Caucasophobia — the Accepted Racism

Count Sudoku

Banned
Banned
http://www.globalpolitician.com/articledes.asp?ID=2564&cid=1&sid=24

Caucasophobia — the Accepted Racism

Fjordman, [link removed], March 21, 2007

I had written much of this essay more than a year before I finally decided to post it online. A couple of personal experiences brought me onto the subject of non-white racism. I hesitated to post it, mainly because I instinctively dislike writing about anything related to race. I was brought up that way. Partly, I also convinced myself that I was first and foremost against Islam, and that writing about skin color would only complicate this fight.

However, after thinking about it for some time, I find that none of these arguments hold true. I am tired of ideological censorship. Western nations can never mount a defense against Muslim immigration if this is always dismissed as “racism.” But above all, if you believe that non-white racism exists, it is actually immoral not to deal with the problem and its victims. I am convinced that not just non-white, but also anti-white racism, are real and underestimated phenomena.

In London, an elderly driver who had a heart attack careered into a bus. Here you had a dying man, people trying to save him and police trying to clear the scene. Meanwhile, black youths at the scene just wanted to fight the cops. They shouted, ‘Who cares—it’s just a white man’.”

The incident confirmed my suspicion that some of those who keep talking about “Dead White Males,” meaning basically every great Western thinker in history, are actually lamenting the fact that not all white males are, well, dead.
_____________________________________________________________

I have watched Mexicans who were illegally in US cities quite openly shouting racist slogans against the majority white population, with little or no reaction from the media. Yet Americans who want to strengthen border controls against Mexico are denounced as “racists.” Why?

I have heard two explanations for this one-sided focus on white racism only. The first one is that white people are more racist than non-whites, a claim I find highly dubious in the 21st century. The other is that we should focus mainly on white racism because “white people are so powerful.” But are whites always powerful? We are, demographically speaking, a rapidly shrinking global minority. We are even a shrinking percentage of the population in the West.

Following the Danish Muhammad cartoons incident, Bob Simon from the “60 Minutes” magazine on American TV made a program about Denmark, which he commented was “very Caucasian.” Journalist Samuel Rachlin complained that the picture presented was one of blond bigots who oppressed the powerless Muslim minority. Are 5 million, white Danes “powerful” compared to a billion Muslims?

John Derbyshire of the National Review Online has written about the prevalence of what he calls “Hesperophobia,” fear and hatred of the West. I will suggest that a more accurate term would be Caucasophobia, fear of white people.

I see two potential objections to this term. One is that negative feelings towards whites are less a matter of fear than of hatred and contempt, which is partly true. But I find Caucasophobia to be a catchy phrase to counter claims of Islamophobia, whatever that is. I loathe the term “reverse racism,” which indirectly implies that white racism is the norm and non-white racism is just a “reaction” to this.

The other objection is that the term Caucasian frequently refers to Arabs and Indians, too. However, in March 2005, peaceful white, French demonstrators were attacked by bands of black and Arab youths. One 18-year-old named Heikel added that he had “a pleasant memory” of repeatedly kicking a student, already defenseless on the ground. The sentiment was a desire to “take revenge on whites.”

Notice that these were Arabs attacking Europeans. I have also heard Pakistanis and Turks refer to Europeans as “whites.” I thus find it justifiable to use the term Caucasophobia of racism against people of European stock.

Barbara Kay of Canada’s National Post writes about a new fad called Whiteness Studies:

“The goal of WS is to entrench permanent race consciousness in everyone—eternal victimhood for nonwhites, eternal guilt for whites—and was most famously framed by WS chief guru, Noel Ignatiev, former professor at Harvard University, now teaching at the Massachusetts College of Art: “The key to solving the social problems of our age is to abolish the white race.”

Some of the inventors of Whiteness Studies have stated their goals quite openly: “Abolitionism is also a strategy: its aim is not racial harmony but class war. By attacking whiteness, the abolitionists seek to undermine the main pillar of capitalist rule in this country.” And: “The task is to gather together a minority determined to make it impossible for anyone to be white.”

Conservative social critic David Horowitz comments that: “Black studies celebrates blackness, Chicano studies celebrates Chicanos, women’s studies celebrates women, and white studies attacks white people as evil.” However, despite widespread criticism, at least 30 institutions—from Princeton University to the University of California at Los Angeles—teach courses in whiteness studies.

While Western academia are busy warning against Islamophobia, Caucasophobia gets the stamp of approval. College professor Mike S. Adams writes about conspiracy theories he’s heard among students attempting to blame various social ills on white people:

“The Mona Lisa was painted by an African artist and stolen from a museum in Ethiopia. Most of the great works of art are African in origin and stolen by white people. This is done to promote the myth of white cultural superiority.” Another one: “It is a proven fact that U.S. Coast Guard ships—on orders from President Bush—were seen crashing into the New Orleans levees during Hurricane Katrina. Bush did it to kill black people living in government housing projects.”

Adams presents this as funny, but I don’t think it is.

Dr. Kamau Kambon, former North Carolina State visiting professor of African Studies, told a forum at Howard University that: “We have to exterminate white people off the face of the planet to solve this problem. (…) I’m saying to you that we need to solve this problem because they are going to kill us. (…) The problem on the planet is white people.”

Kambon may be an extreme example, but he is the product of a disturbing climate where accusing whites of the most insane things has become socially acceptable, even encouraged.

Kenyan ecologist Wangari Maathai, winner of the 2004 Nobel Peace Prize, has reiterated her claim that the AIDS virus was invented in some laboratory in the West as “a biological weapon aimed at wiping out the black race.” Would anybody get the Nobel Peace Prize if they were white and stated that black people are trying to exterminate all whites?

I understand that there are grudges from the colonial era, but not all of Africa’s problems can forever be blamed on Western colonialism. The Kenyan economics expert James Shikwati says that aid to Africa does more harm than good. It mainly promotes huge bureaucracies, corruption and complacency, while Africans are taught to be beggars, not independent. If the West were to cancel these payments, normal Africans wouldn’t even notice, according to him.

Shelby Steele is the author of the book White Guilt. According to him, “White guilt effects everything having to do with race in America. (…) White guilt is what made collective responsibility a source of liberal power in America. And it remains a source of power regardless of who or what is cast as a victim—blacks, the environment, gays, illegal immigrants.”

As Allen G. King, an employment defense attorney put it: “I just have to leave you to your own devices, and because you are a white male,” you will discriminate. In other words: You don’t necessarily have to do anything; you’re a racist simply because you’re white and breathe.

René Descartes, French philosopher and one of the key thinkers of the Scientific Revolution, or a Dead White Male as Western students now learn, is famous for his statement Cogito ergo sum: I think, therefore I am. Apparently, if Mr. Descartes has been alive today, he’d have to rephrase that to “I’m guilty, therefore I am.”

All Western nations, at least for a while longer, have white majorities. As long as anything white people do is considered “racism,” the West has no chance of closing down Muslim immigration. Until the “anti-Whitey” movement has been discredited, we can thus never win the fight against Islam.

According to Muslim reformist Bassam Tibi, “Accusing somebody of racism is a very effective weapon in Germany. Islamists know this: As soon as you accuse someone of demonizing Islam, then the European side backs down.” In other words, merely accusing whites of racism is enough to shut them up.

I heard the Dutch-Somali critic of Islam Ayaan Hirsi Ali be told that if she had been white, she would be called a “racist.” Which essentially means that if you’re white, you’re not allowed under any circumstances to stand up for your own culture, far less criticize non-whites. It doesn’t matter whether what you’re saying is actually correct. Whites have thus effectively been disfranchised in matters related to immigration or the preservation of their own countries.

We cannot defend the West against Muslim immigration unless we defeat Political Correctness. And we cannot defeat Political Correctness until we have utterly demolished the ideas that all whites are racists if they defend their culture or desire self-determination, or that non-whites are only victims of racism.

If you ask people how native Norwegians are supposed to keep our culture when we may soon be a minority in our own country, many reply that “there is no such thing as Norwegian culture”. We eat Italian pasta and Chinese food and are otherwise “Americanized.” So, everybody is supposed to keep their culture, except people of European origins? All cultures are equal, but some are more equal than others? Why is colonialism always bad, but not when my country, which has no colonial history, gets colonized by Third World immigrants?

Isn’t it by definition an encroachment on the rights of the native population if they have to subdue their cultural identity to please people who just moved there out of their own, free will? In Norway, our authorities seem to solve this dilemma by simply stating that this is a terra nullis, a land without people or at least a land without culture. The rights of the Norwegian people don’t count because the Norwegian people don’t exist.

We shouldn’t idealize mass-immigration too much. When one group of people move into a territory where another group of people already live, this has usually throughout human history ended in war. Either the newcomers will be expelled, or they will subdue or wipe out the previous inhabitants, or the groups will divide the country between them.

I see little reason to expect any different result where the indigenous population happens to be white. In fact, it is perhaps even more likely, given the fact that we belong to the racial group that has been dominant in world affairs for centuries and that quite a few non-whites hate us because of this. Add to this the fact that a good deal of the immigrants are Muslims, who usually persecute the non-Muslims regardless of race, and by far the most likely future for my children or grandchildren if the current immigration continues is a choice between fighting for their lives or leaving what used to be their country behind as refugees.

Exactly why am I obliged to accept this? Dispossession, while being muzzled by our own leaders and media, doesn’t feel very tolerant to me. In Norway in 2001, a colored teenager called Benjamin Hermansen was killed by two neo-Nazis. The murder triggered one of the largest protest marches since WW2, led by the Crown Prince and the Prime Minister, and schools across the country marked the funeral with one minute of silence.

Later in 2001, the Oslo police released statistics showing that the number of rape charges in the city was rapidly increasing, and that the majority of these cases were with a white victim and a non-Western perpetrator. These numbers were quickly buried. Moreover, in the area of Oslo where Hermansen lived, Holmlia, white Norwegians are quietly leaving due to harassment from immigrants. Hermansen’s murder received so much attention precisely because it was so rare. Muggings, rapes, and stabbings of whites by non-whites, however, happen on a regular basis.

All over Western Europe, and indeed over much of the Western world, there are now areas where it is dangerous for white people to live. This never triggers any outrage. On the contrary, it triggers accusations of racism if the white population resist continued mass immigration, despite the fact that we have accepted more immigration in a shorter period of time than probably any people has done peacefully in history.

Swedish radical feminist Joanna Rytel wrote an article called “I Will Never Give Birth to a White Man,” for a major Swedish daily, Aftonbladet, stating things such as “no white men, please… I just puke on them.” After receiving a complaint because of this, Swedish state prosecutor Göran Lambertz explained why this didn’t qualify as racism:

“The purpose behind the law against incitement of ethnic hatred was to ensure legal protection for minority groups of different compositions and followers of different religions. Cases where people express themselves in a critical or derogatory way about men of ethnic Swedish background were not intended to be included in this law.”

It certainly isn’t because racism against the white population doesn’t exist. The wave of robberies the city of Malmö has witnessed during this past years is part of a “war against Swedes.” This is the explanation given by robbers with immigrant background. So why is this never taken seriously by the authorities?

Western proponents of Political Correctness are ideologically close to White Supremacists, since they assign a “special status” to white people that they don’t give to anybody else. It doesn’t make it any more just that this “special status” is negative. The opposite of White Supremacy can perhaps be called the White Worthlessness Syndrome (WWS). Self-hating white Westerners are victims of WWS.

I do not see why I should have to choose between White Supremacy and White Worthlessness. It is one thing to reject the idea that your culture should be forced onto others, it is quite another thing to say that you shouldn’t be allowed to retain your culture even in your own country. The latter is simply a matter of self-preservation, the most basic instinct of all living things down to bacteria level.

I have a right to preserve my culture, too, even though I have blue eyes, and cannot see anything “racist” in not wanting my children to become a persecuted minority in their own country through mass immigration. That you are denounced as a White Supremacist for just stating the obvious shows how deeply entrenched and internalized this anti-white bias has become.
 
Last edited:
Your other error is that you don't know how to abstract the substance out of an article and present it to an intelligent audience. Did you sleep through the days in grade school when they taught you how to do book reports? If you find a book that you really love and want to recommend to us are you going to post all 300 pages of it right here? And Baron Max thinks MY posts are too long to bother reading! :)
 
Your other error is that you don't know how to abstract the substance out of an article and present it to an intelligent audience. Did you sleep through the days in grade school when they taught you how to do book reports? If you find a book that you really love and want to recommend to us are you going to post all 300 pages of it right here? And Baron Max thinks MY posts are too long to bother reading! :)

ha!
its a lame attempt to make himself look intellectual.












didnt work.
 
The Devil Inside

the problem is that you see the world in a sense of "white/non-white".
there is your error.

Why? it is the way the rest of the world works, racism is rampant in the non-white races of the world, just look at the posting here on sciforums.
 
The only thing I object to in this article is the usage of "Caucasian" for white people.

I am not a Caucasian. None of my ancestors came from the Caucacus Mountains. I am neither Russian, Georgian, or Armenian.

I am Celto-Germanic.

"White" is a better term overall.
 
But yes, Count Sudoku. Thank you for sharing this wonderful article that reveals the reality of race relations in the modern West.
 
The Devil Inside



Why? it is the way the rest of the world works, racism is rampant in the non-white races of the world, just look at the posting here on sciforums.

doing things the way the rest of the world does them doesnt make it right.
you, of all people should know this.

i havent seen any "non-white" racism on this forum....ever.
 
definitely too long.

didn't even read the 1st paragraph.

CS,
i know how much you love that author. do yourself and him a favour: if you want people to read your posts, definitely do "book reports".
 
Caucasophobia is a neologism, introduced in the Russian and Caucasian media (as Кавказофобия), denoting hostility towards people of Caucasian origin in contemporary Russia, especially hostility towards all non-Slavic ethnicities of the Caucasus and towards ethnic Caucasian migrants in Russia.[citation needed] In common usage in former Soviet countries, the term "Caucasian" is a collective term which refers to anyone descended from the native ethnicities of the Caucasus. Confusingly, the Russian language stereotypes of Caucasian people are in an opposition to the common colloquial English language meaning of "Caucasian" as the "white race": Caucasus peoples (together with Central Asians) fall into the category of "black" in Russian slang, due to their dark complexion.[citation needed]

Caucasophobia is often associated with views that almost any evil or folly of contemporary Russia may be attributed to the non-Slavic inhabitants of the Caucasus, especially Chechens and other Muslims.[citation needed] Members of these ethnicities are often depicted as dangerous and savages and a threat to public safety, both individually and on a social scale.

wiki
 
"Too long to bother reading. Also sourced from a racist site."

"definitely too long."

Gee, did you guys ever get past books that had a picture on every page?
 
The only thing I object to in this article is the usage of "Caucasian" for white people.

I am not a Caucasian. None of my ancestors came from the Caucacus Mountains. I am neither Russian, Georgian, or Armenian.

I am Celto-Germanic.

"White" is a better term overall.

Hold a piece of white paper next to your skin.

Do tell me. Are you white?
 
Too long to bother reading. Also sourced from a racist site.

This article was sourced from

[link deleted]

and most of the material on [link deleted] is straight out of mainstream newspapers.

Warning: overriding a moderator's edit again will result in a temporary ban from sciforums
 
Last edited by a moderator:
doing things the way the rest of the world does them doesnt make it right.
you, of all people should know this.

i havent seen any "non-white" racism on this forum....ever.

Then there's something wrong with your eyes. What about the likes of ganymede, lixluke, that guy last week who said he wished white people were wiped out? What's that if it isn't anti-white racism?
 
I dislike the very inaccurate terms for RACE being "White", "Black", "Brown" etc, in fact I dislike the very changing definition of race from one YEAR to the next, however as the article articulates that doesn't really matter.

What matters is how you pigeon hole someone based solely on how they look, what you can infer from their DNA background and then pin a stigma on them based on what you think from all that data. Shouldn't do this to "blacks", shouldn't do this to "whites". We sorta get how the "black" man feels by being called "black" or "colored" with some disdain.

Also, even if 100% of every bad thing that happened in the history of the world was the "white" mans fault(wtf are we talking a pigment test? - fucking rediculous), just how the hell are you going to make him "pay". They are creating white supremacists with this talk. Attack a group and you make them band together...regardless of if they were really a group in the first place. Honest to god, most "white" people could really not give two flying shits for most of this talk.
 
Racists and Rightists always think their threads & diatribes are interesting. They're not. :yawn:
 
Back
Top