Friday, 14 August 2009

Racist Cake

Things have changed.

In the old days a racist was proud to be a racist, they threw around their offensive and backward opinions without a care in the world, they had faith in their convictions, no doubt helped by the over-arching air of racism that propagated the the good old days.

They accepted and wore the epithet of racist with pride, with honour, a sense that they would be proven right in the long run and that being a racist would one day by a positive, rather than a negative. They accepted the pejorative with a shrug and a "so what?".

Not now.

Racists have realised that being a racist is actually a fundamental human flaw and shows you to be not only intellectual stunted but quite possibly, mentally ill; failing to resolve your own personal issues and projecting your weaknesses and fears onto innocent people. They have also discovered that most people do not like racists and would prefer it if racists stopped being racist and educated themselves and stopped basking in their myopic ignorance.

Now we have a new brand of racist, one who still vomits racist ideas but when you confront them with the truth that they are a racist and explain why in clear detail, they look at you with a mix of horror and confusion and say: "but I'm not a racist and you calling me a racist is an effort to silence my freedom of expression, this is because you are a fascist."

Racists are now in denial, their ideas have proven to be wrong and they've drifted to the margins of modern thought, they hope that by denying their inherent racism, their racist ideas will be seen in a new light.

We live in an age of racists refusing to accept that they are racists.

An age of the racist wanting their racist cake and eating it.


  1. "Gone meta" is the technical term, ISTR.

  2. I don't for one second believe racists think there's anything wrong with being a racist. The minute someone can figure out a way to make it okay to publicly be a racist (very much the way Reagan made it okay to be a classist and excoriate the poor), they will proudly wear their white hoods again.

  3. In the US, the Klan leader David Dukes, doesn't go around in a white sheet. He wears a suit and tie, and runs for office in Republican primaries.

  4. Yup. And there's also my personal favourite: 'Accusations of racism are so overused by the left that the term doesn't really mean anything now anyway'.

  5. You'll have to see the movie District 9. It is allegorical towards race in general, and aparheid in particular. The shows star is the next DeNiro. I was thinking about you at the screening.

    Racism today is cloaked in language, with double meanings as "crime."

  6. Neil:

    Serious? That sounds a bit like that Nick twat at Lib Con.


    Perhaps you're right there but times are slowing moving against the racists.


    Indeed. And I've left a comment over at yours about the movie. Also, I've withdrawn from the healthcare debate, my points have been made, they have no rebuttals, just bluster but I do have to ask you, if the rules got broken, would you enforce them?

    And yes, racists cloak their language well...


    Chocolate cake is far nicer.

    Soho Politico:

    Oh yes, the classic idea that perjoratives can be worn out by over use and thus become more ineffective. I must say, I despise people bandying the word around wothout good cause but that's a lot different from neutering the term altogether.


    Yes! A classic way the racist starts the sentence!

  7. I am not sure if I am a racist, I try my best to hate everyone equally, but I will use an example from this vrey morning to illustrate my moral conundrum and ask you to wonder if our decisions are based on race or behaviour.

    It was a lovely morning, so we went out really early with our baby daughter to go on the swings in the park. Remember, that this is a village in Norfolk where there are few "darkies" around. As we approach the swings, we see a teenage "jungle bunny" pacing around the park eratically and rubbing his head with his hands. To me, it appeared that our coloured cousin may have imbibed some chemicals that may have altered his perception of the world. Or he could have been stone-cold-bollocks it appeared that he was in a highly agitated state.

    So I have this issue. Do we proceed into the park and do our thing on the swings and hope this "wog" will leave us alone or do I do the fatherly thing and do a U-turn and protect my baby daughter from any unpleasantness that was OBVIOUSLY going to happen?

    I did a U-turn - though I am not sure if this was based on the guy's colour or based on his erratic behaviour or just based on instinct of the obvious?

    How do you make decisions in the situation??? Interesting quandry, isn't it?

    PS. I used the colourful language to wrong-foot you...

  8. It was a good time to withdraw, the points were made.

    If you look at Tony's blog, you'll see that discussion, showed the right has no solutions to the healthcare crisis. He posted a link to the conversations, as an example of what the right says in America.

    You can go back and read the comments. It has the points needed to argue against the right.

    It was more disciplined a response, than before.

  9. Another hypothetical question: Let's say there is a student in a very small town in, say, California. And what if her name happens to be a tad bit offensive--let's call her Aryan, pronounced exactly the way you are afraid it is pronounced. Just by coincidence, maybe her last name is, oh, White. She gets accepted in a program at school that targets "underrepresented populations in higher education" (read = non-white) and first-generation college students like herself. Do you address it? How? I'm hypothetically worried about gagging every time I call her name. Maybe she'll get her student ID tattooed on her left arm and I can just call her by number.

  10. "Serious? That sounds a bit like that Nick twat at Lib Con."

    Yeah, sort of serious. What I meant was, the moment you call one of these nu-racists, they rarely defend what they're saying.

    No - they defend their right to say it instead. ie. They start debating about the debate. Failing that, they try and paint your calling 'racist' as an ad-hom fallacy or somesuch - debating the 'rules' of the debate.

    For evidence, see just about any libcon thread about any subject ever.

  11. Darren:

    You always wrong foot me but I like that about you, even thought I think you went too far with the language and I have to be careful, a cold reading of the comment out of context could make you out to be some sort of racist.

    And in response to your story, I think his behaviour put you off but if you pepper a story with racist terms, even if they are in " it will make it look like you avoided him because of race.


    Yes, I spotted that at Tony's it is just that it takes a lot of discipline to withdraw and to leave them posting lies and offensive ones at that, I mean wouldn't you class the denial of AIDS/HIV as homophobia?


    Nice to have you back!

    A name may be a flag to someones bigotry but you have to get beyond that, for example when i teach a Muslim child, I can assume that they hold backward views via the clue of their name but I have to get on with the job at hand and teach them.

    I only challenge them when they vocalise beliefs that repress others, whoever that other may be.


    Now I understand you and agree, I've been in those debates over there plenty and elsewhere. I've noticed that the high volume of Tories over there rarely comment ON the article but rather debate the debate.

    Otherwise known as ducking.

  12. I know I can't be a racist because I don't like people. It has bugger all to do with the colour of their skin. White people offend me as much as black. But then I am world weary and very, very tired of this life...

    I want nice things to happen. We all need a miracle.

    But with the park story, I'd have done the same thing if it had been a white guy. The fellow was off-his-tits or something...and that makes for unpredictable events. Whoo-hoo!

  13. I know you're not a racist Darren, the ennui though of hating all humans is a little tough to take, it makes me worried for you, you know, that you're so negative on everyone cept your own wee one and your wife.

    I hope nice things happen to you.


Please do not be under the misapprehension that this blog has a laissez-faire comments policy where commenters can get away with whatever they want to say on account of their ‘freedom of speech’.

Blurred Clarity has a stringent comments policy. So anything off-topic, diversionary, trollish, abusive, misogynist, racist, homophobic or xenophobic will be deleted.

Cheers duckies.