Sunday, November 25, 2012

On Rotherham and Racism

Prompted by the controversy over the foster children in Rotherham who were recently taken from their caregivers because the foster parents were members of UKIP, our English correspondent Seneca III weighs in with a few choice words for those who would destroy all meaningful communication with their anti-“racist” cant.

Committee for Public Safety

On Rotherham and Racism — Call me Racist if You Wish

by Seneca III

I am sick and tired of me and mine being beaten with the ‘Racist’ stick at every twist and turn of the way we choose to live our way of life. I am going to put the (non-)meaning of that word, Racism! into its proper perspective and damn the Thought Police. I have had enough.


An inadequate or corrupted vocabulary can be pregnant with consequences.

Language ► noun 1 (mass noun) the method of human communication, either spoken or written, consisting of the use of words in a structured or conventional way:
2 the system of communication used by a particular community or country. (OED)

Dialectic ► noun 1 (mass noun) the art of investigating or discussing the truth of opinions:
2 enquiry into metaphysical contradictions and their solutions. (OED)

The word ‘right’ (wing), and the scurrilous labelling so beloved of the media and the chattering classes such as ‘far right’, ‘fascist’ and ‘racist’, are essentially meaningless terms. The dichotomy between the socio-political left and the socio-political right, whilst widely accepted as a given, simply has no definition. Only the ideas and political morality of the ‘left’, and hence the use of that word, can be defined, for they can be traced back to those who originally sat on the left side of the French National Assembly, the bicameral parliament established in 1791 following the French Revolution — which gave birth to the ‘Committee for Public Safety’ under Robespierre and the subsequent ‘Reign of Terror’ during 1793-94.

The term ‘right’, however, has no traceable origins; it is essentially a chimera, a creation of the left for the purpose of describing those, the fallen, who are not of themselves, who do not in whole or in part share their world view, their vision of how human affairs should be conducted.

Nor, as it would at first appear, is this relationship a linear one where one grouping is on one side or the other. The reality is that in their unbending certitude the left have come, by either omission or commission, to position themselves in what could best be described as a state of moral and intellectual stasis, virtually a Ptolemaic, heliocentric view of the political universe whereby they are the Sun at the centre of everything and the rest of us exist in various shades of ideological darkness somewhere in the void beyond their warm, central fire.

The left maintain, defend and expand this position by the use and misuse of language in order to cripple dialectic and demonise those who do not share their enlightenment, those who differ from the self-anointed. We may be Free Market Libertarians, Monarchists, Judeo-Christians, Secularists, Islamophobes, Identitarians or Statists of any persuasion. Indeed, we may be any and all who have not taken Communion at their recidivist, totalitarian altar — we are the benighted.

My (Angry) Position

Racism is a behavioural trait that evolution has hard-wired into our genes for good reason — the preservation of the territorial imperative, the continuation of the cultural determinants of a given socio-ideological group and the ownership and use of the physical resources generated by that group. ‘Racism’ per se has no moral foundation or meaning, for it is purely a modern definition of an ancient survival mechanism, in application a single-word oxymoron.

Hence when any ethno-cultural group unilaterally — and I do emphasise unilaterally — foregoes the intrinsic benefits of this mechanism, it is axiomatic that that group will cease to exist at the hands of others who have not foregone it.

For multiculturalism to work, everyone would have to want it and work towards it. At the moment it appears to be that it is only one particular group to whom the full force of the law, incessant moral flagellation and the bureaucratic fist is being applied in order to make that group accept its own ethnic cleansing, all in the interests of the deconstructionists’ faux utopian dream, their destitute ideology — which, if it flowers into reality, will be but a return to barbarism.

Unilateral non-racism is a form of self-righteous suicide, and multiculturalism imposed from without and without consensus is tyranny. Freedom of association and gradual, spontaneous assimilation, if it happens naturally, is the only rational and safe way forward. If the Cultural Marxists and their fellow travellers — who, incidentally, are but drones on a mating flight they will not survive whatever the outcome — persist and prevail in the short term there can only be one inevitable result: blood and tears, the ultimate determinants. If we are not all racists now then we damn well better become so if we wish to make it through the long, dark night we have been herded into.

Finally, I am of a mind that it is the ultimate evil to destroy a mind, and that for those who work to take mine and use it for their own ends by introducing and enabling the spread and eventual triumph of a primitive, seventh-century theocratic political system based on slavery and atrocity into this once green and pleasant land there can be no mercy. Now or ever — none.

But, I say this to them, do feel free to call me racist if you wish. I no longer care; the word has become meaningless, and I really have had enough of it. I am going to beat my ploughshare into a sword and that sword has your name on it (metaphorically speaking, of course).

— Seneca III, November 2012.

P.S. Perhaps if enough of we the benighted raised our voices and our pens time after time after time loud and in cadence and declared “Do feel free to call me racist if you wish, I no longer care, the word has become meaningless and I really have had enough of it” we could put an end to this fatal deconstructionist farce. Likewise your ploughshares, or whatever (metaphorically speaking, again, of course). S III.

Previous posts by Seneca III:

2007 Oct 13 A Letter to my People
    26 Another Letter To My People
2008 Oct 5 Excerpt From “Ere the Winter of Our Discontent”
2009 Oct 22 The Cultural Death of a People
    23 Do Star Chambers Serve a Useful Purpose, Or Do They Obfuscate the Issue?
  Nov 8 By the Rivers of Babylon
2010 Jul 2 The ‘Phoney War’ Is Over
  Sep 13 Musings on the Winds of Change
  Oct 13 The Fourth Dimension of Warfare, Part 1
2011 Jan 1 The New Year Comes With Ham
  Feb 6 My Yesterday in Luton
  Jun 17 The English Spring
  Jul 12 The Betrayed
  Oct 19 A Long Day’s Journey Out of Night, Part I
    20 A Long Day’s Journey Out of Night, Part II
    22 A Long Day’s Journey Out of Night, Part III
    24 A Long Day’s Journey Out of Night, Part IV
  Nov 3 Are These the Labour Pains of a New Renaissance?
2012 Jan 1 A Furious Tide
  Feb 5 My Yesterday in Leicester
  Apr 22 A Gift from the Religion of Atrocity
  May 9 Inevitable, or What?
  Oct 23 “Beat Your Ploughshares Into Spears”


Nemesis said...

Beautifully put!

Papa Whiskey said...

Your heart is in the right place, sir, but given the fact that in your green and pleasant land all the swords are in the hands of those who would keep their heel on your necks I'd say your prospects are rather dim. But, it is to hope.

Anonymous said...

I don't get Papa Whiskey's point. What's he saying, that because gun ownership is frowned upon in Britain that the revolution is unlikely? Wasn't it always the case that the establishment had a monopoly on power? If it didn't have it wouldn't be, surely!

What matters is the will, that and the facts. Consider the individuals Galileo and Copernicus and the all powerful establishment that stood in opposition to their 'heresy'. Who won through in the end?

The will and the facts. Galileo and Copernicus put themselves on the line and what they had to say was closer to what is that what was at the time being said - and people could see it with their own eyes.

That's what's happening now. The current explanation of what is is being found wanting and the explanation that 'we' put forward is being seen to be a closer fit to what is than what is currently being said.

The big problem for the establishment is that its big idea, the multicultural, multiracial, multilingual, multifaith, multi legal system, society is so obviously wrong that even it is being forced to distance itself from the more absurd manifestations of its imagination. And it can only get worse - for it!

Of course it'll scream and shout in the process, but it is going down - it has nailed it's colours to the mast of a sinking ship.

Glug glug, good riddance.


Anonymous said...

on the phone:
Mohamed somewhere in the west: come here man, you won´t believe how easy life is.
Omar somewhere in islamland: What shall I do for a living?
Mohamed: That´s the best part. You do nothing, get paid by government and can take almost anything, even women..
Omar: no kidding¡¡¡
Mohamed: come quickly and tell cousin Mamadou to come too. Just remember the magic spell if you get into trouble, you just shout RACIST and everyone will freeze, man. I don´t know why but it works.
Omar: awsome i´m on my way. C.YA

Anonymous said...

To understand why this word is so important to leftists one needs to understand it's function.

It is argued:

a) racism was invented by white people to justify the western slave trade

b) other people can't be racist

c) other slave trades/oppressions are unimportant, no matter how bloody or brutal

d) racism is perpetuated by 'the ruling class' to divide workers

e) by finding racism at every turn, and by fighting it, the overwhelmingly white, lower middle class left hope to prove their worth to black 'workers' - who largely ignore them (in the newest incarnation of this model substitute Muslim and Islamophobia)

It leads to all kind of mental gymnastics. The prejudice that Jews faced for centuries couldn't be defined as 'racist' until Hitler. The 160 million black Africans who were enslaved and taken to Arabia over 100's of years were not victims of "racism". The virulent anti-Korean and anti-Chinese attitudes and oppressions which the Japanese state variously has instituted couldn't be 'racist'.

Centuries of Empire and murderous conflict can be rubbed out of history - leaving only the British/French and Dutch Empires as the only actual existing Imperial Histories - which now need to be endlessly apologised for by having no immigration controls or relationship to ones own cultures (racist), in western countries.

Indeed to mention the Islamic slave trade is racist (Islamophobic) itself!

Hence only white people are guilty and the social workers/teachers/University and FE lecturers who make up the vast majority of any leftist party can fulfil their ideological roles (in a capitalist state apparatus ironically) by re-educating the masses out of their reactionary ideas.

This flagellation of self and others, is both a punishment (riddled with lower middle class guilt) and a public demonstration of rejection of ideas which are preventing the glorious revolution longed for in teachers rest rooms and social worker’s lounges.

So when one young man is stabbed to death, probably by a handful of foul young white racists, the whole of white 'society' is dragged endlessly through the mire. But when dozen's of young black men are stabbed to death by other young black men, often by baying groups (far larger than 5), the story appears, sad hands are wrung about 'lack of opportunities' and the story disappears without a trace soon after.

Would the mother of Trayon Martin be flown over to meet the mothers of the dozens of black men stabbed and shot in London by their 'brothers'? Or is the story only useful and the photo only of sufficient opportunity if she is to meet the mother of a boy apparently killed by white boys?

In London recently, a dead muslim youth lay amongst the long list of young men of colour stabbed to death by other young men of colour. But because there was no 'hate' or 'phobic' malice (since black boys can't be racist even if they singled him out because of his otherness), his pious veil wearing mother was left weeping at the shortness of the sentences given to his killers.

We didn't hear apologies from Lee Jasper, or poems read out by Linton Kwasi Jonson at the opening of a memorial to a wasted life. His mother didn't take her place between Shami Chakrabarti and Doreen Lawrence in the Olympic ceremony. His name is forgotten.

Somethings just are. Somethings not.

So it is the authorities in Rotherham ignore mass rape over many years by Pakistani men on schoolgirls, but rush to condemn UKIP supporters as racists and unfit to look after children, snatch the children away, without missing a beat or noticing the contradiction.

Anonymous said...

You must not forget that the murders of indigenous English people over the last 60 plus years by non-indigenous immigrants have never been classed as racist. We never have nor never will see the mother of an indigenous person murdered by a non-white immigrant marching behind the flag at the Olympics. We are white/European and hence have inherited the sins of our fathers where the rest of the world is concerned. Put bluntly, in the eyes of the Left, we deserve it. As another commentator has said, racism is a one-way street.

As regards slavery, I was surprised to hear my Guardian-reading brother blame the sale of African slaves to Europeans on the Arabs. It was they and other Africans who were behind it as certain African tribes had a surplus of those taken from other tribes and so hit on selling them to Europeans.

Slavery was always a part of European society prior to the Middle Ages. Anglo-Saxon and Viking societies had systems in which the lowest were slaves and openly traded slaves. Their greatest source of slaves was the Slavic nations, the word Slav came from slave.

In actual fact, I believe I am correct in saying that the children who were removed from their foster parents in Rotherham, who were doing everything they could for them, were East European.
Hence the term racist does not apply. One could use the word xenophobic instead. The leader of UKIP, Nigel Farage, who spoke so intelligently about this incident, is married to a German. Normally, Europeans do not use the term racist about their fellow ethnic Europeans. The term racism, as invented by the Left, is only meant to apply to white on non-white "racism".

kloutlichter said...

This week whilst discussing Gaza etc I have been called a bigot and a fascist. I no longer care.Pile it on. This website gives me the info to prove otherwise but those I know who call me these names are not interested.Fine . It will take the passage of time to wake theme up. I already smile at the prospect of saying I told you so'.

William Gruff said...

I cannot tell you how pleasing it is to read from another hand what I have been saying for decades: that there is no such thing as the 'right wing'. The term simply describes anything to which the left wing objects. An unusually brain-dead leftie once told me, with a straight face, that she thought individualism, which I was advocating, was fascism, presumably on the basis that because it is the antithesis of socialism it must be lumped in with everything else leftists think they oppose.