Skip to main content

Racism

Racism, in one aspect, is morality itself, which is to say loyalty, care, devotion to a particular community, one you can identify with most as it is the most like you.

This is the 'positive side' of racism, which Communists seek to destroy for white people only; all other groups are allowed to have it.

There is the 'negative side' of racism though.

Exclusion is not the 'negative side' and not wrong. You can't have freedom of association without without exclusion, nor the positive side of racism. Apartheid and Jim Crow were not wrong, as no one was forcing blacks to stay near whites and 'access to white people' is not a right or in the communal interest of white people.

The only truly 'negative side' of racism is when one group justifies or excuses an act of unnecessary brutality by claiming the victim is less than human. Torture, such as the treatment of Australian POWs by the Japanese, would fall into this category.

Is this 'negative side' really 'racism' though, or just evil? When a Communist attacks a patriot while de-humanising them, calling them a 'dog', are they being 'politicist'? There is no such word - I just made it up. The Communist doesn't really think the patriot is an animal, but he is using that as an excuse or imaginary narrative to justify his evil, power-seeking actions. We can certainly say he's partisan and evil, but 'politicist' would just be a junk word that would require more explanation than it would help explain.

So I reach the same conclusion as David, though through a different path. In summary:

- The 'positive side' of racism is not racism, it's just love of kin/community.

- The 'neutral/exclusionary' side of racism is not racism; it's just freedom of association.

- The 'negative side' of racism is redundant, as people can de-humanise others without referring to race and the de-humanisation itself is the relevant aspect and the evil part.

So "racism" means nothing, but has become a reified ideology to bludgeon white people with, and only white people. The claim of 'racist' toward white people is used to de-humanise them and deny the love of kin and freedom of association that every other race is granted social permission. It is the only true act of evil.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Multiculturalism is responsible for every war in history (almost)

people informally segregate all the time. You will find various ethnic enclaves in Melbourne and Sydney. Ethnocentric in-group preference is also seen in choice of friends and communication levels among work colleagues of different ethnic backgrounds. While there may be enough tolerance to allow semi-deracinated individuals to participate in capitalism and consumerism, the reality is that in-group preference is innate and Multiculturalism/diversity should be avoided a much as possible, because it breaks down social cohesion and trust. Diversity is our greatest weakness - an observable, scientific reality (footnote: Robert Putnam). Remember that forced integration has lead to many conflicts in the 20th and 21st century. WWI and Hitler would not have happened if various ethnic groups had sovereignty rather than being under the thumb of oppressive empires. Iraq and Israel/Palestine are two current examples of Multicultural conflicts. There is widespread revolt against forced integrati...
Post a Comment
Read more

How Liberalism enslaves

Aristotle, the Stoics and other ancient Greco-Roman moralists posit a very different idea of 'freedom' that involves combating the tendencies that divert us from human flourishing and contributing to our community as social animals. It is naturalistic, albeit pre-Darwinist, but it is not dogmatic like Liberalism, Leftism, etc. This ancient teach us what freedom really is, and Stoic practices in particular can inculcate an honest sense of autonomy. Liberalism claims to grant people autonomy but it only gives them a false sense of it. It effectively enslaves people to denial of their biology, hedonistic consumerism, keeping up with the Jones', seeking celebrity, lower quality social and family relations, workplace and other forms of alienation, pursuit of happiness in all the wrong places: career, travel, shiny things, sleeping around, taking drugs, etc. Liberalism won't necessarily lead to all these things, but it makes people vulnerable to their marketing, and being h...
Post a Comment
Read more

Equality, Liberalism and the Big State

Shelley makes Liberalism sounds as idealistic and Utopian as any religion. I even see some parallels with the Sermon on the Mount. What is the relation between 'equality' and the 'individual'. (I don't think we are equal and my reification of the 'individual' has become weaker lately). Must one have a strong view of equality to have a strong view of the individual and their 'rights'? I think so, although those regimes pushing equality the strongest - the Communists - have ended up being the most hierarchical and totalitarian of all, with the State on top and the plebs below. Equality ends ups sacrificing individual 'rights' for the sake of whatever new set of individual 'rights' are trendy at the time. e.g. we need to pretend that homosexual relationships are equal to heterosexual ones therefore our 'free speech' right is sacrificed so as to protect the new 'freedom from hurt feelings' right of another. New indiv...
Post a Comment
Read more