Conversation Between a “Racist” and an “Anti-Racist”

The following exchange is between myself, the “racist” and a Guy, the “anit-racist”, posting under the name of GoatFakir, on the thread below the line of an article in the Telegraph, “Martin Nowak: a helping hand for evolution�by Tom Chivers.

Rogerhicks: GoatFakir, Thanks for the dictionary definition [of “tribal”], its derogatory meaning being of particular interest, I think.

Human behaviour is very malleable and complicated, thus often making it difficult to understand the details of, but there can be no doubt that we are an intensely tribal animal, capable of very strong emotions in respect to our sense of group identity and loyalty (because we evolved as a member of an extended family group, or tribe).

This the STATE has always understood how to manipulate and exploit the expression (and suppression) of for its own purposes, by ridiculing, demonising and, when necessary, punishing its unsanctioned expression.

Our tribal nature inclines us strongly to identify with members of our own ethnic group, which the state now demonises as “racist”, at least if you belong to the ethnic white majority. Amongst ethnic minorities the state tolerates (would even have us celebrate) expressions of ethnic identity, because it doesn’t threaten its authority and POWER (at least, not yet), in the way that the expression of white ethnic identity would.

GoatFakir: Ludicrous to even imagine there are white skinned people: pink puce yes. My skin colour is one of the least interesting and least identifying factors about me. How did you come to be so lacking for your inaccurate perception of yours to become your identity?

Rogerhicks: Skin colour in itself, as we all know, isn’t important, except for how long you can expose yourself to the Sun without getting burned. I know Europeans who can tan a lot darker than many “dark-skinned” people. What’s important (extremely important for a tribal animal like ourselves) is its associations with ethnic (tribal) identity.

One might compare skin colour with a national (or rather, state) flag, which is just a piece of patterned and coloured cloth; in itself, like skin colour, completely unimportant. But the associations people make with it are extremely important, millions having died (usually vainly) in wars fighting for them.

GoatFakir: My house has folk from what you’d regard as at least four “ethnicities” and I identify with this group of people. Other loyalties and interests are overtaking racism in their importance thankfully.

Loved the Irish Iranian West Indian wedding I attended a few years back

Rogerhicks: GoatFakir, You are equating my ideas with “racism”, i.e. demonising them, which is, of course, what the STATE wants us all to do, so that IT can lay claim to both your, my and everyone’s tribal loyalty.

It is not for the STATE to tell us what our tribal, i.e. national, identity is. If you want to identify with the British (or whatever) State, you are welcome, but not me. I decide my own tribal, i.e. national identity. And if you want us to be friends, rather than enemies, you must respect that, just as I respect whatever national identity you choose to be, which seems to be a mixed and multi-ethnic national identity.

You choose (or have allowed the state to choose for you) to be “colour-blind”, i.e. indifferent to ethnic difference, and perhaps you really are, which is fine. But most of us are not and are sick of having to pretend (in order to please the state) that we are.

GoatKakir: As I have already pointed out I act independently of state ideology which has often been racist. I fear you ignore clear facts which show also that your racist ideology is on the wane

Rogerhicks: It’s not a “racist” ideology that I am championing, although I appreciate how difficult it is for you to recognise that, your own, statist ideology of “anti-racism” defining itself by declaring all opposition as “racist”.

The Catholic Church did much the same thing, and for the same power-political reasons, in the Middle Ages, condemning any contradiction of its teachings (ideology) as “heresy”.

It is your misconceived “anti-racist” ideology which will soon be on the wane, I hope, just as Catholic ideology was forced to give way to truth and reason, and to people’s desire to define their own identity (whether religious or national), rather than have it dictated to them by the state or church.

GoatFakir: Cap fits. I’m rather more independently minded vis a vis the state than you of course having quit Labour over the racist 1968 Commonwealth Immigration Act. Impressed with your practiced dissemblance before breakfast. Now less than engaged with it however.

Rogerhicks: GoatKakir, I’m disappointed that you continue to disparage me, as a “racist” and “dissembler”. Hardly the way to promote understanding and friendship.

However, I’m not holding it against you, since, like most people, you have been seduced into believing state ideology.

As this ideology is increasingly recognised for the statist, power-political tool it is, hopefully, you will come to understand and respect my position.

GoatFakir: You may characterise the dominant ideology of the middle ages and the rising world zeitgeist as the culture of some imaginary “state” but I fear you delude yourself tendentiously.

The catholic church of the middle ages may have seemed like a state: neither the UN nor any other body acts so world wide now In fact the foreign based media of the UK uses racism whenever it can to distract from the growth of world wide multiculturalism and equality.

Rogerhicks: The dominant ideology of the European Middle Ages was Catholicism, which fragmented following the Reformation, before Christian ideologies (belief) in general went into steep decline, leaving something of an ideological power vacuum, which Marxists and fascists succeeded in filling for a time, before ww2 eliminated fascism and disillusionment set in with respect to Marxism/Socialism.

Following ww2, the ideological power vacuum was filled by adoption of an ideology which was the exact, but equally extreme, opposite of Nazi racial ideology, which also fitted in nicely both with state ideology and with the Left’s internationalist, i.e. anti-nationalist, ideology: the ideology of “colourblindness” or “one-human-racism”, of race and ethnic origins being of no social or political importance, i.e. for national identity, except to evil “racists”, like the Nazis.

Only, race and ethnic origins ARE important, certainly to most individuals, when not forced by state intimidation to suppress and deny it (even to themselves), for a deep and meaningful sense of personal and group, i.e. national, identity.

This may seem to pose an irresolvable dilemma; but not so, once you realise that the STATE is not a NATION, but just likes posing as one, in order to legitimise its authority (and POWER) over all the people, irrespective of ethnicity, under its jurisdiction.

We can’t simply abolish the STATE, because of our dependency on it, especially for enforcing the rule of law and non-violence (we don’t want to return to the times of tribal warfare), but we do need to understand its perverted Darwinian nature, how it facilitates “society’s” self-exploitation to the advantage of power, wealth, privilege and talent, and is thus inherently unjust, inhumane and unsustainable, addicted as it is to perpetual economic growth.

GoatFakir: Even the chinese are becoming less racist. They do have the wit to want their economy to grow.

Rogerhicks: The Chinese, I’m afraid aren’t even liberal-statist, as Britain and other western demoncracies are, but just statist, which the MADNESS of their own obsession with perpetual economic growth testifies to.

GoatFakir: Their racism is reducing and they are wise to look for economic growth. Perhaps you should look to your own identity problems rather than externalising them?  Bye.

Rogerhicks: It was my “own identity problems” with the British state abolishing the ethnic basis of its claim to nationhood which motivated me to try and understand what was going on.

I used to identify with Britain as my nation, but no longer can, because, as I’ve come to realise, it is not a nation, but just a mercenary state posing as a nation.

So now, I’m in search of my nation, as I believe everyone should be, so that together we can put an end to the tyranny of statism. Bye.

Concern for Ethnic Minorities

According to an article in today’s Telegraph, Karen Buck, shadow work and pensions minister, told the Independent:

“I am very, very concerned about the impact of these cuts on black, Muslim and ethnic minority households, in particular.”

Just what one would expect from a white liberal statist: more concerned for OTHERS than she is for her OWN (Moral Basis of the Liberal-Fascist State).

But, of course, she doesn’t see her fellow indigenous Brits as “her own”, but identifies instead with all humanity that manages to find its way to our shores, and, like her former party leader, Gordon Brown, considers anyone who doesn’t, to be a “bigot” or a “racist”.

THIS clearly illustrates the MADNESS of so-called “British society” and, I guess, western society in general.

Like many other indigenous Brits and ethnic Europeans (I would guess, the majority) I don’t see ethnic majorities as “my own” – unless I happen to know then personally as individuals, which is quite different. The vast majority of ethnic minorities I do not know personally and do not identify with, in contrast to members of my own race (ethnic Europeans) with whom I spontaneously identity – at least, until I get to know them.

Does that make me (and most other native Europeans) a “bigot” and a “racist”? No it doesn’t, although that is what the STATE wants everyone to believe, so that it can continue to pose as our NATION.

What it in fact makes me, is a “nationalist”, someone who decides his own national identity (the natural basis of which is ethnicity), as opposed to a “statist”, who allows the STATE (which suppresses and denies the natural ethnic basis of nationality) to decide it for him.

A racist is someone who hates other races (ethnic groups), which I don’t. I respect them, provide they respect me. But I don’t identity with them as I do with my own race, ethnic group and NATION.

Understandably, this presents a problem to the British STATE, whose legitimacy rests on its claim to representing a single “multi-ethnic nation”, which, in my humble view, is an oxymoronic absurdity.

My national identity is based on how I FEEL, not on how the STATE tells me I should feel.

Are there any other NATIONALIST, like me, out there? I hope so, because we need to start organising ourselves, peacefully and grass-roots-democratically, into genuine NATIONS.

Members of different nations need to respect each other and cooperate in the struggle against STATISM.

What about those who want to continue equating the British STATE with their NATION – people of mixed race, perhaps?

That’s fine, provide they respect other nations, like my own (which is ethnic European), and don’t try demonising us (as the STATE does) as “racists”.

I know quite a few people from ethnic minorities and of mixed-race and hope to remain friends with them. But we have to stop pretending, for the sake of the STATE, to belong to the same NATION

The Liberal-Fascist Vision for Europe

And anyone daring to oppose it is a RACIST.

The following quotes are take from an article in yesterday’s Guardian (where else?) by Loretta Napoleoni:

Title: “May Europe’s multicultural new generation succeed where we failed”

The new generation of teenagers is the first born inside the united Europe’s multicultural melting pot, one no longer just populated by Europeans.

Multiculturalism may well be our saviour, wresting us out from the straitjacket of our history, thrusting the old continent into an environment where other ethnicities, less cynical and more positive, will play a big role in its future.

The new blood of the children of immigrants both drives transnational protest and cements solidarity among Europe’s young [link to article containing even more brazen liberal-fascist misinformation and ideology].

I wish I were young again to walk that line with you, to share the experience of reshaping a continent. My generation had similar dreams but failed to achieve them.

Will you succeed where we failed? I believe so. Because the socio-cultural paradigm of Europe has finally shifted, and those who rule us today do not represent such a shift [because still so hideously "white"!]. As your generation comes to power, then the political paradigm will inevitably alter.

Europeans will no longer be explorers; they will not adventure across unknown seas to steal others’ treasure, they will not scale the highest mountains to plant flags, nor will they look west or east to decide what to think and how to behave internationally. But they will be able to delve into the new multicultural spirit of a reinvigorated continent for new economic, social and political formulas.

That is the Europe I dream of for you and the one I want to belong to.

It makes for very disturbing reading and if you feel as I remember feeling in the past, your initial reaction will be to push it aside and forget about it, because we know that any objections we raise, unless self-censored to meaninglessness, will immediately be met with accusation of “racism”.

But don’t dismiss it. That is what many people did after reading Hitler’s Mein Kampf, refusing to take seriously his horrific vision for Europe, dominated by a Germanic master race.

The liberal-fascist Left have got their OWN master race in mind: the product of mass non-European immigration and the melting pot thus created. They are as intent on eliminating their own white race of ethnic Europeans as the Nazis were on eliminating the Jews – but, of course, for our own good and that of humanity as a whole (motivated, not by hatred for others, but by self-hate, or perhaps just a pathological lack of love for or identity with their own, which their ideology has misled them into believing is ALL humanity).

And if anyone dares say they don’t want to see their own, white, ethnic European race, eliminated, they are accused of being “racist”, on the ideological grounds that “Race Doesn’t Matter”, or even exist. Suggesting that it does matter, i.e. for a deep and meaningful sense of personal and group (e.g. national) identity (as I do), is considered “racist” – at least, if you are white.

Once the Nazis got to power, no one could oppose their ideology without landing in jail, or worse. Now, having gone from one extreme to the other,liberal-fascists are in power and no one can oppose their ideology without being condemned a “racist”, which isn’t as bad as the threat of jail, but has thus far proved just as effective.

But lets be clear: liberal fascists, thank goodness, are not nearly as bad as Nazi fascists. They mean well, as most communists, socialists, Christian missionaries, etc. did (or still do), but are just misguided. Most, once they realise that, will, I am sure, change their views, just as most communists did, when they realised that the Soviet Union wasn’t, and wasn’t going to become, the utopia they had dreamed of.

Only it’s not just the liberal-fascist Left (represented in the media by the Guardian/Observer, the Independent and the BBC) that are misguided. The conservative right (represented by the Telegraph, Mail, etc.) are misguided too.

In fact, I seem to be the ONLY one who isn’t !At least, not as misguided as most; but still lost, looking for my, my people’s, while not forgetting other people’s, way . . .