I recently read James Edward’s book, Racism, Schmacism: How Liberals Use the 'R' Word to Push the Obama Agenda. I was quite interested in it because in his three-hour weekly radio show, The Political Cesspool, James’ treatment of the racism smear is not dissimilar to my own.
The book is – as you might expect from its author – a short, easy, and especially funny read, being comprised mostly of James’ witty commentary on the last few years’ worth of news stories covering alleged White racism. Said stories are discussed very much like in James’ show, and an abundance of internet sources are provided to facilitate independent investigation. Needless to say that the stories are absolutely ridiculous, defying belief in some cases, even for someone whose inbox is flooded daily with the reports of White ‘racism’ collected by Google’s news alerts. A reader can expect to roll his eyes, shake his head, and / or find his trachea rippling with laughter practically on every page.
There is the case, why not, of the federal hate crime investigation triggered by a ham sandwich; and there is the case of a mayor’s lengthy written apology to a Black citizen for allowing police officers to eat bananas in public. There are also several examples of White so-called conservatives being far more paranoid, obnoxious, and vociferous in their denunciations of supposed White racism than the usual liberal suspects. I was astounded to read, for example, that in at least one case, said conservatives even complained about their not being condemned vigorously enough in the liberal media; and that a conservative radio talk show host branded high gasoline prices racist because they encouraged farmers to use corn for the production ethanol, when that corn could be going to feed African children.
There is also, however, a serious message beneath this bestiary of political correctness; and it boils down to five simple theses:
1. Modern mainstream culture in America defines a racist as a White person; and a White person as a racist, everywhere and always, forever and constantly;
2. Those who peddle accusations of racism hate Whites and seek to gain advantages at the expense of Whites; anti-racists, even White ones, are anti-White, always and everywhere;
3. Modern Whites are cowards, who have allowed themselves to be imprisoned by a word;
4. When accused of racism, it is pointless for a White person to argue, deny, rebut, or explain: he is a racist, end of discussion;
5. The only appropriate response when accused or racism is derision.
Points four and five I have argued myself, most recently in my article for The Occidental Observer, where I discuss the anti-A3P smears in the New York Daily News and the Huffington Post. Points one to three, although beyond argument to anyone who has been paying attention, are home truths sadly yet to be recognized by most White folk on either side of the Atlantic. For this reason, because recognition is a necessary precondition for dismantling the anti-White culture of guilt, apologies, and reparations, James has pitched his book beyond his immediate constituency: its welcome purpose is to enlighten the benighted, not just preach to the converted.
No doubt James’ clean conscience, sunny disposition, and lighthearted disregard for matching his views and opinions to those approved by race relations professionals are proving an exasperating irritant for both them and adepts of the anti-racist egalitarian cult, so popular among smelly underachieving Molotov-hurling Marxist youths. Already we are seeing an escalation of attacks against James and his show. To my mind this only confirms the correctness of his approach. As Finnish nationalist Kai Murros, author of Revolution – And How to Do It in a Modern Society, wrote to me last year:
The ruling elite is afraid of our laughter, because it is the one thing they cannot control and laughter is a sure sign that people are already in process of signing off their loyalty to the system.
Of course, the system is predicated on fear – it needs to be, as it is otherwise too fragile to be sustainable. Its weakness becomes ever more apparent as it commits ever more of its resources to extinguishing laugher outside its designated ‘safe’ zones. In as much as ridicule is a projection of power, therefore, we will recognize the erosion of establishment power whenever its smug ridiculing of Whiteness gives way to obstreperous denunciations of, and vehement over-reactions against, assertions of White power.
But these are only humor’s destructive properties. Humor also has decisively constructive ones, which must not be overlooked. Firstly, it is associated with relaxation, and thus tends to convey among observers the sense that a person is in control of a situation – people tend to follow whomever appears to be in control of a situation. Secondly, it is associated with youth, and thus imbues anything positively linked to it with a sense of vitality and dynamism – this is how the Left won the young, and cast itself as a forward-looking movement. And, finally, it is both associated with and has the capacity to generate among observers a sense of well-being and good will, which is always preferable to nay-saying and prophecies of doom. Therefore, I think James' friendly and easy-going tone is more likely to make the non-ideological part of his audience more receptive to his message than the mass of demographic projections and crime statistics upon whose dissemination the racialist Right has so far based much of its political strategy. The projections and the statistics are necessary to inform intellectual arguments without a doubt, but, politically, they cannot achieve the revolution in consciousness that precedes fundamental change, because the anti-White culture is not founded on reason or rational data, but on irrational emotions, urges, and aspirations.
The true value of Racism, Schmacism, then, is its demonstration of the tone, attitude, and approach that need to become integral to pro-White campaigning.
This is not to say that the cultural war will be won by laughing and cracking jokes; the cultural war remains serious business. This is to say, rather, that pro-White campaigning will not be successful without its first becoming user-friendly.
Finally, I need to mention that there is scope here for a follow-up. Passing mention is made somewhere of the need to twin derision for the racism smear with an aggressive counter-attack. This is an important point that needs detailed treatment, because while humor can work miracles, there are times when seriousness is required in order to be taken seriously. Yet, when there is no point responding to an accusation of racism with denials and explanations, when said denials and explanations are, in fact, the accuser’s desired response (because it wastes time and energy counterproductively), one needs to target the accuser, not his accusation.
This is what I had James do in Mister, where he makes a fiery appearance in a not-too-distant future as the governor of Tennessee. Unfortunately, he is also targeted for an assassination attempt, but for now he needs not worry about that, as the friendly folk at the $PLC are still content with just savaging him in their magazine. Let us wish James good health and fortune so he may continue to fight the forces of political correctness with the same valour and gallantry he has displayed so far.
You can order your copy of Racism, Schmacism here.