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.

Incidentals and Fundamentals in the Consideration of Truth

In the search for truth, we need to consider two sets of knowledge: Incidentals and Fundamentals.

Incidentals are facts about incidents that take place everyday all over the world. Crimes, accidents, meetings, mergers, riots, marches, deals, and etc. all comprise the realm of incidentals. Incidental truth seeks straight facts about what happened where, when, and how. Exactitude and accuracy are crucial. Incidentals are often difficult to ascertain without indisputable video & audio evidence.
It's like we don't know exactly what happened on the night when George Zimmerman shot and killed Trayvon Martin. We know for sure that Zimmerman was assaulted and Martin was shot, but we don't know how the event unfolded. We only have Zimmerman's account and approximation based on collected material evidence. Incidentals vary from incident to incident even though there are patterns to certain kinds of incidents, such as drive-by-shooting. They happen to be drug-related and carried out mostly by black gangs. Because each incident is unique and isolated, one can't rely on other incidents, however similar they may be, to determine what happened at a particular incident. So, every murder or business deal happened within its unique set of circumstances. Incidentals are mutable, each incident being different from other incidents.

Fundamentals are immutable. They are about general truths governing peoples, things, and places around the world. For instance, it is a fundamental fact that lions are stronger than leopards and hyenas. There may be cases where a wounded or old lion is killed by a hyena or leopard. So, not every incidence of violence between lions and hyenas(or leopards) involves lions emerging victorious. But despite variations among incidents, it is a fundamental fact that lions are bigger and stronger than hyenas and leopards, and that means most encounters between lions and hyenas(or leopards) will favor the lions.

To know the facts about an incident, every incident has to be investigated separately. Just because many murders follow a certain pattern doesn't mean that a particular murder under investigation happened in the same way in the same place by the same people for the same reasons as other murders.
In contrast, the ever-shifting details of countless and ever-unfolding incidents aren't crucial to our understanding of the fundamentals of the world. So, even though there may be dumb Jews and many incidents involving Jews doing stupid things, it is a fundamental that Jews(at least Ashkenazi kind) are smarter than other groups. Likewise, even though there are cases where black athletes lose to non-blacks, it is a fundamental that blacks are generally more muscular and athletic than non-blacks.
Fundamentals don't ensure that every incident will conform to general truths. It is possible that, on a bad day, a black basketball team will lose to a non-black one. Also, even in games in which the black team wins, the margins of victories will be bigger in some games than in others. So, each game, as an incident, has to be reported on differently. And this is what the news are about. They are about reporting the incidentals. So, sports pages will cover each game as an isolated and singular event. While some teams will be expected to win more games than others, each game has its unique set of stats and results.
But that still doesn't invalidate the fundamental fact that some teams are better than others and that some races excel at sports more than other races do. Also, it's a fundamental fact that men are better at sports than women are. There may be rare cases when women are victorious over men, but the fundamental says men will prevail in most cases.
And in gambling, it is a fundamental that the House-Wins-in-the-End. Without such fundamental, gambling industry couldn't survive. So, even though there are individuals who gamble and win, the overwhelming truth is the casino wins far more than it loses.

While incidentals gleaned from news are crucial to our understanding of world affairs and social issues, more important is an understanding of the fundamentals of the world. For instance, one may learn of many individual cases where gamblers have won against the House, but the central fact one must know about gambling is the House-Wins-in-the-End. That is the immutable truth about the gambling industry. The odds are calibrated so that the House will usually win or win more than lose.

Consider the incident with Michael Brown, the big black guy who was gunned down by a police officer in Ferguson, Missouri. To know the incidentals, we have to rely on witness accounts and material evidence from the scene of the altercation. There are incidents where black thugs attack the police first. There are incidents where cops shoot an unarmed man who poses no threat. So, each incident has to be treated independently.

But we cannot ignore the fundamentals of black violence. These are immutable fundamentals about blacks: (1) Blacks are bigger and more muscular. (2) Blacks are more aggressive and abrasive. (3) Blacks feel contempt for whites and other non-blacks as 'weak and wussy'. (4) Blacks are generally less intelligent. Their lower intelligence & higher aggression make them less reflective and self-critical. (5) Due to aforementioned facts, blacks are more likely to act thuggish, commit crime, and come in conflict with the police.

Those are fundamentals that must be considered in race relations in America. Now, those fundamentals don't guarantee that every altercation between blacks and whites will involve blacks-as-aggressors and whites-as-victims. There are cases, rare as they may be, of white aggressors and black victims. But given the fundamentals, it is hardly surprising that interracial violence is overwhelmingly black-on-white. Likewise, it is a fundamental that men are bigger, stronger, and more aggressive than women, therefore most sexual violence will be male-on-female even though there are incidents where women attack men.

Fundamentals are essential, but we mustn't confuse true fundamentals(developed from integrity, honesty, and courage) with false fundamentals(concocted from official dogma, political correctness, intimidation, moral blackmail, and self-serving antics of the elites). Black Lives Matter or BLM was based on a false fundamental. It posited that rogue 'racist' white cops are out-of-control and gunning down innocent angelic blacks for no reasons. This false fundamental was erected from bits and pieces of the Magic Negro myth, Hollywood & TV shows, education as PC indoctrination, and propagandized media that employ semantic tricks like referring to black criminals & thugs as 'teens' and 'youths' to suppress true fundamentals of race relations. They all conspire to maintain the image of the Magic Tragic Innocent Negro from the pages and reels of TO KILL A MOCKING BIRD. Also, even in cases where blacks are indeed depicted as killers, they are romanticized as rappin' outlaws & gangstas who be so 'cool and shit'. So, black thuggery is either glorified as something 'badass'(therefore beyond conventional 'lame' morality) or as heroic rebellion against the 'racist' system that won't give the Negro no chance to 'survive'.

Because of their willful preference for the false fundamental of BLM, it was assumed by Proglodytes and blowhard blacks like Charles Blow that the main problem of America is innocent blacks being gunned down by 'racist' white cops. Of course, this was all just a fantasy. Blacks are mostly killed by other blacks --- blacks also rob, rape, and murder many non-blacks --- , and most cops(black or white) have been justified in shooting at violent non-compliant blacks. There are surely cases where innocent blacks are killed by panicked or psychotic cops. But those are exceptions than the rule.

Because the false fundamental of the BLM narrative was so ludicrous, the activists had to scream & throw tantrums and resort to intimidation to push their agenda. It's like a liar or fool who can't win on facts and logic will fall back on high drama and volume. If you can't win by facts and argument, try kicking and screaming.

So, what has been the result of BLM's false fundamental's being crammed down America's throat? It led to the Ferguson Effect that only increased crime, violence, and number of dead blacks in cities.
True fundamental on race says that blacks commit more violence and crime because they are stronger, more aggressive, less intelligent, and less reflective. So, more police presence will suppress black crime and save black lives(and non-black lives). False fundamental on race says that rogue white cops are going around killing angelic innocent blacks. Because of BLM rage and demands, police in many cities decided to retreat and be 'more sensitive', which allowed blacks to be more flagrant and arrogant in their natural racial tendencies. So, the result of cops standing down or retreating led to more licentiousness among blacks to indulge in violence and mayhem. And that meant more dead black bodies. But black pride, the product of lower black IQ and childlike egomania, cannot own up to any of this. You can't expect people who describe their own emotions as 'incandescent rage' to think clearly or logically. They are full of self-righteous self-flattery that is nothing more than moral flatulence. And white 'liberal' conscience, premised on virtue-signaling and preening display of 'compassion', is too stuck-up to come to terms with reality.

Anyway, even though unique details matter for each and every incident, one cannot overestimate the importance of assessing the fundamentals of racial differences, black characteristics, Jewish abilities, homosexual tendencies, ways of power, basic facets of human nature, racial differences in personality & temperament, and etc. in order to understand the true state of the world.
True fundamentals are the most important guide in our interaction with the world.
That is precisely why Jews who control the media and academia are so invested in spreading false fundamentals as palliatives to sustain their power and privilege. After all, true fundamentals enable gentiles to understand matters more clearly and deal more effectively with Jewish Globalists whose tentacles of false narratives have done so much in service of Jewish Supremacism at the expense of gentiles.

All Immigration is race-ist

Immigration is racist.

Look at the immigration patterns.

Jews bitch about ‘white racism’, but Jewish immigration patterns have always favored white nations.

After all, Latin America and Anglo-America were both open for immigration, but Jews chose the whiter America over mixed-race Latin America.

And Jews almost never decided to move to black Africa. If anything, the favorite African destination for Jewish immigration was white-ruled South Africa where Jews made lots of money in diamonds. Jews chose South Africa because whites ruled it and maintained the law-and-order necessary for Jews to do business.

Look at Asians. Most Asian-Americans are progs who bitch and whine all the time about n
white racism'(as yellows are toadies who follow prevailing officialdom, which now happens to be PC), but their immigration preference has been for white-majority nations. Almost all Asians would rather move to America, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada(or Europe) than to highly diverse Latin America. And they certainly don’t want to emigrate permanently to Africa or Middle East. Some go there to work(like Chinese laborers), but they don’t want to settle in those parts. Also, even Asian women who bitch about white evil racially prefer white husbands.

So, immigration is racist. Mexicans want to move El Norte to where the Anglos are. They don’t want to move El South to where people are even less white than Mexicans are.

And look at Muslim and Black African immigration into Europe. Their decisions are 'white supremacist' in the sense that they think white nations are superior destinations over non-white ones. We don’t see Muslims move to black African nations. We don’t see black Africans wanting to move to Mexico or India.

And even when it comes to western nations, non-white emigrants/migrants/refugees prefer northern pale-white nations to southern-swarthy-white nations. They’d rather move to Germany or Sweden than be stuck in Greece or Italy.

Anglos are just about the only people who were willing to move to lands with nothing and build something on it. They turned wilderness into civilization.

All other peoples have no such will and vision. They want to go to where civilization has already been built and feed off it. They want to feed off whites even as they bitch about ‘racism’ even though their immigration preference itself is racist in seeking white nations over non-white ones.

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.