To all intents and purposes, today, the word racist, can be defined as follows:
Racist: The judging of a person or group of people in a negative fashion based exclusively on their race, ethnicity, or religion, prior to having had any specific interaction with said individual or people, to determine the actual content of their character.
I’d say that definition would be agreed upon even by most mainstream media today.
And of course, by that definition, absolutely everyone on this planet is and always has been, racist. So it’s really just a matter of degree.
Now, if you are able to read and do basic math, and have informed yourself concerning certain statistics concerning violent crime, sexual assault, crime in general, fraud, embezzlement, and so on, you will have justified reasons for any racism. Sure, individually, person X might be great, but collectively, we can trust our life experience and the math of crime statistics.
Now, for any bleeding heart who says that the crime statistics are skewed because of socio-economic factors, or “systemic racism” or whatever, let me point out some simple truth:
No one cares.
I don’t care if a pedophile was abused or whatever. If he rapes kids he should be legally put to death.
The grandma getting mugged, the teenager getting raped, the guy getting robbed, they don’t care why the criminal is doing it or how hard a life they had. Nor should they. Nor does it matter. Their hard luck stories do NOT entitle them to committing crimes against others. End of.
So, on that basis, we can have some objective reasons to preemptively judge a person or group of people based solely on their race, ethnicity, or religion. In fact, everyone does it, though not everyone is as blatant about it as the leftie/woke/liberal crowd who are the first to point and scream “racist” to everyone but themselves.
Are blacks overall, in general, throughout the world, less capable than whites to maintain a functional society that can compete favourably in the modern world?
If you think yes, then you’re a racist.
If you think no, then why would you advocate for refugees from Africa coming to Europe or Mexicans coming to the USA? Or affirmative action. Or reparations for slavery from over a century ago? Every people on the planet have been enslaved at some point. Why should Africans be the only ones that get retroactively compensated when the present benefactors of it were never slaves? If you think no, then, surely, you must be positively inclined towards a meritocracy. Since we are all equally capable, right? Because if we are NOT all equally capable, then some races and ethnicities and religions are objectively more or less capable to perform certain things better or worse than different races, ethnicities, or religions.
In short, either you are aware and accept objective reality, which is that there ARE differences, that no one is “equal”, and so, by definition, you are a racist,
OR
You deny reality, to yourself first and foremost, and then, increasingly shrilly, to everyone else, while at the same time, crying out for special treatment for this or that group, which still makes you a racist, but also a hypocrite, because the implication is clear that you don’t believe this or that group has the ability to perform at the same level as everyone else.
So, now that we have cleared up that either way you are racist, we need to think of what is the fairest solution for all?
Given that:
We have differences in ability between races
We have differences in ability between ethnicities
We have differences in morality between religions
We can try to come up with different solutions, but in a multi-ethnic and diverse society, you will, necessarily, be unfair to some groups over others. For example, if we have laws that make sense to everyone with an average IQ of 100, we will be unnecessarily limiting people with an IQ of 130 that are moral, but we can accept that because they are a tiny minority and it is not such a burden on them to follow the rules that for them are the equivalent of training wheels on a racing bicycle. We are also going to be jailing a lot of people with an 85 IQ.
If we have a meritocracy, then, those races that have certain intellectual advantages (eastern orientals) will naturally outperform those races that have certain intellectual disadvantages (Africans).
In short, is it fair, to expect an 85 IQ African to subscribe, respect and use the same laws, technology and social cues as an 105 IQ Japanese man? Surely not. Similarly, is it fair to artificially penalise that 105 IQ Japanese man, restricting his ability to advance himself and his loved ones so that the 85 IQ African can keep up with him and not feel “inferior”? Surely not.
The fairest and easiest way to ensure that the largest number of people is treated fairly and in accordance with their abilities is simply to keep the nations, actual nations.
Germany for the Germans, Italy for the Italians, Nigeria for the Nigerians, and so on.
By sticking with your own ethnicity and forming ethnically homogenous societies, you will be able to have the laws, customs and prospects for advancement, determined by a group of your own actual peers. Nothing could be fairer than that, surely.
Certainly, some small number of guests, tourists, or foreigners that settle in a nation not their own, is always going to exist, and that is fine, because that immigrant, knows, that the rules of his host nation apply to him, not those of his origin. The risk, lies entirely with him. As it should. If I go to Saudi Arabia and try and build a Cathedral there, I will be punished. And that would be on me.
So, we arrive at the perhaps surprising conclusion, that, a form of apartheid, is in truth the fairest system of all.
I hope you will think on that and consider it deeply, and then, based on these truths, work to make the world a better place for all.
UPDATE: Aaand this just came up on my feed at Gab:
Defining Racism – With Solutions
To all intents and purposes, today, the word racist, can be defined as follows:
Racist: The judging of a person or group of people in a negative fashion based exclusively on their race, ethnicity, or religion, prior to having had any specific interaction with said individual or people, to determine the actual content of their character.
I’d say that definition would be agreed upon even by most mainstream media today.
And of course, by that definition, absolutely everyone on this planet is and always has been, racist. So it’s really just a matter of degree.
Now, if you are able to read and do basic math, and have informed yourself concerning certain statistics concerning violent crime, sexual assault, crime in general, fraud, embezzlement, and so on, you will have justified reasons for any racism. Sure, individually, person X might be great, but collectively, we can trust our life experience and the math of crime statistics.
Now, for any bleeding heart who says that the crime statistics are skewed because of socio-economic factors, or “systemic racism” or whatever, let me point out some simple truth:
No one cares.
I don’t care if a pedophile was abused or whatever. If he rapes kids he should be legally put to death.
The grandma getting mugged, the teenager getting raped, the guy getting robbed, they don’t care why the criminal is doing it or how hard a life they had. Nor should they. Nor does it matter. Their hard luck stories do NOT entitle them to committing crimes against others. End of.
So, on that basis, we can have some objective reasons to preemptively judge a person or group of people based solely on their race, ethnicity, or religion. In fact, everyone does it, though not everyone is as blatant about it as the leftie/woke/liberal crowd who are the first to point and scream “racist” to everyone but themselves.
Are blacks overall, in general, throughout the world, less capable than whites to maintain a functional society that can compete favourably in the modern world?
If you think yes, then you’re a racist.
If you think no, then why would you advocate for refugees from Africa coming to Europe or Mexicans coming to the USA? Or affirmative action. Or reparations for slavery from over a century ago? Every people on the planet have been enslaved at some point. Why should Africans be the only ones that get retroactively compensated when the present benefactors of it were never slaves? If you think no, then, surely, you must be positively inclined towards a meritocracy. Since we are all equally capable, right? Because if we are NOT all equally capable, then some races and ethnicities and religions are objectively more or less capable to perform certain things better or worse than different races, ethnicities, or religions.
In short, either you are aware and accept objective reality, which is that there ARE differences, that no one is “equal”, and so, by definition, you are a racist,
OR
You deny reality, to yourself first and foremost, and then, increasingly shrilly, to everyone else, while at the same time, crying out for special treatment for this or that group, which still makes you a racist, but also a hypocrite, because the implication is clear that you don’t believe this or that group has the ability to perform at the same level as everyone else.
So, now that we have cleared up that either way you are racist, we need to think of what is the fairest solution for all?
Given that:
We can try to come up with different solutions, but in a multi-ethnic and diverse society, you will, necessarily, be unfair to some groups over others. For example, if we have laws that make sense to everyone with an average IQ of 100, we will be unnecessarily limiting people with an IQ of 130 that are moral, but we can accept that because they are a tiny minority and it is not such a burden on them to follow the rules that for them are the equivalent of training wheels on a racing bicycle. We are also going to be jailing a lot of people with an 85 IQ.
If we have a meritocracy, then, those races that have certain intellectual advantages (eastern orientals) will naturally outperform those races that have certain intellectual disadvantages (Africans).
In short, is it fair, to expect an 85 IQ African to subscribe, respect and use the same laws, technology and social cues as an 105 IQ Japanese man? Surely not. Similarly, is it fair to artificially penalise that 105 IQ Japanese man, restricting his ability to advance himself and his loved ones so that the 85 IQ African can keep up with him and not feel “inferior”? Surely not.
The fairest and easiest way to ensure that the largest number of people is treated fairly and in accordance with their abilities is simply to keep the nations, actual nations.
Germany for the Germans, Italy for the Italians, Nigeria for the Nigerians, and so on.
By sticking with your own ethnicity and forming ethnically homogenous societies, you will be able to have the laws, customs and prospects for advancement, determined by a group of your own actual peers. Nothing could be fairer than that, surely.
Certainly, some small number of guests, tourists, or foreigners that settle in a nation not their own, is always going to exist, and that is fine, because that immigrant, knows, that the rules of his host nation apply to him, not those of his origin. The risk, lies entirely with him. As it should. If I go to Saudi Arabia and try and build a Cathedral there, I will be punished. And that would be on me.
So, we arrive at the perhaps surprising conclusion, that, a form of apartheid, is in truth the fairest system of all.
I hope you will think on that and consider it deeply, and then, based on these truths, work to make the world a better place for all.
UPDATE: Aaand this just came up on my feed at Gab:
No related posts.
This entry was posted in Social Commentary. RSS 2.0 feed.