Wednesday, June 28, 2017

How the Church helped create Racism

The term racist as a projective was invented by Trotsky in 1927,although it appeared a few years previously in scientific literature referring to a scientist who studies race.

The reality of the word's origin is indeed quite a far cry from the left-liberal version of the story: that the word was coined in bona fides to identify people who were just plain bigoted against certain racial groups, and as a rallying cry for good liberals to protect the racial minorities from the bigots. On the contrary, the actual concept behind the word (even though he hadn't invented it quite yet) -- that ethnocentric "backwardness" must take a back seat to "enlightened" internationalism -- was often used by Army-Navy Commissar Trotsky as a rallying cry for good Red Army communists to embark upon murderous rampages against peoples who resisted having their traditional way of life paved over and replaced with an alien system.

He used it as a semantic weapon to attack Christian identity, and political correctness along with anti-racism is still used today to teach people to hate their own cultural traditions.

Orwell said the same, “racist” is a term so nebulous that it can be applied to anyone, and is used to quell political dissent and discredit Christians.

It has become a hate word for White people,
all Whites are racist. Only Whites can be racist. Therefore all Whites need to be attacked and Whiteness deconstructed.

For the baby boomers themselves, white racism becomes a synonym for cluelessness in general, but cluelessness about social engineering in particular.”

And it's done its work. Catholic scholar E. Michael Jones shows how anti racism dismantled Catholic churches, actually creating white racism,

"Racism is, in other words, a function of lack of community. It is also an argument for the ethnic parish, which the Catholic Church abandoned at the moment the federal government began promoting large-scale black migration from the South to the cities of the north. As the Irish Jesuits at the Gesu parish in North Philadelphia argued in the 1930s, Black Catholics could have preserved their faith and identity better if they had been given an ethnic parish of their own rather than attempting to integrate them into the ethnic parishes which had already been established for other nationalities. 

The same is true now for the Irish and the descendants of the other European ethnics now living in a place like Southern California. If the Church had allowed these people to retain their own communities, they would not now be abandoning Catholicism for white racism.

...the Catholic Church condemned the ethnics who defended their neighborhoods as “racists” when in fact it was the racists who were trying to destroy the neighborhood.”

And to this day, when Catholics complain about immigration once again they are denounced, but this is the very thing preventing Hispanic assimilation into the American Catholic fold.

During the 1950s and 1960s, the Catholic Church failed to understand the challenge to its parishes (and therefore its existence) which social engineering posed. Obsessed with the (largely Irish) desire to assimilate, the Church ( or at least its intellectual leaders at place like the Catholic Interracial Council) adopted the racial categories of its oppressors and condemned the ethnics who defended their neighborhoods as “racists” when in fact it was the racists who were trying to destroy the neighborhood. 

When the largely Catholic population of Folcroft rioted when the Quakers smuggled a black family into their neighborhood, Catholic interracialists like Dennis Clarke had them punished by having their pastor read the U.S. Bishops 1958 statement on race from the pulpit, a document which was written in response to a school desegregation dispute in Little Rock, Arkansas. 

Like Nostra Aetate in the hands of the Jews, the 1958 bishops’ statement on race became a weapon for beating up Catholics and dividing them internally. When it was read at the Catholic parish in Folcroft, many, if not most of the parishioners there literally got up and walked out of the Church. Many of them kept right on walking, and, like Dennis Ruiz, they discovered white racism at the end of their journey from the Catholic church, which failed to understand what was going on. Thus, did black racism create white racism, and thus do both of them serve the interests of the social engineers who continue to divide in order to conquer." 

It should noted that in the 70’s once class was replaced with identity politics the social conflict between the rich and the poor could be re-defined as a conflict between the White oppressor and minority oppressed, the liberation movements of the second half of the 20th Century could be effectively suppressed—which they were.

It does have one precedent however,

"We renounce, censure and condemn racism, that is racial discrimination, ethnic feuds, hatreds and dissensions within the Church of Christ, as contrary to the teaching of the Gospel and the holy canons of our blessed fathers which “support the holy Church and the entire Christian world, embellish it and lead it to divine godliness.”

-- Holy and Great pan-Orthodox Synod, Constantinople,1872.

Many have noted the extreme political nature of that synod and questioned its legitimacy.

The term phyletism from phili (Hellenic: φυλή) translated as race or tribe was coined at the Holy and Great pan-Orthodox Synod that met in Constantinople in 1872.

It’s uncertain what was meant by its
condemnation of “ecclesiastical racism” or “ethno-phyletism,” as, Vladmimr Moss comments

if it is taken to mean the formation of special racial churches, each accepting all the members of its particular race, excluding all aliens and governed exclusively by pastors of its own race, as its adherents demand, racism is unheard of and unprecedented.”

Obviously hating others is wrong. The church has never excluded anyone based on ethnicity in its history, so to condemn something that's never happened, and the fact the church managed to go 2,000 years without ever noticing the sin of racism, ought to raise red flags.

Use of the word "Racism" since 1940. Apparently no one noticed it before then.....

A couple more terms added...

And with one additional term for fun:

Link :

Racism in - Usury out !

Of course, since only White people can be racist, there are Orthodox Christian communities, such as the St. Moses the Black brotherhood, exclusively for African-Americans. But that's OK.

I know. Everything is racist. Even robots and babies.

Well, man, baby, or calculator, anything that can recognize a pattern is racist...

So, now that any religious ethnicity or local identity has been broken down, we now have “White people” as an identity, Mark Christensen writes about the consequences, 

“The context is that white identity politics is bad because white identity is based on systematic oppression; on the other hand, the political concerns of people of color are on the receiving end of oppression. To put it on a more gut-instinct level, white identity politics is Hitler, and non-white identity politics is Mandela. Mugabe and Idi Amin don’t enter the respectable mind as archetypes of non-white identity politics. 

The practiced ideology of the white, western Brahmin is this: universalism for white people, identity politics for the rest. On a more fundamental level: agency for white people, socioeconomic conditions for the rest. The latter point may explain why our Brahmin feels no contradiction when championing the cause of the African poor, whereas white American poor are the inbred, gun-toting fundies of flyover country. (South Park really caught onto something with the line “what is political correctness but a verbal form of gentrification?”)

What really matter are two things: individuals and shared humanity. Identity politics both erases individual differences between members of the group and makes us forget that we’re all human in the end.”

Anti-racism ends up functioning as racism.

Pierre- André Taguieff has pointed out, “There is no effective struggle against racism once one creates a false image of it, for then antiracism becomes a mirror image of the racist myth. To treat in a racist way those whom one is accusing of racist conduct is part and parcel of current antiracism, and one of its shortcomings. Above all, to fictional-ize ‘the Other,’ even if he be racist, is to miss who ‘the Other’ really is, never coming to know him.”

Louis Dumont notes,

“Thus one can better understand the failure of anti-racism that, in the best of cases, does not 
accept the Other more than to reduce it to the Same. As much as it erodes the differences with the hope of facilitating integration, the more it in reality makes it impossible. The more it thinks to battle against exclusion by desiring to make immigrants uprooted individuals ―like everyone else the more it contributes to the advent of a society where mimetic rivalry culminates in exclusion and generalized dehumanization. 

And finally, the more the anti-racism is believed in, the more it appears like a racism classically defined as the negation or radical devaluation of group identity, a racism that has always opposed the preeminence of a single obligatory norm, judged explicitly or implicitly as superior (and superior because it is ―universal) over the differentiated modes of life, whose mere existence seems incongruous or detestable."

Jones ends with,

"Religion is the enemy of nationalism and racism, both of which are forms of idolatry, but it is the friend of ethnicity, which can only perdure with religious roots. Ethnos needs Christ to survive, but the Body of Christ needs ethnos as form needs content. Ethnos because of its connection to reproduction is the vehicle (like the family, of which it is composed) for the transmission of the faith. Religion without ethnos is another word for deracination; so is ethnos without religion, especially when it reaches the stage of worshipping its roots in the name of nationalism. 

“Religion,” Smauel Huntington opined, is critical in “shaping the identities of people and aligning the states.” The hand that shapes his destiny is the formal causality of empire. The hand that shapes the destiny of the Catholic peoples left behind to pick up the pieces is the same one which created Europe out of the rubble of Rome."

No comments:

Post a Comment