing, isn't it?

And consider the other caveat that the City of Toronto requires for employment or residency at the shelter, needing to be of "African descent."

Obviously, the brainiacs at City Hall never thought this one through. Case in point: it would appear that someone who is not black but was born in Africa would qualify to work at or reside at this proposed shelter. Oops.

It's all so fascinating. Decades ago, the Left used to be race-obsessed for all the right reasons, be it advancing civil rights for minorities or bringing about the end of the odious system of apartheid through the original BDS movement of boycott, divestment, and sanctions.

These days, the Left trots out the BDS treatment for Israel—you know, the only true democracy in the Middle East. Meanwhile, on the home front, the loony Left is all about revitalizing apartheid. That's right: suddenly, discrimination is back in vogue due to the unholy trinity of diversity, equity, and inclusion.

It's gross. It's madness.

Whenever this shelter gets up and running, it will prove most fascinating to see how this travesty plays out. Which is to say, on a frigid winter day, will the people running such a racist shelter actually turn away a freezing and hungry homeless individual because that person is, say, Asian or Indigenous? Really?

Talk about compassion.