News42 mins ago
Is it correct to refer to the Jews as a 'race'?
47 Answers
It is a question that has intrigued me for a while since the phrase 'Jewish race' (and its variants) crop up regularly in the media.
Should it be rightly referred to as a 'race' or is it simply a religious belief? Is it both?
Should it be rightly referred to as a 'race' or is it simply a religious belief? Is it both?
Answers
Race is being stretched for political reasons. The CPS regard a racist crime as: "... any incident which is perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person."
The big question is why political lobbies want to stretch the classificati on "race", which was always a passive characterist ic, to extend to all identifiable groups whether based on race,...
14:15 Thu 24th May 2012
FAO Naomi ~ http:// www.the answerb ...2.ht ml#answ er-6944 747
The labelling of people as "races" used to be about passive characteristics, especially colour etc.
The modern labelling by race is deliberately designed to amplify the separateness of groups. The extension of the concept of race to any group means that the state can assist them to can develop their separate values and become alienated. How on earth are we going to polarise society enough to precipitate the revolution if we rely on such weak differences as class? Postmarxism demands racism.
The modern labelling by race is deliberately designed to amplify the separateness of groups. The extension of the concept of race to any group means that the state can assist them to can develop their separate values and become alienated. How on earth are we going to polarise society enough to precipitate the revolution if we rely on such weak differences as class? Postmarxism demands racism.
Race is being stretched for political reasons. The CPS regard a racist crime as: "... any incident which is perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person."
The big question is why political lobbies want to stretch the classification "race", which was always a passive characteristic, to extend to all identifiable groups whether based on race, nationality, creed or even political belief. The reason is simple, the postmodern philosophers of the late twentieth century realised that the label "racist" was a powerful tool for polarising society. If you can twist an opinion into being racist you turn those who hold the opinion into oppressors of a whole social grouping and you evoke fear and hence solidarity in the group that you claim is under attack.
This approach uses the propaganda of warfare as a tool of everyday politics so that those who hold opinions that differ from your own can just be labelled "racist" and dismissed as the evil enemy.
The whole technique of postmodern sociological analysis is racist of course.
All individuals are racist - if you favour your own wealth, your home, your family, your town or your country you are racist under the new definition of the term. It is only by accepting allegiance to an amorphous, globalising, governing class that you can escape the label. The amorphous governing classes are only too happy for this to happen, they always have been.
The big question is why political lobbies want to stretch the classification "race", which was always a passive characteristic, to extend to all identifiable groups whether based on race, nationality, creed or even political belief. The reason is simple, the postmodern philosophers of the late twentieth century realised that the label "racist" was a powerful tool for polarising society. If you can twist an opinion into being racist you turn those who hold the opinion into oppressors of a whole social grouping and you evoke fear and hence solidarity in the group that you claim is under attack.
This approach uses the propaganda of warfare as a tool of everyday politics so that those who hold opinions that differ from your own can just be labelled "racist" and dismissed as the evil enemy.
The whole technique of postmodern sociological analysis is racist of course.
All individuals are racist - if you favour your own wealth, your home, your family, your town or your country you are racist under the new definition of the term. It is only by accepting allegiance to an amorphous, globalising, governing class that you can escape the label. The amorphous governing classes are only too happy for this to happen, they always have been.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.