Is it racist to notice?

On September 2, 2014, in Commentary, by mkennedy

The standard dictionary definition of racism is, “the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.”

Which leads us to a conundrum.  As anyone who has seen track and field events during the Olympics or Commonwealth Games may have noticed, the 100m sprint is dominated by people of West African genetic heritage (regardless of location of birth), and marathons prominently feature people of East African genetic heritage.  Watching the 100m sprint at the Olympics, we see a majority of the contestants being black, and expect nothing different.  If you were to place a bet on who wins the marathon, the Kenyans and Ethiopian contestants are always a good choice.

So noticing this racial disparity makes you a racist, and you are required to come to any conclusion OTHER than the most obvious one about what you see and that this phenomenon in no way hints different ability at the track.

“But the definition says belief about ALL members of a race”, the anti-racists would say.  “Not all Kenyans are good at marathons”. Perhaps true, but we still have a trend.  Is noticing a trend racist? Is the belief that someone of a particular race is more likely to have or lack an ability racist, as long as that belief isn’t about every single person?

In practice, this is considered racism too.  Generalizing allows for exceptions.  In practice, ascribing any difference in ability due to race or generalizing is considered racism.  The entertainment of the idea that race may make any difference, is in practice, considered racist, yet reality is there staring us in the face.

Generalizing, but stating that the line up of the 100m sprint is likely to be significantly black due to natural ability is racist, and seems to be what we see.  But we mustn’t treat this phenomenon as true.  The neurosis begins.

As Steve Sailer said, “Political Correctness is a war on noticing”.

So when anti-racists talk about stamping out racism, how can it in reality be done?  It is one thing to adjust attitudes, it’s another to demand a reinterpretation of reality and punish people for noticing what they see.

Eradicating racism, as so many profess to be a noble goal has to deal with this dilemma, such as the 100m sprint and we can only truly eradicate racism by forcing people to not make salient observations of the world around them.

Tagged with:
 

One Response to Is it racist to notice?

  1. romannoff says:

    I don’t quite understand why the author of this article is so concerned what the Anti-Racists may think of so called racist speech ……….racist according to their own definitions!

    He gives us a clue however when he says:
    “So when anti-racists talk about stamping out racism, how can it in reality be done? It is one thing to adjust attitudes, it’s another to demand a reinterpretation of reality and punish people for noticing what they see.”

    Notice he say that Anti-Racists have the power to “punish” people if they don’t adapt their speech according to their definition of racism. How did such situation arise in Australian society that the Anti-Racists can punish people for making “racist comments?”

    It does appear however, that the Anti-Racists have somehow, perhaps illegally, wrested power from the ordinary people with European identity………Because They can apparently use the legal power of the State, its courts and police power against speech acts which are nothing more than the statement of preference of one race over the other!……..If the citizens in a free market economy can act out on their own preferences, on the basis of their taste, in favour of one brand of a car over another, why not allow such expression of taste over different kinds of people? ……..It is a question of preferences of course, not a question of superiority or inferiority!………..Therefore, the Anti-Racist can use the legal power of the State, its courts and police power against speech acts that are nothing more than a product of aesthetic taste, by someone saying, for example in public, that one racial group is more beautiful than another!

    Does the Australian State, its legal system, its police force, have such powers over people?………. And Where is The Social Contract agreed upon between the people and the Australian State which allows the State to apply such powers over its people? …………..I think these are much more pertinent questions that any national movement with the courage should ask of the government, NO LESS than insist on receiving clear answers from the government.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Please enter CAPTCHA *