Just Say It is RACE-IST AND TRUE. Associate Race-ism with Truth.

Even after so much ink has been spilled over how Political Correctness robs us of reason, liberty, integrity, and courage, we still can’t have honest discussions of world problems because the vast majority of people adhere to the PC definition and deployment of the term ‘racist’. The word has such power over us because nearly everyone, from ‘left’ to ‘right’, agree on its dubious meaning. So, even as there are increasing numbers of people who deny that they are ‘racist’ or hurl back the accusation at the other side, almost no one dares to deconstruct the term and examine why it is so powerful.

People fail to understand that the term was devised to suck out all the air in the room so that it can have only one meaning and nullify all other meanings. In other words, ‘racism’ is like a terminological black hole that will not tolerate honest discussion of race. Why would that be? It is because a neutral sounding word has been defined in the most extreme way. Most of you will say that ‘racism’ means racial hatred, racial chauvinism, racial supremacism, irrational racial hostility, blind racial animus, or even racial genocide. Now, why is this a problem? Because a neutral-sounding term has been overloaded with strong meanings.
Now, suppose extreme racial views had been associated with a term ‘radical racism’ or ‘racial extremism’. Thus, we can agree that some people may have extreme prejudice or extreme hostility based on racial differences. After all, ‘radical’ means purist and fanatical. And ‘extremism’ means an abnormal stress on certain inclinations or tendencies. So, if a term like ‘radical racism’ or ‘racial extremism’ carried the burden of ultra-hardline views on race, we can have rational and sensible discussion of the reality of race and racial differences. Indeed, under such rules, the term ‘racism’ or ‘race-ism’ would mean what it should mean. As ‘ism’ means belief or credo, ‘race-ism’ would mean belief in the reality of race & possible racial differences and the necessity or inevitability of racial consciousness or awareness.

Now, race-ism could become extreme or radical, but it doesn’t need to be... no more than a religious person must be a fanatical nut like Jim Jones or a socialist must be a radical communist. Likewise, belief in racial reality doesn’t mean one has to be a Nazi or a member of the KKK, Nation-of-Islam, or Jewish Defense League(an outfit created by the Zionist zealot Meir Kahane who was so extreme that even fellow Jews renounced him). Some might go that way, but then, one can become crazy about anything. After all, people love food, but that doesn’t mean they have to become fatty-fatkins. And people like being slim, but that doesn’t mean people who watch their weight are fated to be anorexics.

Anyway, because a neutral-seeming term like ‘racism’(race + ism) has been defined as an extremist ideology, it’s difficult to have an honest and truthful discussion of race. After all, the formulation of the term ‘racism’ keeps reminding us that ANY ism(belief) about race must be extreme and pathological. Some have tried to solve this problem by using terms such as ‘racialism’ or ‘race realism’, but that only complicates matters. Such tactics are defensive when, if anything, true race-ists must go on the offensive and stop backing down. The term ‘racism’ must be rehabilitated, just like innocent victims of tyranny. The only alteration I would recommend is to spell and pronounce it as ‘race-ism’ to reiterate that the word should mean race + ism = belief in reality of race & possible racial differences and the necessity or inevitability of racial consciousness. For more on this matter, go to this link: http://dailyandreaostrov.blogspot.com/2018/03/why-im-only-true-race-ist-how-misuse-of.html.

Anyway, for the time being, what steps can we take to slowly steer the ship to redefine ‘racism’ or race-ism properly? I propose the ‘Race-ist-and-True’ Rule. If you make a true statement about racial reality and racial differences OR exhibit natural tendency of racial consciousness & solidarity, don’t ever back down when you are accused of ‘racism’. If you try to explain that you’re not ‘racist’, you’ve lost the argument there and then. You’ve put yourself in a defensive and pleading corner, as if the other side has the right to judge you while you feel a need to defend and justify yourself. This is because what should be a neutral term has been rigged by Jewish radical agenda and political correctness to mean something extreme and evil. For that reason, ANY belief in race or expression of racial identity(at least if you’re white and gentile) is automatically smeared as something extreme.
Now, what is so extreme about believing that evolution created different racial groupings of human beings? It is so obvious to any honest pair of eyes. What is so extreme about noticing racial differences? We can see it all around in sports, crime, and all sorts of behavior. And what is so evil about a people having a sense of racial identity, unity, and solidarity? It seems rather natural given that humans are genetically programmed to judge things based on sight and other visible signals. But because the mere terminology of race + ism has been defined as the most heinous form of extremism, even people making the most obvious observations or statements about race and racial differences must be on guard against charges of ‘racism’. With nearly all the institutions and powers operating in such PC manner, is anything possible to stem the tide of this rabid and virulent Judeo-Nazi agenda?

Yes, even if it’s an upward struggle. Also, the first tentative steps are the most important in any movement. It means you are serious and willing to move forward with the truth. And once we reach the top of the hill(like the Train that Could), it will be easy coasting from there on, with historical gravity being on our side.

So, what exactly is it that should be said when our perfectly reasonable views are accused of ‘racism’? First, I’m talking of rational and sane statements about racial reality, racial differences, and racial identity. I’m not talking of clown antics of people like Andrew Anglin who will say ANYTHING to trigger people and gain notoriety. Their views really are extreme, demented, or unserious(and mainly for attention). There can't be any moral defense for such stupidity and dementedness though we must defend speech rights to say offensive things.
As for those of us who dare to speak the truth about race & racial differences and have facts, truth, courage, and integrity on our side, the proper way to respond to accusations of ‘racism’ is to say that our views are ‘race-ist and true’. That is the right way. Don’t try to deny that you’re ‘racist’. Don’t play by their word game that was long ago rigged to favor them... just like a socialist can’t win any argument IF even the most moderate socialism is made synonymous with Stalinism, Maoism, and Khmer Rouge.

Likewise, a capitalist will be in a hopeless position IF the base terminology of ‘capitalism’ is defined to mean Scrooge-like greed and pathological selfishness. Indeed, communist nations defined capitalism in just such manner, and that made it nearly impossible to lay out a rational case for free markets. According to communist terminological rules, the term ‘capitalism’ could never mean a neutral theory of economics based on market dynamics. It couldn’t be approached rationally and judiciously because it had an albatross of ‘greed’ and ‘exploitation’ around its neck.

Now, capitalism CAN be exploitative and ugly, but just because a system is capitalist doesn’t mean it is ultra-libertarian where the ONLY thing that matters is greed & profits and nothing else.
But in a communist nation, there were few things worse than being called a ‘capitalist-roader’ or ‘bourgeois’. Communist terminology fixed it so that ‘capitalism’ could only mean utterly greedy exploitation and ‘bourgeoisie’ could only mean the reactionary exploitative class. A rational, balanced, and empirical discussion of capitalism or the bourgeoisie’s role in history was nearly impossible because those very terms were loaded with moral contempt and loathing.
And in the Current West, ‘racism’ has the same kind of effect. Thus, even if someone like Charles Murray wants to calmly discuss the subject of race, it is denounced immediately as ‘racist’, and then any views about racial differences between whites and blacks is associated with slavery, Jim Crow, and lynching. This hysteria would have us believe that because racial differences had been invoked the past to justify certain institutions, any idea of racial differences must be to restore slavery.
This is like someone in a communist system insisting that any argument in favor of capitalism and market economics must be evil because, at least in his mind, anything associated with markets and profits must be about the greedy rich hogging all the wealth, sadistic henchmen tyrannizing workers, giant smokestacks belching out black soot to choke the proletariat, and innocents beaten down with truncheons. The radical stigmatization of the term ‘capitalism’ made it difficult for reformers to call for more efficient market economics because their reputations and careers(and even lives) could be ruined by accusations of being ‘bourgeois reactionary’ or ‘capitalist roader’. Even basic market reforms and limited privatization that might boost the economy became taboo in many quarters because, according to the communist terminology, there could never be a moderate and balanced form of capitalism. No, all forms of capitalism were extreme, exploitative, & evil, and that was that, and there was nothing more to be said.
People in the West face the same trouble with the term ‘racist’. As Charles Murray and many others found out, there are too many people brainwashed by PC into believing that rational ideas about race and racial differences are simply not possible. There can only be one view of race, and it is ‘nazi’.

Now, there are idiotic Nazi types who do espouse extreme and radical views on race. Calling them ‘racist’ would be correct to the extent that they do hold views on racial reality and racial differences. But the difference is their views are indeed radical and extreme, and more importantly, there is no way that sane and rational people who believe in racial reality and racial differences have views that resemble the lunacies of Neo-Nazism. So, my advice is not for radical racists who are prone to saying idiotic things. As so much of what they say is numbnuts and retarded, I have no wish to represent them or defend them. Fools who dig themselves into holes can’t be helped.

But, what if you’re a sane, rational, and honest person? What if your views on racial reality and racial differences are fully in accordance with known facts & data and are indeed in alignment with what any honest pair of eyes can see from racial reality in any society. If you’re that person and if what you’ve said makes good sense, then the worst thing you can do is deny that you are ‘racist’ when that charge is thrown at you. If your race-ism is valid & true and if you’re accused of ‘racism’, the proper response is to say that your views are ‘race-ist and true’.
This puts the accuser in a bind. After all, truth has the advantage of prestige. How can falsehood be better than the truth? Those who argue for the Noble Lie will lose soon enough because no one wants to believe that he or she must stick to demonstrable falsehoods for the ‘higher good’. People want to believe that their righteousness is based on rightness about reality. The rabid dogs of PC want to believe that science, reasons, and facts are on their side. To be sure, there are some PC hacks who argue that truth about race must be suppressed for the ‘higher good’. But such argument simply cannot stand for long. It’s like the Geocentrism of the Catholic Church couldn’t withstand the truth of real astronomy that placed the Sun at the center. If PC admits that it favors lies over truth in the name of the ‘higher good’, it will be admitting that PC 'goodness' has no legs of truth to stand on. It must be propped up by crutches of deception, the logic of which is not unlike withholding the truth about Santa Claus to little children.

So, truth beats all in the end. Those with truth on their side merely need to speak honestly because truth backs them up. In contrast, those opposed to the truth must resort to lies, propaganda, hysteria, or banal homilies. Indeed, the reason why so many Jews(in media and academia), Antifa Janissary types, and cuck-collaborators are so triggered by rational race-ists is due to their abject fear that they may indeed be wrong on facts and truth, thus on the wrong side of history. Not only are racial differences so obvious to the naked eye but new genetic studies are showing that group differences among various races are all too real. PC hacks are now so desperate that they go beyond calling people ‘racist’ and call them ‘nazi’ as well. (This is rich coming from Jewish globalists especially because, if we were to judge people by what they DO as opposed to what they SAY, Jewish Power is the most nazi-like force in the world as it indulges in Jewish supremacism, warmongering & imperialism, politics of paranoia & scapegoating, cult of megalomania, and even genocidal tendencies.) PC hacks hope to shut down debate by screaming ‘racist’, and that is supposed to decide there-and-then that your race-ist views are false and invalid.
But if you do have truth and facts on your side, you should respond to the charge of ‘racism’ by clarifying that your views are, yes, ‘race-ist’ and also true. This way, the term ‘race-ism’ is gradually, step by step, associated with the courageous will to speak the truth and counter the platitudes of PC. Prog idiots use ‘racist’ as shortcut to invalidate those who won’t get on with the program, and they gained much power by convincing so many people that, yes indeed, any view about racial differences had to be about irrational ‘hatred’ and ‘supremacism’.

And PC got the upperhand because even people with rational and sane views on race, upon being accused of ‘racism’, denied the charge and tried to explain themselves on ground of science and facts. But the fact is they never had a useful term for their rational position on race. Because the neutral formulation of race + ism has been defined to mean something extreme(and possibly the most evil thing in the universe), people with rational views on race simply didn't know how to characterize their positions. Perhaps, they could have used the term ‘genetist’(as opposed to geneticist who is a researcher of genetics). A genetist could mean someone who believes in the genetic or biological roots of human existence. But ‘genetist’ is too broad and would apply to all life forms. As we are mostly involved with human affairs, it made sense to winnow down to categories and concepts with the greatest relevance to us. And race is of great importance because evolution has been at work to create different human groups that really do vary generally in appearance, body size, intelligence, strength, speed, temperament, and other factors. Therefore, we must stick to the term that addresses the reality of race, and that term must be race + ism or race-ism. If race is real(and it is), then it means there are real differences among races. That is the truth, and we prefer the truth over falsehood. So, it means we are race-ist and truthful. Then, if some PC dog barks at us and accuses us of ‘racism’, we must simply say that, yes, our positions are race-ist-and-true. PC dolts assume that the mere accusation of ‘racism’ has a magically discrediting and disinfecting effect on people who espouse 'hateful' views.

But they are unprepared to deal with people who dare to point out that race-ism = truth. If we stand our ground and insist that our views are race-ist-and-true, then the other side will find itself in a bind. They are so used to ‘winning arguments’ with that magic word ‘racist’ that they've grown mentally lazy. Our enemies are accustomed to people cowering or backing down because PC has long held that ‘racism’ = extreme views on race = falsehood.
But we can easily demonstrate that race-ism is valid and true. Facts are really on our side. Races do exist, and the differences are not just skin-deep. So, our race-ism is rational and sane. Furthermore, because we have the facts on our side, our views are race-ist-and-true. Because we stand our ground and associate race-ism with truth, it is now up to the PC side to prove that our race-ist views are untrue. But this is difficult because the evidence of racial differences is so everywhere and so obvious. Furthermore, the advancement of genetic science is beginning to prove that differences among racial groups go the roots of our DNA.
So, there you go, the idea of Race-ist-and-True will be difficult to beat. Then, the next time you are accused of ‘racism’ by PC dogs and dolts, don’t cower and sweat as you try to persuade them that you’re not ‘racist’. Instead, tell them that your views are Race-ist-and-True. Insist that truth is on your side precisely because you are a race-ist who has the will and courage to look at the world with honest eyes. See what happens.

Race Denial Is No Long Tenable - Ideology Is Downstream from Iconography

Following WWII and the demise of Nazism(and revelations of its horrors) and prior to the explosion of race problems in America(and now in Europe as well), one could forgive the sincere belief among intellectuals, social scientists, and politicians that race is essentially a ‘social construct’ and, once equality was assured under the law, all races could achieve more or less the same. If intellectuals were wrong about race reality and racial differences back then, it was more out of naivete or idealism than dogma, cowardice, or some pernicious agenda.

But after several decades of social experimentation, it should be clear to any honest person that racial differences are all-too-real and account for the persistent problems of race, especially pertaining to blacks. But because of the pervasiveness of PC as status symbol(as political incorrectness will invariably lead to blacklisting or demotion in the choicest careers), iconography of holy relics(as Jews, Negroes, and Homos are now objects of mandatory reverence), and radical violence as forms of intimidation(as heretics & dissidents face real danger of being physically assaulted by Antifa thugs, BLM lunatics, or screeching campus fanatics), most academics and media people are FORCED to be dishonest, FORCED to ‘not know’ what they, in the heart of hearts, know.

We can forgive a white liberal in the 1940s, 1950s, and even in the 1960s for believing that black conditions would be vastly improved with new laws and federal programs because, after all, blacks(along with other non-white races) had been denied equal opportunity in America. But after several decades of undeniable proof of black advantage in muscle power, black impulsiveness, black aggressiveness, and black psychopathy that tends toward obsessive egotism & narcissism, one has to be willfully disingenuous or just plain delusional to insist that the racial problems in this country owe to the legacy of slavery and ‘Jim Crow’.

It’s no longer about Jim Crow but ‘Radio Raheem’(the obnoxious thug of Spike Lee’s worthless DO THE RIGHT THING), the kind of moron who is all too common in black communities across America. The problem is too many Negroes who act like ‘nogs’ and carry this ‘groid’ gene that makes them tougher, more aggressive, more impulsive, and more psychopathic. After decades of black rampage against other races(and among themselves), this fact should be plain as day, but the tyranny of political correctness prohibits honest discussion of race that locates the black problem as rooted in genetics. As a result, we are left with praising everything black(as if even Problem Blacks are really just misguided and misunderstood victims of the System)and blaming anything white as explanation for the failures of the black community.

PC is an excuse-making machine that blames external white forces for all that stinks in the black community. (This is all the more disingenuous because it is the problematic nature of blacks that is hyped and sensationalized as ‘cool’ and ‘badass’. So, the very white progs who insist something must be done about black gangsta culture of mayhem and murder also promote it as ‘authentic’ and something worthy of emulation.) The idiot critic Andrew O’Hehir at Salon surmised(or pontificated) that Detroit’s decline owed to envious white racism’s punishment of Motown. Apparently, white folks decided Detroit must go down because Smokey Robinson wrote too many groovy songs.

To be sure, conservatives are hardly better on the Race Issue; they also play by the PC songbook in their own way. So, we are told that Detroit was ruined by Liberalism, socialism, and the Democratic Party. Apparently, it had nothing to do with race, specifically the naturally destructive tendency among blacks. If so, why are some white-majority cities under Democratic rule among the richest in America? Why is San Francisco and Manhattan, two very Liberal cities, overflowing with wealth and privilege despite their ‘big government’ policies?

Or consider how Ann Coulter blames lowly black behavior on the Democratic Party, as if blacks would have acted better under Republicans. So, how are blacks acting in Republican Alabama or Texas? Or channeling Thomas Sowell, Ann Coulter muses that blacks learned how to be violent from Scotch-Irish hillbillies, a notion that would imply that Black Africa was an Edenic paradise of peace and harmony when, in fact, it was inhabited by spear-chucking savages from time immemorial. Why is there so much nonsense about blacks?

Political Correctness isn’t just about ideas & issues but also about idols & icons. In a way, the power of idolatry & iconography is more crucial to the sway of PC. After all, even as the ‘right’ and the ‘left’ differ in their explanations & proposals of the Black Problem, both sides are agreed that blacks, along with Jews and even homos, must be treated as a preternaturally noble and holy people, a Magic People. Despite differences in ideology, the American ‘right’ and American ‘left’ are agreed on the icons. It’s like the conflict between Catholics and Protestants or between Sunnis and Shias. Despite doctrinal differences, they worship the same gods or icons. So, ‘iconology’ > ideology. While ideology offers explanations, ‘iconology’ determines what or whom should be worshiped. There is a reason why Jews, homos, and Negroes have special iconic power in the US. Part of the reason is obvious: Jews control the media and decide which people should get favorable attention and adoration. But it’s also because Jews, homos, and blacks have special talents. Jews are especially good with intellectualism, science, business, and humor. So, they are admired as people of superior skills whose achievements continue to do wonders for all humanity. Jews also promoted the Cult of Shoah. As for homos, they are naturally fanciful, flamboyant, & narcissistic, and in our Age of Vanity & Hedonism, those qualities count for a lot. As for Negroes, they dominate sports, pop music, and sexual symbolism. For many whites, nothing is worthier of worship than the black ‘twerking’ booty and the black dong. Andrew Breitbart once said "Politics is downstream from culture." Sometimes, ideology is downstream from iconography. People are captivated by something first on the sensory level and then seek rational or ideological explanations to justify their fixation. It’s like the John Hurt’s closeted homo character in LOVE AND DEATH IN LONG ISLAND who is so enthralled by the iconic sexuality of some second-rate actor that his mind follows his heart and balls.

Everyone is Racist. Difference is between C-racists and D-racists.

All this talk of ‘racism’ misses the point.

In fact, we are all ‘racists’. It is impossible not to be because we have eyes, ears, and flesh. We were designed to notice things, and humans notice differences. It was part of evolution, to notice differences.

The real difference isn’t between ‘racists’ and ‘non-racists’(or ‘anti-racists’).

It is between c-racists and d-racists.

C-racist is a candid racist who is open and honest about his awareness of the existence of races and racial differences.

D-racist is a dishonest(or disingenuous)racist who comes up with all sorts of rationalizations, evasions, and deceptions to mask or obfuscate what he really sees, feels, and thinks while pretending to be ‘progressive’, ironically often by championing the blatant racism of other peoples. So, while PC says it's wrong to be ‘virulently white’, it’s okay to be virulently Jewish in NY, virulently Cuban in Miami, virulently brown in LA, and virulently black in Detroit or Baltimore.

D-racism can be conscious or subconscious(because so many people have been raised to reject the notion of race altogether and to see whites and only whites as the source of all evil — they think dealing with ‘white problem’ will be a cure-all since whites are characterized as the sole evil while other races are naturally good. It’s like a communist thinking the economy will prosper only if the capitalists are gotten rid of because Marxism blames all evil on the bourgeoisie. Of course, the economy gets even worse without the presence of evil capitalists, so communists end up calling each other ‘capitalist roaders’ to explain the worsening economy.) Incidentally, d-racists are too stupid to realize that PC is racist against whites. Radical Justice has blinded them to reality. Their morality is high on the nihilism of preening righteousness.

Racism can be based on truth or falsehood. There are correct racial theories and false racial theories. The theory that whites are faster than blacks is false. The theory that blacks are faster than whites is true. Jesse Owens destroyed the false 'Aryan-ist' theory and established the true 'black-ist' theory that blacks can run faster. His feat didn’t prove racial equality but black superiority in sprinting.
But d-racists only focus on the discrediting of the Aryan-ist theory, as if that proves all races are equal. If a beagle claims it can run faster than a greyhound and loses, does it mean all dogs are equal? No, it means greyhounds are superior in speed. False racism(beagles are fastest) would be replaced by true racism(greyhounds are fastest).

A theory that Eskimos are smarter than Jews is false. A theory that Jews are smarter than Eskimos is true. Perhaps, to c-racists and d-racists, we can add another category: the f-racists or false racists who peddle false racial theories. D-racists(who pretend to be anti-racists) claim to disprove racism by discrediting the false racists. But they never disproved the c-racists who notice REAL existing racial differences.

F-racist says beagles are faster than greyhounds.

D-racist says all dogs are equal because the greyhound beat the beagle and discredited the beagle theory of superiority.

C-racist says greyhounds are faster and superior in speed to beagles.

C-racism is the only truth.

When we look at how people respond to sports, music, crime, residence, academics, justice, sex, policing, etc, everyone seems to notice racial differences on some level.

C-racists admit as much. D-racists deny that they do even though they do.

Look at yuppie Liberal Gentropolis. It is because Jews and Asians are smarter than there are more of them than blacks in those areas.

Look at the NBA, and blacks dominate because blacks are bigger, faster, and stronger.

Much of interracist sex is black male and white female because white women find Negroes to be superior studs.

Look at gentrification carried out out by affluent urban ‘progressives’. It is essentially about pushing blacks out to make safe spaces for bobo yuppies and hipsters who went to good colleges and/or have generous trusts from grandparents.

Jews are smarter/richer and influence US policy to favor Israelis over Palestinians. Jewish ‘progressives’ or progs seem to have no problem with this Foreign Policy that racially prioritizes Jews over Palestinians.

And on an on.

‘Racism’ is something far more complicated than saying the n-word. Ism means belief or consciousness, and it is impossible not to notice racial differences and be affected by it.

Even when you prefer another race more than your own, you are being ‘racist’.
When a white woman prefers a Negro man and when a white boy wants to be like a black rapper, they are acting on premise that black race is superior to the white race in sex and fighting(and acting unruly).

So, it’s really about c-racists and d-racists.

I notice racial differences that are the product of 100,000 yrs of human evolution, and I see how they affect society.

After all, the main reason for black aggression isn’t history but biology. Blacks are more muscular and have more aggressive temperaments. I grew up in an integrated community, and black boys tended to see white boys as flabby and slow weakling wussies easy to pick and beat up. (That was the main reason for white flight in which Jewish liberals took part. Prog Jews are d-racists, always denouncing white gentiles as ‘racist’ while doing everything to seek safe space from the tougher and more aggressive blacks. After all, NY made a comeback by getting very tough on black crime. But it never got tagged as ‘city of hate’ or ‘city of greed’ because NY owns the national media that serves as its publicity machine.)

Needless to say, I’m a c-racist or race-ist.

Ism means belief or consciousness, and I believe in the existence of race and racial differences.