According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the term “racism” first appeared in English in the United States in 1936 in a fascist pamphlet by Lawrence Dennis called The Coming American Fascism: The Crisis of Capitalism.
It is pretty clear that “racism” was in use in other European languages before English. The origin of “racism” is commonly attributed to either the Jewish communist Leon Trotsky (1930) or the Jewish sexologist Magnus Hirschfeld (1934).
In 1939, a Roper poll found that 7 out of 10 Americans believed that blacks were less intelligent than Whites. More than 8 out of 10 Americans believed that blacks should be prevented by law or social pressure from living in White neighborhoods. At that time, the Jim Crow South and much of the West practiced segregation while restrictive covenants and sundown towns were commonplace in the Midwest.
In 1942, 42 percent of Whites believed that blacks were as intelligent as Whites, 30 percent believed blacks and Whites should attend integrated schools, 51 percent believed that blacks and Whites should be segregated in public transportation, and 62 percent were bothered by the thought of having black neighbors.
In 1946, a poll found that 53 percent of Whites believed that blacks were as intelligent as Whites – this was first time in American history that a majority of White Americans professed to believe in racial equality.
By 1952, 78 percent of Whites believed that blacks were as intelligent as Whites, 49 percent believed blacks and Whites should attend integrated schools, 60 percent believed that blacks and Whites should not be segregated in public transportation, and 52 percent of Whites were not bothered by the thought of having black neighbors.
In the video below, “racism” comes into circulation in the English language in the late 1930s and explodes in usage around 1960. The first use of “racist” as an adjective was in 1938 which was also the year the American Anthropological Association passed its first resolution that condemned “racism.”
Like its counterpart ‘anti-semitic’, the term ‘racism’ is anti-semantic. Real words have meaning. These anti-semanticisms are nonsense terms to contrived to screw (jew) the brains of Whitey and guilt him with false sins.
When Jews say someone is anti-semitic, what they are saying is that like Ian Flemming’s S.P.E.C.T.R.E. – this organisation does not tolerate criticism. Jews don’t do criticism – that gives them the heebejeebies. Furthermore, they are not semites unless they have ancestry from a Semitic people – which the Ashkhenzim do not.
Racism is a meaningless term because every single ethne on the planet prefers its own ethnicity, ethnic heritage and race. White nations are no exception. But the term ‘racism’ only applies to Whites because this is the group that the Jews (a race that is ethnically supremacist in the extreme) wants to subvert the thinking and discourse of the Whites.
Merriam-Webster claims the first use dates to 1933. I believe a French variant was in use prior. In any case, it is a good example of how the Jews have used our strong sense of morality and fairness against us: by making the one of the most basic human instincts, ethnocentrism, into a sin of the worst kind in the ersatz religion of PC.
Oh, it’s not an Ersatz religion.
It IS a religion. It is the Antichrist religion of the modern era.
Gary North was correct. ‘There is no neutrality. You can’t fight something with nothing.’
All of life is religious. It just depends on WHICH religion you are preaching.
The continued antichristian sentiments on this board, and on Daily Stormer, clearly show TWO, and only two, religions operative in the world today.
Just because the Antichristians don’t know they are following a creed, and a liturgy as proscribed as the ancient rites of Christendom, don’t make it any less a ‘faith.’
“Racist” frequency starts to decline as Mantra frequency starts to increase. Oh, just a coincidence, of course.
Racism as a problem to be remedied, according to the jews and blacks, was a form of classism, and was supposed to be the name for redressing that class exploitation of blacks way back in the 60’s and 70’s. But the reality is that if either group really had wanted to try to balance out some of the unavoidable extremes of classism, they would have just called out classism. Instead they created this term to simply dispossess and disenfranchise Whites, while pretending the goal was to end classism’s exploitations.
The Civil Rights movement pretended to incorporate white lower and middle class interests in it’s drive to liberate blacks, but the intention was in fact to displace all whites from positions of power. The jews used the promise of college loans, sexual libertinism, and the straw man type argument of freedom from Viet Nam as the incentive.
Which is why the only way I can see whites gathering enough momentum to change the tide is by appealing to and engaging the bleeding white middle and working classes. By the time the 85-95% of the white upper middle class figures out the time limit on it’s comforts and conceits have expired it will be too late, so only a certain element of them will join any coalition to free whites.
I was trying to find my source on that, but a screaming baby kept me from pursuing it any further.
The term “sexism” was coined around 1965:
Everyone on our side must prepare, practice what to do when they or someone they support is smeared with the dreaded “Racissssssssssst” smear.
Never back down, deny, pander.
I like to use sarcasm and counter attack.
They: “you’re Racist”
Me: ” I’m not racist, some of my BEST FRIENDS are Islamic terrorists let in to our country on student visas. I think these Islamic extremists terrorists are really great for America because they bring DIVERSITY and add interesting cultural enrichment lie, hijacking our airplanes and crashing them in to our office buildings oh – and these Islamic extremist immigrants are great supporters if women’s rights and gay and lesbian rights, just as long as the women or gays don’t show their faces in public, then, They tend to stone the women and gays to death, but hey, DiVERSITYis our strength!”
“Racism” is a category term used by liberals to make taboo anything they dislike.
It implies that any racial preference is bad in a universal sense, forgetting that it most commonly occurs in a local sense:
I would like to live among my own kind.
That is universally true for every group, whether white, black or Asian.
“Like its counterpart ‘anti-semitic’, the term ‘racism’ is anti-semantic. ” – its a non-word that means only what the speaker wants it to mean.
James Edwards wrote a book about that sort of thing. All one needs to do is read the title, which is just two words long.
“Furthermore, they are not semites unless they have ancestry from a Semitic people – which the Ashkhenzim do not.”
On the contrary. About 80% of Jewish males and 50% of Jewish females can trace via their DNA, ancestry back to the Middle East:
Rudel, everyone comes from the Middle East.
These numbers are suspicious. First the polling were probably driven by an agenda in an attempt to change the opinions of whites. Secondly claimed opinions are very probably not sincere considering the phenomenon of white flight that is still the general result of neighborhood integration.
“Rudel, everyone comes from the Middle East.”
These are haplogroups distinct to ethnic Semites. Neither their language nor their genes are Indo-European.
Logan Smith where do you get this certainty that everyone comes from the Middle East?
@ “…Racism as a problem to be remedied, according to the jews and blacks, was a form of classism, and was supposed to be the name for redressing that class exploitation of blacks way…”
Parsing everything out as “classicism” IS marxism, pure and simple. Now everybody says things s/a that… “it’s about class not race,” etc… At this point everyone is dumbed down to the being proles, anyway, and FDRs fascism (another kind of leftism) has ensured that everyone has to work for “the state,” one way or another (in u.s., the military, schoolteachers, and now doctors are the “upper class.”
Just awhile back, they stuck the military workers on “bases” (basically projects for them), but now they live among the general population, meaning they live among the people who have to pay their bills. Same with the school officials and cps, and soon the state doctors next door.
So goes the latinization of the u.s. (that latins always want to blame on jews—- the ashkenazis might be middle eastern but they are frequently more blonde/blue than their med counterparts, which is another reason people ignore d. duke).
…yes, ot, but they always talk about the “shrinking middle class,” WHEN WILL SOMEONE point out that we have a very, very healthy middle class, it’s just that they are immigrant, scholarship students, or military, or schoolteachers or obamacare doctors, lol. The OLD middle class (that valued creativity) and were wasps, descendents of the u.s. founders, etc, etc…and they have shrunk. but there is definitely a big, fat (often literally, lol) “middle class.”
Blacks and jews used the idea of empowering the white middle class as a means of eventually displacing it. This is simply the truth. Trying to blame it all on white feminists (I’m not accusing you of this necessarily) is stupid because when jews and blacks shifted towards hyping the holohoax and white privilege white feminists had already jumped off the bandwagon; this happened during the early 80’s.
White racialists need to question how whites got into the mess we’re in now. Lies to white women and the white middle class enabled Diversity Cult to take over. I personally think we should be appealing to both groups instead of ignoring or castigating them. Ignoring that classism exists is what pro-whites have been doing all these years. They’ve accomplished absolutely nothing as far as I can see.
Jewish historian makes a sudden discovery that there are statues of notorious white racists all over NYC:
Yankee, the Garden of Eden was in the Middle East.
Interesting link about how different NY and NJ were historically from New England vis a vis the Civil War, race, etc. To be a founding stock white in some parts now is practically a crime, that’s how intense the hostility is towards my ethnicity/race, especially if you’re female and have the extreme ‘aryan’ look. I was asked by an arab shop or stall keeper in Union Square, NYC, once if I ‘came from Europe,’ that’s how foreign my nordic looks seemed to someone who I guess thinks he can speak to who is an american.
Any English word ending in ISM is by definition an ideology. Ideologies are modern creations based upon values which are by definition relative – see the work of Nietszche “The Birth of Tragedy and the Geneology of Morals”. A value is what I or you value [prize]. You value wealth, someone else values racial supremacism, etc. The only determinant of value is will. The values of the the most powerful group prevail. That is ideological and dialectical thinking.
The West has never reasoned like this. The West reasons on the classical basis of anti-thesis and non-contradiction in terms.
The Christendom reaons on the basis of Credo (faith, conviction of truth) and morals which are absolute and not relative. It is objectively and morally wrong to deny there is no God, no Creator – for His works plainly declare Him. Sodomy is objectively and morally wrong regardless of who ‘values’ it or how powerful they are to enforce their ‘value’. Genocide is objectively and morally wrong regardless of whether or not it is good for the Jews.
Moderns must return to the classical basis of reason and desist from thinking in terms of dialectics and ideologies. These are forms of anti-reason and will definitely screw [jew] your mind.
Well said, Lynda!
To whom it may concern,
Stop running from your own shadows. Stop being a stranger to yourself in your own skin. There’s a better than average chance that you are a liar or loon if you claim to not be a Race-ist while continually promoting White autonomy and/or complaining about the destruction of multiculturalism. Multicultural/Multiracial societies take a tremendous amount of energy and devotion to ignore reality and pretend that what you see isn’t really what you see; that what you know isn’t really what you know; that any facts you have to support your case must be biased; and any negatives you experienced were just an example of your own failure to accept blind faith as a substitute for experience and preference. There’s really no difference in the supremacy espoused by PC multiculturalists and that which is espoused by zealots of religious dogmas.
Jesus ain’t coming to save you, and it should be obvious that all of that praying hasn’t done shit to help you so far. I’m not a big fan of the Third Reich or Nazism, but I definitely understand why Hitler and Goebbels looked at religion as a very weak form of Nationalism that couldn’t be counted on to effectively fight for blood and soil in a world that was becoming more fluid and modernized, and more easily influenced by “truth” coming from different forms of mass media.
If you try and talk your way out of an accusation by claiming that you are “not a racist,” then you have to be an anti-racist. That means you are a bane to any kind of racial nationalism. You are useless.
If you ramble on about religion and give it most of your time, while giving a fraction of your time to actual discussions about Race, then you are just as much of a bane to racial nationalism. You are equally useless. Find some holy water and drown yourself in it stat!
Thought you would find this of interest: Crack down on Alabama career criminals in 1977 helped cause this staggering spike in prison population ===> http://s.al.com/iJAbApm
Calling someone a racist is committing an ad hominem fallacy. You can assault a race realist’s character all day long, but that won’t change that he/she is right.
There is something I don’t understand, though. In the book, Why Race Matters, Michael Levin said that racism is inherently bad. He then said that if there are good reasons to discuss racial differences in intelligence then it cannot be racist.
I would love to meet Levin someday and listen to him explain his reasoning on that. I don’t think that racism is inherently bad, but I’m curious about whether it would be possible to get egalitarians to discuss race realism by telling them doing so is not racist.
What race do people consider themselves on here? ‘Caucasian?’ ‘White?’ ‘European?’
There are numerous problems in my view with grounding ‘whites’ struggle in terms of ‘race,’ but the question I pose here is – where do people draw the lines around their ‘race?’ I ask because where I come from it seems very difficult to speak in terms of race for many of those numerous problems, one of them being that to try to corral incredibly disparate groups like italians, jews, and even eastern europeans to a lesser extent in one ‘race’ just seems bizarre. Southern italians are about as much my race as somalians are. This is not purely biological but also cultural. As an FYI and example of the difficulty of defining a european ‘race,’ northern italians tended strongly to group themselves with southern italians in a separatist but also somewhat imperialist capacity in the northeast, even though ‘racially’ northern italians often look more like native europeans than they do southern italians. Their culture superseded their biology, which is almost categorically the case in at least the northeast for the various tribes. The jews have their own somewhat sneakier version of this tendency.
Does ‘white’ include the north africans, as the technical definition of ‘caucasian’ does? If it doesn’t then why are the italians or any meds included? Or jews, who hail from the middle east?
Caucasian is the over all race, but there are many ethnicities within our race. For instance, most people here are Southrons.
Your problem, Yankee, is that you’re confusing “ethnicity” with “race”.
Western society is hemorrhaging from a sucking chest wound and you want to talk about technicalities like there’s some omnipotent arbitrator of Whiteness handing out name tags and trying to meet a quota? Who gives a shit! I’ll stand up for just about any sane and decent person who considers themselves White and believes in some form of racial nationalism. If some other “racist” doesn’t like my inclusive definition and wishes to adhere to their own exclusive formula, then they can keep their distance from me. Having a discussion on the Internet about who is and who isn’t “technically” White is not some kind of precursor to building something in the real world. It is a sign of impotence when it’s the same exact talk that has been regurgitated ad nauseam.
And before I forget, a belated congratulations to Hunter and Renee on the new addition.
Earl Holt: ‘The Yankees love their niggers.’
The truth: ‘The Yankees love their niggers.’
The reality is, Celestial Times, that northerners, especially in my region, would far sooner indict a people for their moral choices – like judaism – than for the amino acid peptide chain whatever…
Anti-white is a choice, as is imperialism and parasitism. Call it racism if you will. But understand that trying to advocate on a biological basis gets one nowhere in the northeast at least. We are a tribal people. I have more in common and more respect for some blacks and some bygone ways of their culture than I do for the jews.’ In many ways some blacks are more like me and my people than are the the jews or the southern italians. Southerners have no idea what ethnic warfare is beyond some strict dichotomy of ‘white’ versus ‘black’ – a schema that has only a limited meaning up here. We believe in our tribe and then in an abstract universalist value system. We impugn those who violate it.
Racialism gets one nowhere up here, sorry to offend. But if you had to live amongst north africans and middle easterners you might sing a different tune. I really fail to see how non-native europeans are my ‘race.’ I might as well be a Negro, and many yankees would feel the same.
““Furthermore, they are not semites unless they have ancestry from a Semitic people – which the Ashkhenzim do not.”
On the contrary. About 80% of Jewish males and 50% of Jewish females can trace via their DNA, ancestry back to the Middle East:”
Still harping on that BULLSH*T lie, Rude?
Just because these folks can trace their ‘DNA’ back to the Middle East, doesn’t mean that they COME from there- or that the REAL Israelites were not REMOVED, say, about 600B.C., and only came back around 450 B.C., with possible Babylonian DNA mixed in, and then were dispersed AGAIN in AD 70, never to return?
And that the Turkic nomads, of a completely different DNA took over that land for teh last 2000 years?
Why do you continue to give spurious LEGITIMACY TO THE CHRIST-KILLERS, unless you ARE ONE?
“Why do you continue to give spurious LEGITIMACY TO THE CHRIST-KILLERS, unless you ARE ONE?”
I’d rather be a Jew than a de-frocked RC priest like yourself. Unfortunately I don’t have any trace of Ashkenazi ancestry.
BTW, all the ancient Canaanite tribes were Semitic both linguistically and genetically. Start reading books besides the Bible. You might actually learn something that is true for a change.
The Crown (of Jewry) is currently HQ’d in the The City within London – the sq mi.
In the Guildhall preside the tribal idols of Ashkhenaz (a Japethic people) – these are the two wicker giants (Nephilim) of Gog and Magog. The Biblical Gog and Magog designated by its tribal gods. The fact of Japethic tribal ancestry is there for anyone who wants to look at it.
Rudel, the Canaanite tribes were Semitic speakers, but they were racially Hamitic.
The American Anthropological Association probably issued that statement not long after Carlton S. Coons was kicked out as president. Coons of the book, “The Races of Man”. Boas, a Jew, took over and now the institution is useless. Coons books are very good. He even talks about the difference in temperament of the different races.