Castro: A miracle Obama is still alive

FORMER Cuban president Fidel Castro says a “profound racism” in the United States will stop millions from voting for Barack Obama in next month’s presidential election and it is a miracle the Democratic candidate has not been assassinated.

The ailing 82-year-old made the comments in a 1,200-word reflection on recent global economic problems and the contest for the White House, published by Cuban state media on Saturday night.

“Racism is deeply rooted in the United States where the mind of millions of people can hardly reconcile with the notion that a black man, with his wife and children could live in the White House, which is precisely called White. It’s a miracle that the Democratic candidate has not met the same destiny as Martin Luther King, Malcolm X and others who only a few decades ago dreamed of justice and equality."

Castro said Republican candidate John McCain likes to enhance his reputation as a belligerent man and he was one of the worst students in his class at West Point.

“Something McCain has aplenty is age, and his health condition is not safe,” he said.

He said he highlighted this because, if McCain is elected and anything went wrong with his health, then: “the lady of the rifle, the inexperienced former [sic] governor of Alaska could be come president of the United States. It can be noticed that she does not know a thing.”

“FORMER Cuban president Fidel Castro says a “profound racism” in the United States will stop millions from voting for Barack Obama”

[Source withheld because of the sensitive nature of the subject;I am not the author]

Defeating Anti-White Racism

What is racism?

The short answer

When whites engage in racial favoritism toward other whites (and therefore discrimination against non-whites), it’s called racism. When other groups engage in racial favoritism, it’s called ethnic solidarity.

When people buy into these word games, it’s called being brain dead.

The long answer

According to the dictionary, the word racism has two definitions:

1) The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.

2) Discrimination or prejudice based on race.

Source: dictionary.com

It is important that those of us who fight racism (including anti-white racism) understand exactly what the word means as well as what non-specialists think it means. Most people tend to think the word means:

3) Hatred or hostility based on race.

This triple meaning creates a great deal of confusion; let’s clarify by separating these into three definitions:

Definition 1 racism, i.e, the belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others, refers to ideas that are commonly known as racial theories - the ideas that promote, justify and legitimize racism.

Definition 2 racism, i.e. discrimination or prejudice based on race, refers to what is commonly known as plain racism.

Definition 3 racism, i.e. hatred or hostility based on race, refers to what is commonly known as race hatred - that which motivates racism.

In other words, racial theories (definition 1) promote, justify and legitimize racism (definition 2), which is motivated by race hatred (definition 3).

This sounds a lot better than: Racism promotes, justifies and legitimizes racism, which is motivated by racism. This last sentence is so confusing it borders on the meaningless.

There is a fourth unofficial definition that does not appear in any dictionary but is nevertheless widely used, particularly by the education and political establishment. Under this unofficial fourth definition, racism is:

4) The belief that whites can express, claim or defend their group interests.

For example, the policy of affirmative action patently discriminates against whites and is therefore clearly racism under the dictionary definition, i.e. discrimination or prejudice based on race. Yet members of the education establishment strenuously deny that anti-white discrimination is racism. Instead, they claim that racism is opposition to their discriminatory policies. Under the unofficial definition, whites who question adverse discrimination are defending their group interests and therefore racist.

If you think the fourth unofficial definition is a joke and that I made it all up, consider these statements and ask yourself which definition of racism these establishment spokespersons were using when making them:

* Government: Civil rights laws were not passed to protect the rights of white men and do not apply to them.
Source: Chairman Mary Frances Berry, US Commission on Civil Rights

* Universities: Only whites can be racist.
Source: Cornell University

* Schools: [Racism is] the systematic subordination of members of targeted racial groups who have relatively little social power in the United States (Blacks, Latino/as, Native Americans, and Asians), by the members of the agent racial group who have relatively more social power (Whites).
Source: Seattle school district

In all the above, the arguments are for anti-white discrimination and are patently racist under the dictionary definition. However, under the fourth unofficial definition, none of these statements is racist because racism is only the belief that whites can express, claim or defend their group interests.

What is anti-white racism?

Insofar as this fourth unofficial definition is in direct contradiction to the dictionary definition, we will refer to it as fraudulent racism and opposition to it as fraudulent anti-racism or simply anti-white racism. The word fraudulent is appropriate because the definition is deliberately and intentionally designed to deceive people into not recognizing the racism inherent in anti-white discrimination by masking it as anti-racism.

Thus, people who claim they are anti-racists yet use the fraudulent definition are in reality racists, specifically anti-white racists. This is because fraudulent anti-racism promotes discrimination or prejudice against a group - whites - and is therefore racism under the real dictionary definition.

Why does anti-white racism matter?

Fraudulent anti-racism, or anti-white racism, is spreading like an intellectual plague. It is no longer limited to the education establishment and increasingly touches all areas of American life. Indeed, the very core of our identity and freedoms - the Constitution and the Bill of Rights - has now come under assault:

Recently, in a 2-1 decision, a panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals handed down a decision which may provide a foundation for applying preferential treatment to freedom of speech. If allowed to stand, the decision could authorize local governments to set varying limits to free expression, depending on the race, religion, or sexual orientation of the listener. Preferential treatment has proved one of the most divisive policies of modern America. The Ninth Circuit’s decision could radically expand its scope.

Source: TCS Daily

Judge Reinhardt wrote that a different standard should apply to derogatory remarks aimed at majority groups such as Christians or whites because there is, of course, a difference between a historically[A] oppressed[B] minority[C] group that has been the victim of serious prejudice and discrimination and a group that has always enjoyed a preferred social, economic and political status.

Source: Harper vs Poway Unified School District

Anti-white racism therefore matters because its effects are beginning to extend beyond economic considerations such as diminished educational and career opportunities. If anti-white racism is not confronted - and defeated - soon, it will tear away even the most basic constitutional protections white people have, such as freedom of speech.

What is anti-white racism based on?

There are three - and only three - racial theories that promote, justifiy and legitimize fraudulent anti-racism, or anti-white racism. As can be seen from the above court decision, where they have been noted as [A], [B] and [C], these three racial theories often operate in tandem. They are:

* [A] The Unique History of White Evil theory
This racial theory holds that whites “cannot evade history”. It is a racial theory because it promotes, justifies and legitimizes discrimination against a group based on their (Euro-Christian) ancestry alone - irrespective of actual participation or consent (in slavery, holocaust, etc.) - and therefore denies innocence as a defense.

* [B] The Unearned White Skin-color Privilege theory
This racial theory holds that whites are “in power”, “privileged” and “the oppressors” and therefore “cannot evade responsibility”. It is a racial theory because it promotes, justifies and legitimizes discrimination against individuals based on their (Euro-Christian) ancestry alone - irrespective of actual status or financial condition - and therefore denies innocence as a defense.

* [C] The Majority Deference theory
This racial theory holds that “majorities must serve minorities”. It is a racial theory because its discriminatory logic is applied exclusively to circumstances where whites are the majority.

All of the above are racial theories in fact because they promote, justifiy and legitimize discrimination or prejudice against one group - whites. The bad news is that there are three of them and if one is defeated, anti-white racists simply fall back on another. In order to defeat anti-white racism, it is therefore necessary to discredit all three simultaneously. That’s the bad news. But there’s also good news.

What can we do to defeat anti-white racism?

The good news is that all three are also racial theories in application and therefore very fragile. In order to discredit them, one merely needs to demonstrate that the proponent doesn’t really believe in the principles they embody. This technique involves accepting the racial theory in order to demonstrate its absurdity. Here are three examples to illustrate this concept:

* Debits and credits
(Example discredits racial theory A; slavery variant)

“White colonialism over Africa introduced Western medicine, sanitation and agricultural practices that allowed the native population to increase five fold, from 100 million to today’s 500 million plus. Thus, worldwide, four out of five blacks owe their very existence to whites.

Since, under your racial theories, whites are responsible for the crimes committed by their ancestors, it follows that they are also responsible for the good things done by them, i.e. whites will take their ancestor’s debits only if they take their credits. So if whites owe blacks for slavery, don’t four out of five blacks owe whites their very existence, i.e. their lives and property?”

* As below so above
(Example discredits racial theory B; economic variant)

“According to The Jewish Phenomenon: Seven Keys to the Enduring Wealth of a People by Steven Silbiger and Jewish Power: Inside the American Jewish Establishment by J.J. Goldberg (currently the editor of the influential Jewish community weekly Forward), Jews account for 33% of millionaires, 45% of billionaires and 50% of Wall Street executives even though they represent only 2.5% of the U.S. population.

Since, under your racial theories, groups that are below whites on the socio-economic ladder are entitled to discriminate against whites, can whites similarly discriminate against groups above them, such as Jews?”

* Detroit and South Africa
(Example discredits racial theory C)

“Whites are minorities in several places, such as Detroit or South Africa. Since, under your racial theories, minorities are automatically entitled to not equal but superior rights simply because they are minorities, shouldn’t white minorities in Detroit or South Africa have superior rights over the black majority?”

As you can see, by switching actors around, the same racial theory is applied to non-whites which forces the anti-white racist to turn around and condemn it. This destroys their argument by exposing the hypocrisy and the discrimination inherent in their whites-only application. After all, if they won’t apply these theories to any other groups it means they don’t buy their own racial theories.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.