Kritik of the term RACISM:

Kritik of the term RACISM:

Any one who uses the term racist becomes a victim of instant hypocrisy. The people who crusade against ‘racism’ as though it were a ‘Thing’, a remote object ‘out there’, bite their own Kritik, to speak idiomatically if not literally, and seem to be promoting it. Yet ‘It’ is not a real problem. In the same way as Should Implies CAN, a problem implies a possible solution. Otherwise it is an abstraction, a delusion, and a confluence of prejudices. There is no such ‘thing’ as Racism; we pretend it to be a problem because we think that we can ‘stop It’. Yet in fact it is but a REIFICIATION of totally individual prejudices that result from pretending towards solidarity in a group of progressives. Few progressives can agree what OPPRESSION is; few have gone through it, and the problem of oppression becomes no less nebulous the more one knows about it. As Kafka said: no one has access to the Law. Zizek pointed out that there is no Other that is running the show. There is no ‘they’, as in Philip K. Dick’s book VALIS. No ‘one’ or ‘group’ is racist, even if he she or they believe their selves to be. And we cannot stop people from thinking ‘bad thoughts’, especially if our own rhetoric re-enforces such terms as ‘black bodies’, ‘white bodies’, ‘red bodies’, et cetera. These terms have no referent for race does not EXIST. Yet with the advent of force one begins to ascribe an individualized meaning to them and begins to picture ‘racism’ as an external phenomenon. This process is actually an internal phenomenon, yet since it’s been demonstrated that I have no access to an other’s mind, I can rarely fairly accuse that person of being ‘racist’. And even if I could justify the accusation I shouldn’t.

To point the finger is to have three more pointing back at one’s self. To say that some one is racist is to say that some one is irrational. It is usually no good, for we are all both rational AND irrational. So it is that if the people crusading ‘against racism’ are the ones who push for essentialism and dogma, pretending towards being ‘practical’ in their essentialism, then the term is simply an arbitrary put-down and one-up. It reflects a power attitude and nothing more. opponents who insist that based upon some label they’ve assigned to us we must be ‘ignorant’ of the ‘real problems’ only underscore our point by ignoring our epistemology. The ignorance is THEIRS, as is the dogma that they use to perpetuate it. Our argument is no more circular than theirs, and THEy are the ones stuck in a loop of hatred that they COULD escape if they consider our ALTERNATIVE:

-          De-construct Race. There is no such thing, and accusations of ‘racism’ depend upon definitions that involve this urban myth.

-          As Nietzsche put it: Judge people by their Actions not their Souls.

-          Do not take seriously people who self-identify as racists. They, like the more passively aggressive Forensics Community, are not as unified as they look or as they think.

-          Eliminate the expression ‘Hate Crime’. We knew a guy who nearly went to jail for life for an act of vigilante justice against a gang member that attacked his brother. He shouted back to this young man the same term that the man or his friends had shouted at the brother. Were it not for an act of intervention on our friend’s part this one word, which all should be permitted to use BECAUSE it is so offensive, would have cost him his entire life. In the same way as we get touchy when only certain people are allowed access to fire arms, access to slurs should be available to all.

This machine stops Fascists.

Dm.A.A.