Saying that in 2020 is like saying, in the midst of an ongoing Communist revolution, "We categorically condemn all exploitation of the proletariat by the bourgeoisie."
Well, exploitation should be condemned. And sometimes the middle class does exploit the working class. But in context -- the context of a triumphant evil movement that defines everything, including everything good and true, as the exploitation of the proletariat by the bourgeoisie -- what you're really saying is "Shoot more kulaks." Or, to paraphrase somewhat, "Hail Satan."
So that's how it is. If you make a point of categorically condemning "racism," no matter how defensible the literal content of your statement may be, I'm going to see it as a declaration of allegiance to the god of this world. And I'm not going to be wrong.
5 comments:
In a nutshell - YES.
Another way to understand is by the actual way that words are used. The word racism has been used in a certain asymmetrical and targetted way over the past (what?) 25 years, probably more: this definition is widely used in (for example) the mass media and the actual workings of the legal system).
This operational definition of racism means that (for example) all whites are racist. And this in turn means that supporting mainstream and official antiracist propaganda and campaigns means supporting the 'real life' definition of racism as an intrinsic sin of all whites.
It also means supporting the real-life-morality that this sin of racism is the worst of sins. Being a racist is worse (and is treated as worse, is punished as worse) than (for example) murder, rape and arson. Antiracism is always and everywhere mandatory whatever the consequences in terms of murders, rapes and fire-setting (among other things - enslavement, poverty and starvation could be added to the list of things not as bad as racism).
For a person or institution to 'condemn racism' is, in actual fact, to endorse this antiracism morality. It no excuse to say something like 'I am against What I Call racism (which is the old definition)'. That would be like someone advocating murder or rape and then saying he was using a private definition.
Greengrocering.
Bruce, the ambiguity of the term "racism" is a key feature. Condemn racism, and you are (rightly) taken to be supporting the evil "antiracist" agenda. Refuse to condemn it, and you are portrayed as condoning the atrocities associated with the Nazis and the KKK.
G, you are of course alluding to the Havel story story. It's one thing to make an antiracist statement under duress, and to know that what you are doing is evil, and to repent. But I get the feeling that very few people are repenting, that they genuinely believe they are on the side of the angels -- as indeed they are, but not the sort of angels they have in mind!
Antiracism is just a way to destroy the good. Its aim is to increase hatred, make people bow down to coercion and accept (no pun intended) that black is white and truth lies. But you know that!
Post a Comment