The Historical Revising of Racism, Hate, Bigotry and Your Right to all Three!

TRUE STORY

That's right, you have the right, to be A bigot.  What the law says you can't do is commit acts of racism.  Racism and bigotry are NOT the same thing.  Racism is trying to stop, deny or limit a person in their pursuit of the American Dream because of their Race. Racism is not always done out of hate; you can also commit racism by playing favorites because of a person's race.  Your race is not a variable in the act of racism.  You can even hate your own race and commit race acts towards your own race. Racism is about hindering and not about hating.  Bigotry on the other hand, almost always has some level of disdain but for some group.  You can even commit acts of racism unintentionally.  With race being thrown around in every social conversation lately it might be a good idea to learn the un-revised truth about the history of REAL racism and exactly what it is. 

(The following information below is from the book; "The Pacification of Humanity; Exposing the Ideological Contagions."  Like all the information contained on this blog is copyright protected and is the intellectual property of the author; Emmanuel S. John.)

Un-Revising Race History!

One of the problems with language in a modern society is that if people, social groups or governments choose to, they can actually reprogram people by merely changing the meaning of the words the populous uses.  They usually do it for purely selfish reasons.  These acts are often extremely destructive and actually harm their "supposed" causes. 

This will be a simple example of how words can be changed since it is so obvious; let's use Racism.  How are race relations going right now?  I grew up, worked and lived in Baltimore most of my life; race relations have never been this bad and the division never more violent.  I moved away because even though Baltimore has a history of violence, it was becoming increasingly more dangerous to be the wrong race in the wrong place, at the wrong time; at least if you're white-ish.  

See if you agree with the current definition I use for Racism.  While the word is not that old this is the historic legal definition of record for the "charge" of Racism.  The original meaning went something like this: "Racism is the withholding of goods and services, or access to goods and services by one race that is in power from another race that is not in power, with that denial of such things being exclusively based on race." 

How did we do?  Sounds pretty good right? It should, because without one race being in power you have no negative outcome; it would just be dislike, distain, bigotry or hatred, but not Racism.  (Psst,, Right now there are some really freaked out people, freaked out about a word being clearly defined.  They're getting really anxious because they have been programmed to have an emotional reaction to the word and its meaning. They may even feel like they are not the right RACE to be able to talk about it. That is PC repression.)

Real Racism

The real definition of racism is of no interest to the Ideologues.  In truth "Racism" only exists when a good, service or opportunity is denied because of race.  Thinking about denying someone a job based on race is not illegal nor is it considered to be committing an act of racism.  For racism to exist the job must actually be denied for the reason of race; regardless of the rationale.  Simple test; "Am I denying this person something because of race."  If you deny him the job for punctuality issues in the past it's not racism, no matter how many white people work for you.

Speaking about another race in a negative manner is not Racism, that’s why they came up with the term "hate speech."  The problem with the term "hate speech" is that speech is supposed to be free and it is guaranteed by the 1^st Amendment. They have resorted back to the word racism because it still has a lot of emotion attached to it. 

The race baiters use race to coerce you into silence.  They would like you to think that speaking about race is just as bad as committing racism.  Many northern black voters have never been in the South, yet most of them are sure that everyone "down there" is filled with hate for them. (Recall from earlier in the book, the emotional aspect of polarization and how the Nazis used unrealistic fear to motivate support.)  The left-leaning ideologues would be in major trouble if the religious Northern black voters unified with the Black and White religious Southern voters.  It would end the Democratic Party.  For this reason they are desperate to Keep Hate Alive!  Their real motive is to engulf you in their argument and to get you to join them in their redefining of the word.  The less you think, the more power and control they have.  In a perversely ironic way, this assimilation of blacks into the democrat party is a form of continued ownership and intellectual slavery to their cause. (But I digress.)

Original Racism 

The origins of the word Racism is not as old as you might think (which should give you pause).  Its evolution had nothing to do with people of African descent.  Leon Trotsky’s 1930 work, "The History of the Russian Revolution" was the first time that the term was coined.  The word came from a Latin transliteration of the word he used in that book. “Racistov” essentially meaning “racists.”  Trotsky was the cofounder and first leader of the infamous Red Army.  Interesting enough, he was a Jewish man in a pre-WWII Russian State.  He co-led the 1917 revolution alongside Vladimir Lenin as Commissar of War in the new Soviet government.  He helped defeat forces opposed to Bolshevik control.

As the Soviet government developed, he engaged in a power struggle against none other than Joseph Stalin who had had him exiled earlier. It had nothing to do with people of African descent and in fact, it was a reference to a notion that Jewish people were not Caucasian.  That is the original meaning of the term.  Trotsky was arguing that Jews were Caucasians; just like Russians.  Jews were being denied equal opportunity and access.Trotsky was denied the big job because he was Jewish!

In 1960's America the term shifted to "Denying the access to a job, to food, to shelter, to opportunity; or to equal treatment based on race alone."  The co-opting of the word was initiated because it was the same thing that was happening to the Jewish people in Russia.  Initially it was really about jobs only.  That is the original and still the modern, standard for defining racism.  Did they teach you that in school? Of course not, it wouldn't serve their agenda so they are trying to expand it to mean more than it does. (Words equal Perspectives!)   

Every other non-racial factor entered into the decision to deny someone access to something diminishes the impact of racism.  The race that is "in power" is not relevant; it does not require the racist to be white.  Slavery is not necessarily racism either. There have been many cultures that have enslaved their own race.  People in the Middle East were the first to hold slaves and usually of the same race.  The Muslims were the first outsiders to enter Africa and enslave black Africans.  Black Africans (not all Africans are black, but you knew that too right) learned that if they converted to the Muslim faith they could not be held as slaves.  According to Mohamed, one Muslim is not allowed to enslave another Muslim; hence the birth of the Black Muslims.  (The Black American Muslim is actually celebrating a heritage of slavery by being Muslim.)  While the faith freed them from slavery, it mandated or enslaved them into the religion/ideology.  It didn't make them free.  All this occurred long before the US was even conceived of.  This information is not hard to find.

(Want a little more?  Like the content?  If so you'll love the book; see the link below to read the first chapter free. )

 FYI 

SHOCKER ALERT!!!

The first person in the US to legally own another person was a black man named Anthony Johnson in 1654.  He sued and won when a North Hampton court allowed him to indefinitely retain and keep a black indentured servant named John Casor.  Casor had left Johnson's keeping to be a paid servant/employee of a white man.  Johnson sued in court for the return of his possession, Mr. Casor.  His victory created the landmark case for ownership of a human being in the US colonies in 1655.  Mr. Casor and those who followed, were the first property that a black man could actually own; yep, another black man.  You can be certain that social order deemed that if a black man could own a black man, then a white man could own one too.

OPEN YOUR EYES PEOPLE; HUMANITY IS DYING!!!!  

In the book the Pacification of Humanity I explain in detail how we can see past these ideological contagions and how we can purge our minds of this pollution of perspective.  

LEARN MORE ABOUT UN-REVISING HISTORY @
Read for FREE on the website http://www.thepacificationofhumanity.com/chapter-1.html
Or take advantage of the New Start in the NEW YEAR Sale, on now! Clear up your vision and learn the truth.
"The Pacification of Humanity: Exposing the Ideological Contagions," is not a book about politics, it's a book about the affect of politics on your life both past and present. A book that exposes the hypocrisy of policy and the inconsistency of Ideology. It explains how propaganda and political correctness create division, societal discord and identity confusion. It will help you find your way in a lost society. thepacificationofhumanity.com