Sunday, November 04, 2007

Racial Racketeering

The following opinion piece is written by a close friend. The psychology student that he refers to in the text is another mutual friend. I have also read through a number of her lecture notes, but am unable to disclose the exact institution she studies at, for obvious reasons. For more on the Cultural Revolution and Patrick Buchanan's book, my own review is available here.

The Cultural Revolution is merciless. Its elite will use all the tools at their disposal to further their aims for total control. One of the most prominent tools that they use is a psychological one that involves intimidating people into self-censorship. This has led to the phenomenon known in the public arena as ‘political correctness’.
Patrick J. Buchanan wrote about this topic in his excellent book entitled Death of the West. This book, which I have recently finished, gave me the inspiration to write on this issue.
In much the same manner that Jews have used ‘The Holocaust’ in order to gain certain advantages, designating opponents as ‘anti-Semitic’, so these revolutionaries are using similar tactics against whoever stands in the way of the struggle for social equality, diversity, immigration and civil rights. Slurs such as racist, xenophobe, homophobe, sexist, even Nazi and fascist have been (obsessively) utilised as part of PC rhetoric. However, as Patrick Buchanan says:

'these slurs carry no penalty and instead carry rich rewards. They carry the opposition outside the community of decent men, discredit them in advance and force them in defending their integrity rather than their positions.'

He jokingly describes those that use these slurs as ‘heroes’ because one of the greatest benefits is of a psychic nature. If we have the scenario of one standing up to a ‘Nazi’ or ‘racist’, it is surely regarded as ‘heroic’. After all, the more one demonises an enemy, the more one 'heroises' oneself.
One of the main reasons that the instigators of the cultural revolution have allowed the situation to reach this ridiculous level is due to the benefits they derive from ‘dividing and conquering’. By undermining the dominant ethnic group, and by creating heterogeneous rather than homogenous societies, they deprive the host people of the freedom and confidence to exercise control over their own destinies. It therefore becomes much easier to hijack various institutions and have them work even against the interests of the host population.
A vital institution, which has been hijacked, is the education system. A friend who studies psychology provided me with material from her course. The lecture sheet’s begin with the definition of racism taken from the Jewish David Goldberg:

‘Any practice that has as its effect, intended or unintended, the exclusion of a group from full access to the rights, responsibilities and opportunities enjoyed by the majority population.’

So from the very start we have a member of an ethnic minority, defining racism in such a way that the only possible racist can be a member of the majority population, and never anyone else. Ironically, by this standard, racism would be logically impossible if ethnic groups lived in their own homogenous states and were allowed sovereignty and independence to determine their own destiny. There would be no one to discriminate against. Naturally such a solution that would lead to the end of racism is not posited.
Students are then taught how to quantify an individual’s racism in order to identify potential fascists. We have the AS scale (anti-Semitism scale), the E scale (ethnocentrism scale), PEC scale (political and economic conservatism scale), and finally the F scale (the fascist scale). It sound’s like something out of a communist textbook and it probably is.
One interesting and (for a change) scientific conclusion that the lecturer mentions is the following:

Intergroup hostility and prejudice is derived from different groups with incompatible goals.

Again the obvious solution is to not insist on forcing different groups to live together, jockeying for power, and creating tension. Again the obvious solution is missing from the lecture.
Students are taught that white men wanting to take out their desires on black slave women is an example of dominative racism. The entire section on slavery focuses exclusively on black suffering at the hands of whites in America. Again this is totally unscientific. Slavery existed before America existed. Entire sub-groups of the European race never inflicted slavery on anyone, but were themselves the victims of slavery. The Arab slave trade goes unmentioned.
It is also interesting to note the reaction that met the Nobel prize-winning scientist Professor James Watson when he expressed his opinion that intellectual capacity differs between racial groups. Watson saw his book-tour cancelled and was forced out of a job for having an opinion that contradicted the world-view of the cultural left.
What is most ironic of all, is that those same people that championed the theory of evolution to their own political and social ends, now seem totally incapable of accepting where those theories lead… to the possibility that natural selection combined with thousands of years of geographic separation produced more differences than just skin color. But the point is not whether Watson was right or wrong, but that he is not allowed to express an opinion. The moral outrage witnessed made a mockery of true science. Instead of being told how and why Watson was wrong, we were told that he can’t say what he said because it offends people. The cry that scientific truth is subordinate to people's feelings is of course the height of hypocrisy. Where were people’s feelings when they were being told that they descended from monkeys? As
Kevin Macdonald, professor of psychology at California state university stated:

The cultural left has a long and largely successful history of being able to combat scientific ideas that it doesn’t like. This was the main conclusion of The Culture of Critique: The long and sorry history of Boasian anthropology, psychoanalysis, the anti-hereditarian and anti-Darwinian movements in the social sciences, and the Frankfurt School all masqueraded as science but they also wore their politics on their sleeves. Like other political movements, dissenters were simply excluded — drummed out of professional societies, publically humiliated, and relegated to the fringes of intellectual life.

The more the masses accept these artificially imposed ways of thinking, consciously or not, the more disorientated they become. People have so conformed to these ideals that at the rate at which things are progressing society must eventually reach a breaking point. Hopefully there will be light at the end of the tunnel for those who remain dignified throughout these proceedings.

Technorati tags;
revolution racial racketeering patrick buchanan death west


Blogger Srba said...

'An article so very well put together'. Nothing more to say.

10:38 PM  
Blogger Russet Shadows said...

You do realize that you border on anti-semitism yourself by holding up "the Jews" as a monolithic block of people who use the Holocaust to claim special advantages. Maybe things are different in Europe, but I haven't seen much evidence of this in America.

If anything, the tide has turned away from any Jewish groups controlling the public discussion to the Islamic minority. Although making folks feel guilty about things they haven't done is always wrong, I've never seen a Jewish advocacy group embrace violent tactics so typical of Islamists.

4:39 AM  
Blogger Nationalist14 said...


12:31 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home