What they really mean by “anti-racism”

From time to time it happens that propaganda says something that sounds like grammatically and syntactically correct language, and yet your brain struggles to actually understand the content.

That may be because the propaganda demands or asserts something that is simply impossible or dangerously vague. (For example: “Yes we can.”)

Or when the propaganda tries to dissolve or reinterpret concepts. (For example, when it declares men in women’s clothing to be women by law.)

Sometimes, however, our bullshit sensor goes off because we sense that although a particular word is being used and might even be somewhat meaningful, in truth a very different concept is intended.

That is how I sometimes feel about the word “racism.”

Completely detached

When the press and politics of the propaganda state talk about racism—and especially loudly about the fight against racism—what do they really mean?

Originally, racism meant judging and condemning a person on the basis of their skin color.

In the context of the quasi-religious Critical Race Theory, racism was meant to be expanded and redefined. It was to count as racism only when a prejudice was combined with power.

In the thinking of many on the Left, racism is thus completely detached from “race.”

Among the absurdities of the new explanation of racism is that it is not supposed to be racism when ten Arab students torment a white female student because of her ethnicity. In the new-left definition, whites are always in a “position of power,” regardless of the concrete situation.

By contrast, it can be “racism” when an African ex-Muslim criticizes the faith of a European convert to Islam, since criticism of Islam can only be motivated by “prejudice.”

Power and prejudice

The accusation of racism long counted among the most effective attacks in the political-rhetorical arsenal of Western propaganda states. (And only there: in the rest of the world—and of human history—you would simply be laughed at for using “racism” as an accusation.)

But because racism as a term is no longer supposed to have anything to do with “race,” but rather with potentially ethereal concepts such as power and prejudice, institutions are needed to determine which phenomena even count as power or as prejudice. Conveniently, this is handled by the same academics and other propagandists who also redefine racism. In doing so, however, they themselves attain a position of power in society—at least as long as people fear the accusation of racism.

Harassed and disadvantaged

The new definition of racism encountered a vacuum, a broad absence of actual racism in Western society—as long as it was predominantly white (and by white we mean and those: shaped by Western culture).

With the waves of immigration in the early 21st century, however, real racism also returned to the West, into schools, authorities, newsrooms: hatred of whites and of white culture, by non-whites.

The propaganda insists, however, that imported racism against the host population is not racism. It is irrelevant that whites are hated, harassed, and disadvantaged because of their skin color and culture, because according to the academic definition, anti-white racism simply does not exist.

Forced to choose

Parts of the left-wing academy seem to be constantly mentally occupied with “anti-racism.” But if you listen more closely, it sounds like open hatred of whites. And whites in their lingo stand in for the West, Western culture, and modern civilization.

We know the feeling when the babble of propaganda sounds strangely skewed, because something is wrong. The talk of racism and anti-racism is such a case—because a word is being actively and maliciously used incorrectly.

The propaganda says that the state is fighting racism, but it only makes sense once you replace “racism,” namely with “culture, heritage, and tradition.”

The alleged fight against racism is actually a fight against tradition, culture, and heritage—and thus a fight for the eradication of the West.

These are the times; this is the decision you are being forced into: either you live with being called a “racist” today.

Or one day your conscience will torment you with the knowledge that you betrayed and lost what your fathers bequeathed to you.