By Jane Everdene:
An article on the BBC News website dated 30 August 2014 has the title ‘The Fear of Being Seen as Racist’.
Referring to events in Rotherham, in which it was exposed that around 1,400 of the town’s White girls had been abused, raped and passed around for torture and sexual pleasure by Asian men, the article states: “fear of being viewed as racist has been cited as one of the reasons why child sexual exploitation in Rotherham was allowed to proliferate for 16 years.”
“A fear to confront the subject of race ultimately stopped the council engaging with the wider Rotherham community about the problem, the report suggested.”
According to sources such as the Oxford English Dictionary it was the Jewish Communist Leon Trotsky who coined the word ‘racism’, although this is not entirely corroborated. Certainly the word has been used in an ideological sense by Trotsky and the exact details are not relevant. What is beyond doubt is that the word is employed routinely in the present culture as a weapon with which to silence and accuse. Indeed the word ‘racism’ is aimed as a derogatory insult applied uniquely to White people.
What is meant by the epithet ‘racist’ cannot be pinned down as it is used whenever it suits to score a hit against White people or White interests. Amongst most Whites the view is that taking a violent hatred against another person for the sole reason that they differ to yourself racially is unjust and cruel. This is the most common definition given for ‘racism’ when asked. In practice, however the term ‘racist’ is widely aimed at someone who has not demonstrated any hate of other races but who has simply acknowledged the existence of racial differences. That is all it takes!
The real reason the epithet ‘racist’ was created was to attack and hurt the White race, specifically, and to help in the genocide of our race. Feelings of shame and fear of prosecution, social ostracism, loss of career, etc if accused of being ‘racist’ scare people into silence and this is the fear that the BBC headline on Rotherham refers to.
Blackmailing in this way has created the climate in which millions decide it is prudent to comply with the gagging and not to rock the boat, staying silent and carefully avoiding being recorded as being ‘racist’.
In the light of the 1400 White girls raped and pimped systematically by Asians in Rotherham, this fear of being called ‘racist’ effectively means that those who comply by staying silent are complicit in the crime of child rape.
If instead the observers had put moral duty before cowardly cringing over a pathetic word and gangster-like threats by authorities, those girls could never have been abused en mass as they were.
The abuse of countless other White girls by such Asian men continues in other towns around Britain as well as other crimes committed by non-whites who are unchallenged due to the selfish paralysis or confusion over just what one can object to these people doing if they are members of an immigrant community.
It is a moral duty to speak out against crimes targeting our children – including drug dealing. The paedophilia in this case was a racially defined crime. It is no less objectionable when the culprits are White individuals abusing children – but in those cases the fear of being labeled as racist does not come into play and people will generally do something about it and tell the authorities. If the criminal is not one of the protected establishment elite they are quickly put on trial. The matter of the paedophilia in the establishment is tied in with the immigrant paedophilia as abusers from the very anti-racist Great and Good are supplied with victims from the same care homes that many of the Asian men procured their victims from. This article does not aim to explore that aspect in any detail.
The non-Whites involved in these crimes have a racial contempt for White people. Other races routinely discriminate on the basis of race and commit horrendous crimes particularly against our own White kindred.
Simply for a White person to favour our own race by being RACIALLY LOYAL we are denigrated as being haters and ‘racist’. This even though we may hope and try to be civil to people of other races in the expectation that the other individual will be similarly considerate to us. It is all as nonsensical as if someone was accused of being familyist’ because they love their own close relatives somewhat more than they love total strangers. Imagine such a crime being written into law with the assumption being that if you are loyal to your family, your wife/husband, children or your parents you must surely hate those who are not in your family – such as your neighbours or absolutely anyone not that close to you. Yet that is how we have been taught to view racial loyalty, but only in the case of White racial loyalty. Somehow even though so many fellow Whites regard the idea of White racial loyalty as a bad thing, these people applaud or admire when another race or religious group pull together to work as a collective. Other races are congratulated for working to advance their group interests at the expense of the Whites who are portrayed as historical oppressors.
None of this is justifiable when one tries to take an objective view of things. It is not normal for humans to think objectively however. Human nature is to be biased as well as manipulated. In fact, our genetic interest should also mean we Whites are loyal to our race, just as other races are to their own. Nature intended this in the same way that we show preference to close kin. Science records ‘kin selection’ as an instinct vital to mammal psychology and a source of self-sacrifice, kindness, generosity and love as well as a healthy sense of identity. All human beings need a sense of identity and our modern extremist taboo against the racial aspect of identity causes mental illness. It leads to a sense of loss of purpose, depression and failure – leaving White people at a disadvantage compared to the other races who are encouraged to embrace a racial identity even when they are of mixed race.
White people going through their lives as rootless individuals unable to embrace their racial identity and forbidden to discriminate, while indoctrinated to feel guilt for any antipathy towards immigrants are seen by the outsiders as clear victim material. They are targeted like disorientated prey by predators. The girls of Rotherham – lambs to the slaughter clearly dangled as temptation to the Asian predators.
The girls had been indoctrinated to view these immigrants as friendly, attractive and glamorous. They are taught in the perverted sex education at school to experiment sexually at an early age and copy the media that pushes over-sexualised imagery of how young women should dress and conduct their relationships. Adults did not warn the girls about this danger. They left it to the system to direct the girls straight into trouble. Even as the girls became embroiled in the abuse the adults turned a blind eye allowing atrocities to happen – out of sight, out of mind. Just so that they would remain respectable non-discriminating participants of multiracial society. Their conformity means they are culpable for the horrendous experiences of the young victims.
When news broke of the industrial scale of the pimping by Asian men of these poor White girls, the public was duly shocked. Questions were asked as to how this was allowed to happen. For the first time in our hysterically anti-racist, anti-White society even mainstream media outlets spoke out about the need to acknowledge the part race plays in this tragedy. People have to change their perspective and stand up to be counted as proud to be ‘racist’ if that really is a prerequisite to demand justice, the guilty charged and their vile practice stamped out.
It is time to shake off the stigma of the accusation of ‘racist’ and see such an accusation instead as if it were a badge of honour. To be a ‘racist’ is to be someone who cares, who stands up against oppression and bullying and who will not look the other way when the welfare of children is concerned. Our children must be raised to value themselves, to have a racial identity and pride that prevents them admiring other groups who have this quality they lack and acting like love struck poultry around hungry foxes. They must learn to discriminate and keep to their own.
Fear of being seen as racist has been exposed as a scourge in our society. Far from being ‘institutionally racist’ as the Ferguson Report stated, the Rotherham scandal has shown the police and social services are institutionally ANTI-racist, with devastating results. Fear of being called ‘racist’ leads to children getting raped.
By Jane Everdene © 2014
# # # #
Max Musson
- Edit
A good article Jane, but I would say that the rape of White girls by immigrant gangs is far worse than the rape of White girls by White paedophiles, because there is in addition to the sexual defilement that is present in all rape cases, the additional factor of racial defilement.
billy
- Edit
The difference is other racial groups are fight against oppression in the UK. For a white person to say white pride is code for “I am better than you other people”.
Black pride etc is fighting for equality.
Max Musson
- Edit
Sorry pal, but the only ethnic group that is oppressed in the UK is the indigenous British. If blacks want pride, they can go back to Africa and achieve something in their own countries, with their own people, that is worthy of pride.
PharmaPhil
- Edit
Silly billy has bought into the BS that says only white people can be racist.
There some modern theory that says the majority in a country can be racist because they are in the position of oppression, a minority can’t be but this only seems to be applied to white European type countries strangely enough.
billy
- Edit
“I would say that the rape of White girls by immigrant gangs is far worse than the rape of White girls by White paedophiles”……………That makes no sense. You imply that if a white girl gets raped, she just walk it off and get over it because the perpetrator was white is damn right crazy.
Max Musson
- Edit
No one has suggested that rape by a White paedophile is in any way acceptable, but it simply involves sexual defilement, whereas a sex act with a non-White also involves racial defilement. That’s why it’s worse.
PharmaPhil
- Edit
The media often bring up the issue of race when a victim is non white & the perpetrator is white but usually not the other way around such as with the Night Stalker.
With the grooming gangs they tried to down play it until they were overwhelmed by the sheer amount of it all having the same common denominators.
Shaun
- Edit
No one at Western Spring thinks that type of bullshit! This was, no offense to the other writers on the site, the best article I’ve ever read here, and I have no doubt that the lady in question hates White paedos just as much as she hates the disgusting Muslim gangs that did these crimes in Rotherham. I repeat: there has been several articles here about the White sex cases who run the country. But these Muslim crimes are much worse because they were a community attack against the most vulnerable of our folk.
But … we want to stop it all. That’s why we’re nationalists!
Mike
- Edit
“billy
2014/09/22 at 10:34 pm
“I would say that the rape of White girls by immigrant gangs is far worse than the rape of White girls by White paedophiles”……………That makes no sense. You imply that if a white girl gets raped, she just walk it off and get over it because the perpetrator was white is damn right crazy”.
It makes no sense because billy is doing what liberals always do. He is lying about what was written. No one implied that a “white girl walk(s) it off” if “the perpetrator was white.” billy’s interpretation is crazy, not what was actually written. .
If billy wants to be taken seriously, he should read what was actually written and respond to it, instead of lying about things.
GEORGE
- Edit
Hi Max, I do accept your argument. I don’t think that those that suffer from these despicable crimes care. Many of us say that whoever commits these crimes should swing.
I disagree. The victim should be given a choice. The perpetrator can swing or they can be used for spare parts. If someone needs a kidney, no problem. Need a heart, no problem we can get one. I would even take it a step further. Have you seen those animals that are experimented on? Well, we could save a few of their lives and the results would be far better.
Max Musson
- Edit
I can understand you thinking like that George, but spare parts for surgical purposes need to be taken from donors who are genetically close to the recipients. Therefore in a racial nationalist Britain there would be no demand for the organs of non-Whites. Furthermore, as for the purpose of medical experiments, there are ways now of growing human tissue in vitro, that enables most medical testing to be done without live subjects and in any case, I would not want any non-Whites in the country even for purposes such as these.
MsBridgit
- Edit
Lifted from Albion’s People blog…..
Racism has been demonised it is akin the blasphemy, An accusation of Racism is like showing a Cross to a Vampire, but it is Racism that will save us..
There is no place for any religion or racial identity in the New Order. A collective/communist Marxist oligarchy does not allow for religion, it cannot work with religion as the people of the USSR found out. If something or someone does not stop this madness now we will be the future Proles.
“NB. The singular reason ‘Racism’ in the Western World must be destroyed at all costs has nothing whatsoever to do with the pretext of an absence or lack of human morality or the non-acceptance of the anthropological differences of ones fellow man, it is that Racism is the glue that holds a Nation together. It is the foundation of the purest form of Patriotism and loyalty to one’s race that can exist, whether Caucasian, Negro or Oriental. It is the bedrock that cements devotion among African tribal people, Soldiers of Islam or lost tribes in the Amazon Forest..
There is no other single word that perfectly describes the two noble human attributes of Patriotism and Loyalty. Patriotism is the mortal enemy of the New Order; the New Order cannot exist alongside loyalty to one’s kin. Multi-Culturism is the perfect tool which over time can implement a race’s eventual destruction” …….(Albion)
ONE SHOULD WEAR THE BADGE OF RACIST WITH PRIDE………
Jane
- Edit
Thank you Max. It was necessary to address the issue of the White paedophiles as critics like to suggest that our consternation is really just a means to express hatred of non-Whites or even specifically Muslims – when of course we are just as angry no matter whom the sexual predator may be.
In some ways it may be easier to get over an attack by an alien than by someone of one’s own race as the victim can categorise the danger and more easily avoid contact with the dangerous group rather than being psychologically damaged by losing trust in people who they should feel safe around.
I perhaps should have added that we cannot blame Islam specifically for the crimes because the evidence supports that various races are prone towards being rapists regardless of their religion.
South Africa is notorious for its Black Christians rapists. White populations of any religion (or lack of) are far less inclined to behave in that way.
Michael Woodbridge
- Edit
An excellent article Jane! No sensitive person could read it and still shy away from the word “racist”. As Jane says, to be described as a “racist” should henceforth become an epithet of honour. Historically, descriptive words which once had a derogatory meaning frequently acquire an opposite or neutral meaning. Take the word “Tory” for example, which originally meant some kind of ruthless landowner or bandit, whilst nowadays it has even become a girls name as in Tory Clinton.
With all due respect to Max I would question whether degrees of defilement can significantly differ. To tumble into a sewer in a white area must be sufficiently gross without worrying too much as to how much worse it might have been had one tumbled into a sewer in an alien ghetto.
jackdaw
- Edit
Yes Jane, a term of abuse that anti-whites hurl at us when they’ve lost
the argument.
Albert
- Edit
The Authorities since the 60s have brought in law after law….in the race relations act…to stop the indigenous population from speaking out by creating a climate of fear,
The Liberal/Left/Zionist media say Britain is such a less racist society these days, yes correct because their is a law against it.
A Swain
- Edit
The media can always be relied on to twist the facts when commenting on matters relating to White society.
What they, the media, are really saying is that Britain is less racist since White indigenous people have seen a succession of punitive laws passed against them preventing them from speaking out in the public domain.
However, the media recoils from investigating in depth and calculating the enormous number of hate crimes perpetrated by non-Whites against indigenous White people including crimes of rape and murder.
No, in my opinion Britain is far from being a less racist society. It instead has become an extremely anti-White racist one.
Michael Woodbridge
- Edit
Surely the point of the argument is that we have to use the term “Racist” as a positive life affirming word.
Max Musson
- Edit
Yes, we must rehabilitate the meaning of the word and claim it for our own, in the same way that blacks have reclaimed the word ‘nigger’, and homosexuals have reclaimed the word ‘queer’. Once we have done this, the term will lose all impact in the hands of our enemies and in the minds of the public.
John
- Edit
I don’t think it will be possible to turn the word around words like ‘racism’ and ‘fascism’ because they inherently verbally resonate negativity. In the controlled society they are the teacher telling of the child. The words have an inherent negative ‘growl’ to them. We need positivity and to do our own thing than to sling the mud they throw at us back.
They can have their buzz words, political correctness, cover ups, misery and hypocrisy: an artificial existence. We can embrace nature, folk, prosperity, future and life. I think it is best to recognise and treat it as the marxist soundbite it is. In 1930’s USSR it was ‘Wrecker’, ‘Class Enemy’, ‘Western Imperialist’ etc. Why be concerned with marxist language.
However, the first paragraph is just one way. Another way is to go the way National Action have brilliantly done and be so ‘racist’ that the word becomes one of ridicule and the ones pushing it look desperate and boring while the other side laughs at it. Much of political battles is just about infuriating the other side. Inevitably it improves morale and breaks the shackles which allows creativity and positivity to blossom.
The ‘racism’ slur is most efficiently used when they are dealing with individuals/groups which try to ‘box clever’ who attempt to say “I am not a racist but…” while attempting to use the enemies own rhetoric to gain sympathy. When it comes to political battles I think few are influenced by making agile points about another sides hypocrisy.
“Are you racist?”
“Well since you’ve asked that I feel this is an excellent opportunity to express my commitment to ensuring a future for the native people of Britain and by extension all Europeans”
Thus the question does not become a defensive stumbling block but an opportunity to put your view across to influence others, infuriate your opponent and force them to accept they are anti-white if they reply “so you are racist”. Likewise if they push further the word can be brought up to be the buzzword for what it is and ridiculed as it is treated like how in Christain times they would say “are you a heretic?”.
Walter Greenway
- Edit
Am I a racist? My answer would be “yes and proud; for generations past and those yet to come I fight”.
While keeping a smile ‘of cause’ 😉
A Swain
- Edit
It IS indeed wholly possible to alter the Racism definition entirely. After that, all it requires is a refusal to recognise the politically correct version and instead reinforce the correct White ethno-nationalist version by constant explanation and repetition as well as exaltations of pride in being thought of as ‘racist.
Trying to dodge the accusation using verbal acrobats is playing straight into the hands of the Marxian Liberal ruling elite and their minions.
When accused, I simply sneer and reply that the term Racism is indicative of nothing more than ‘race realism and, therefore, a normal and healthy survival strategy.
Before he/she can offer a retort, I proceed to immediately go on the attack by calling my accuser an anti-White race-hater and genocide promoter which invariably renders him/her speechless. I then repeat the accusation, ie, anti-White race-hater and genocide promoter as many times as it takes to batter them into capitulation.
I then tell them that they’re abnormal and depraved in condoning and facilitating the destruction and demographic replacement and thus genocide of their own indigenous racial kin, their language(s), culture(s), traditions, etc by primitive dark-skinned alternatives from the Third World and that they should have the decency to commit suicide out of utter worthlessness and self-contempt or instead offer themselves up as a bloody sacrifice to their precious Third World pet-projects, the primitive non-White invader hordes themselves.
Max Musson
- Edit
Excellent!
Michael Woodbridge
- Edit
To say that the media is Racist because it is anti-White is a slur on the whole concept of Racism. What the media and other alien interest groups present is not “Racism” but an unholy alliance of non-White peoples against the noble Aryan.
Max Musson
- Edit
The issue we should have with the media is not that they are ‘racist’, but that their racism is anti-White.
Fionn Westron
- Edit
Michael Woodbridge
Exactly, racism would imply they are expressing a preference for one group of people over another, the group being preferred usually having that right if they are the natives of the territory, and there is no element of race-hate involved, that is racism, nothing wrong, totally healthy.
the media are not racist, they are race-hate-ists, they are expressing a hate toward the native people of a territory who are the original ppls of that territory, thus situated there by default, the the culture of that territory is there by default consequence of the indigenous ppls.
The media are displaying a hate of the indigenous ppls, by undermining them and their ethnic and ethnic territorial thus human rights, and thus undermining their right to exist, usually called genocide.
This is called anti-whiteism, whereas as white racists, have no feelings of hate or genocide towards other races, they merely are intent on making sure their own exist in the indigenous territories that they are the natives of.
PharmaPhil
- Edit
Fear of being called racist will lose us our country.
Fionn Westron
- Edit
Hopefully people might be catching on to the idea of word manipulations and taking a concept of looking after one’s own people, (whether they be family or ethnicity) and how the marxists made it a sin, is gaining ground. What was once ok and good, has been twisted into being something bad, used to control our emotions, thus reactions and ultimately us.
that concept manipulation is explained here:
The word “Racism” is rendered positive and it’s true meaning
https://www.westernspring.co.uk/first-came-the-word/
The notion of racism-concept manipulation deconstructed and it’s true meaning regained. How a definition is used to denote a negative toward something that was always normal, natural, healthy and good.
Looking after your own is natural and was the natural order and way of things, it is how races and ethnicities came to exist. So the marxists had to say that very natural process itself was bad, they had to target the actual natural process of looking after things that are your own.
I have said many times before:
I look after my own family in our house, we do not hate other family’s => I am a familyist
I look after my own ethnicity in our own ethnic homeland, we do not hate other ethnicities => I am a racist.
The meaning has been twisted and manipulated to make sure doing what is natural in looking after your own and does not hurt any other people, cannot be done anymore or is not allowed to be done, or seen to be a sin.
AAA
- Edit
This issue –while obviously a moral outrage– is providing perfect cover for the paedophiles in power and in the Establishment, police, and judiciary.
.
There are 151 entries in the “Paedophilia” section of this site –all relating to our personal and political enemies with far more organisation, influence, and cover for their activities: https://eotp.org/tag/paedophilia/
.
It seems to me a grotesque coincidence that there was suddenly an explosion of cases of ‘celebrity’ paedophilia when groups and persons such as Chris Spivey, UK Column, Labour 25, Enemies of the People, Justice for Hollie Greig, etc. were getting a little to close for comfort in exposing the Establishment. Indeed, two whistle-blowers –Robert Green and Melanie Shaw– have been on the sharp end of the Establishment’s defensive measures.
.
Robert Green has spent over 100 days in HMP Perth prison and as of today (24/9/14) has been under house arrest for 127 days and ordered to report to his local police station on every one of these days and every day thereafter. The charges against him? He doesn’t know. He is forbidden to access the internet, which of course hinders his defence when the Establishment finally dreams up its charges.
.
Melanie Shaw is incarcerated in HMP Peterborough and is denied medical treatment for her leg ulcer. It’s said she is consitently bullied by the corporate (French-owned Sodexo) prison guards. She has recently gone on hunger strike to raise awareness of her plight. She’s been accused (without evidence) of arson –a tactic the State is rather partial to (it did the same with an outspoken mother of a victim in the Rotherham paedophile
.
And so, ‘Celebrity paedos’; ‘Paki paedos’…? A suitable-to-the-Establishment diversion?
.
Ah, the “British” State. What a ‘roaring success’ (for those heading it).
.
.
Robert Green: https://www.freerobertgreen.co.uk/who-is-robert-green/
.
Melanie Shaw: https://www.neonnettle.com/news/1031-whistleblower-melanie-shaw-jailed-without-evidence-of-a-crime / https://www.facebook.com/groups/323993691112095/325334817644649/?notif_t=group_activity
Max Musson
- Edit
That’s an interesting angle, AAA, I will have a good look at the links you have posted. 🙂
DASREICH
- Edit
While we moan on this site and others we are losing the war. Get up and protest against the elite and forget foreigners for now. Take it to the enemy and cause mayhem if we dont get listened to. 14 WORDS.
JP
- Edit
Whites have collectively gone insane.
PharmaPhil
- Edit
I think youthful rebellion might make well racism fashionable as it is anti establishment.
XpatinSG
- Edit
Can you please stop using the term “Asian men” whenenever none European readers hears this term they always think “Asian men” as meaning ; Chinese, Filipinos, Korean, Japanese or Malaysian and Indonesian. Why not use the exact description as: “of Arab origin” rather than Asian. Neither those perpetrators of Arab origin would like to be called Asians anyway.
Max Musson
- Edit
Unfortunately, most people from Southern Asia, i.e. Asia south of the Himalayas, are not ‘Arabs’. Arabs are from the Middle East and parts of North Africa.
.
People from the very south of India and from Ceylon are predominantly Veddic, i.e. of a racial type very similar to Australian Aborigines.
.
People from the bulk of The Indian sub-continent are Dravidian, Nepalese and Indo-chinese.
.
People from Anatolia, the southern Caucasus and central Asia are racially Turkic, and people from north-western Asia and Siberia are predominantly European.
.
Only the peoples from north of the Himalayas And east of the Tien Shan mountain range are of Oriental racial type and therefore when we write specifically about the Chinese or the Japanese we refer to them as ‘Oriental’, whereas when we write about people from Asia of generalised, indistinct or non-specific racial type, we refer to them correctly as ‘Asian’.
.
I hope this helps.