To imply that the content of a human being's
mind "should be", determined by the color of
one's skin, like a pre-programmed robot, is
not only dead-wrong, idiotic and insane, It's
EVIL. AND it's a PERFECT example of PURE
racism. And it's beyond outrageous
that many unadmitted racists actually say
they're "pro-choice," but not in regard to
thoughts or thinking processes, apparently.
"Like every other form of collectivism, racism is a quest for the unearned…It is a quest for automatic knowledge—for an automatic evaluation of men's characters that bypasses the responsibility of exercising rational or moral judgment."
A genius is a genius, regardless of the number of morons who belong to the same race -- and a moron is a moron, regardless of the number of geniuses who share his racial origin."
(An article published in the September, 1963
issue of The Objectivist Newsletter
Racism is the lowest, most crudely primitive form
It is the notion of ascribing moral, social or
political significance to a man's genetic lineage --
the notion that a man's intellectual and
characterological traits are produced and
transmitted by his internal body chemistry.
Which means, in practice, that a man is to be
judged, not by his own character and actions, but by
the characters and actions of a collective of
every form of determinism, racism invalidates the
specific attribute which distinguishes man from all
other living species: his rational faculty.
Racism negates two aspects of man's life: reason and
choice, or mind and morality, replacing them with
The theory that
holds "good blood" and "bad blood" as a
moral-intellectual criterion, can lead to nothing
but torrents of blood in practice. Brute force
is the only avenue of action open to men who regard
themselves as mindless aggregates of chemicals.
Just as there
is no such thing as a collective or racial mind, so
there is no such thing as a collective or racial
achievement. There are only individual minds
and individual achievements -- and a culture
is not the anonymous product of undifferentiated
masses, but the sum of the intellectual achievements
of individual men.
These are not
two different claims, of course, but two
applications of the same basic premise. The
question of whether one alleges the superiority or
the inferiority of any given race is irrelevant;
racism has only one psychological root: the racist's
sense of his own inferiority.
one's virtues to one's racial origin, is to confess
that one has no knowledge of the process by which
virtues are acquired and, most often, that one has
failed to acquire them. The overwhelming
majority of racists are men who have earned no sense
of personal identity, who can claim no individual
achievement or distinction, and who seek the
illusion of a "tribal self-esteem" by alleging the
inferiority of some other tribe. Observe the
hysterical intensity of the Southern racists;
observe also that racism is much more prevalent
among the poor white trash than among their
state is merely an institutionalized form of gang
rule, regardless of which particular gang seizes
power. And -- since there is no rational
justification for such rule, since none has ever
been or can ever be offered -- the mystique of
racism is a crucial element in every variant of the
absolute state. The relationship is
reciprocal: statism rises out of prehistorical
tribal warfare, out of the notion that the men of
one tribe are the natural prey for the men of
another -- and establishes its own internal
sub-categories of racism, a system of castes
determined by a man's birth, such as inherited
titles of nobility or inherited serfdom.
No political system can establish universal rationality by law (or by force). But capitalism is the only system that functions in a way which rewards rationality and penalizes all forms of irrationality, including racism.
A fully free,
capitalist system has not yet existed
anywhere. But what is enormously significant
is the correlation of racism and political
controls in the semi-free economies of the 19th
century. Racial and/or religious
persecutions of minorities stood in inverse ratio
to the degree of a country's freedom. Racism
was strongest in the more controlled economies,
such as Russia and Germany -- and weakest in
England, the then freest country of Europe.
Such was the
trend of mankind for the brief span of some hundred
and fifty years. The spectacular results and
achievements of that trend need no restatement here.
When men began to be indoctrinated once more with the notion that the individual possesses no rights, that supremacy, moral authority and unlimited power belong to the group, and that a man has no significance outside his group -- the inevitable consequence was that men began to gravitate toward some group or another, in self-protection, in bewilderment and in subconscious terror. The simplest collective to join, the easiest one to identify -- particularly for people of limited intelligence -- the least demanding form of "belonging" and of "togetherness" is: race.
It is thus that
the theoreticians of collectivism, the
"humanitarian" advocates of a "benevolent" absolute
state, have led to the rebirth and the new, virulent
growth of racism in the 20th century.
victims of such race prejudice as did exist in
America were the Negroes. It was a problem
originated and perpetuated by the non-capitalist
South, though not confined to its boundaries.
The persecution of Negroes in the South was and is
truly disgraceful. But in the rest of the
country, so long as men were free, even that problem
was slowly giving way under the pressure of
enlightenment and of the white men's own economic
[ ... ]
In the absence
of any coherent political philosophy, every economic
group has been acting as its own destroyer, selling
out its future for some momentary privilege.
The policy of the businessmen has, for some time,
been the most suicidal one in this respect.
But it has been surpassed by the current policy of
the Negro leaders.
It is time to
clarify the principles involved.
racists' claim of "states' rights" is a
contradiction in terms: there can be no such thing
as the "right" of some men to violate the rights of
others. The constitutional concept of "states'
rights" pertains to the division of power between
local and national authorities, and serves to
protect the states from the Federal government; it
does not grant to a state government an unlimited,
arbitrary power over its citizens or the privilege
of abrogating the citizens' individual rights.
"liberals" are guilty of the same contradiction,
but in a different form. They advocate the
sacrifice of all individual rights to unlimited
majority rule -- yet posture as defenders of the
rights of minorities. But the smallest
minority on earth is the individual. Those
who deny individual rights cannot claim to be
defenders of minorities.
Instead of fighting against racial discrimination, they are demanding that racial discrimination be legalized and enforced. Instead of fighting against racism, they are demanding the establishment of racial quotas. Instead of fighting for "color-blindness" in social and economic issues, they are proclaiming that "color-blindness" is evil and that "color" should be made a primary consideration. Instead of fighting for equal rights, they are demanding special race privileges.
[ ... ]
Today, it is not an oppressor, but an oppressed minority that is demanding the establishment of racial quotas. (!)
[ ... ]
But that is the principle of the worst Southern racist who charges all Negroes with collective racial guilt for any crime committed by an individual Negro, and who treats them all as inferiors on the ground that their ancestors were savages.
The only comment one can make about demands of that kind is, "By what right? -- By what code? -- By what standard?"
That absurdly evil policy is destroying the moral base of the Negroes' fight. Their case rested on the principle of individual rights. If they demand the violation of the rights of others, they negate and forfeit their own. Then the same answer applies to them as to the Southern racists: there can be no such thing as a "right" of some men to violate the rights of others.
[ ... ]
[ ... ]
[ ... ]
The Virtue of Selfishness is available HERE.
|"I'm not generally proud to be British. It strikes me as absurd either to claim some sort of credit for an accident of birth, or to assume that the culture one is brought up in is ipso facto the best available to anyone. Nation is usually alien. I've said it before and I'll say it again: when someone says 'we', I feel like a 'them'." -- Guy Herbert|
|"The crude primitivism of supposedly respectable establishments to engage in 'reverse discrimination' or 'affirmative action' in order to allegedly 'make up for' the sins of people other than those they actually wind up 'punishing' for them, is racism squared, or moral depravity at its worst. It says, in effect, not only that 'two wrongs make a right,' but that racism is okay so long as it's 'our' racism. It is really an acknowledgment that, even if they tried, they wouldn't know how to internalize and institutionalize pure character-consciousness or merit-consciousness, let alone how to demonstrate to the world that it can be done. It is an abject admission of their guilt, real or imagined, and a hope that you, by your silence, share in it, or at least, tacitly condone it." -- Rick Gaber|
|"The less justified a man is in
claiming excellence for his own self, the more ready he is
to claim all excellence for his nation, his religion, his
race or his holy cause." -- Eric Hoffer
|"... So here we get the two essentials of Nazism: the rejection of reason and the mind in favor of the worship of brute emotion, and the elevation of the collective over the individual. What, then, distinguishes the ideas of the modern intellectuals from the philosophy of the Nazis? The addition of an altruist twist. The Nazis were certainly pro-self-sacrifice, because they advocated (and enforced) the sacrifice of the individual self to the collective aggrandizement of the race. But the modern intellectuals declare that they are even more altruistic because they want to sacrifice our own race to other races." -- Robert Tracinski, HERE|
|"If anyone insists that racism is valid, that the content of one's mind is frozen in place by the circumstances of his birth, then the only appropriate response is to say, 'Speak for yourself, buddy. Unless you're some sort of non-human, you must be speaking for yourself, and since you must regard those thoughts you just uttered as predetermined by your ancestors, you therefore couldn't possibly know or care if they're true or not just like a mindless robot programmed to make noises. Therefore, no one should take what you say any more seriously than robot noises, since your denying the human ability to do independent thinking and discriminate truth from falsehood means only that you have denied it for yourself. So I will take your word for it, and ignore you. As for me, I have found to be untrue many things my parents and ancestors believed, and I had no trouble rejecting those things. So at least I know damn well -- and from first-hand personal experience -- that human beings most certainly are capable of doing that.' " -- Rick Gaber|
|"The core of racism is the notion that the individual is meaningless and that membership in the collective -- the race -- is the source of his identity and value. ... The notion of 'diversity' entails exactly the same premises as racism -- that one's ideas are determined by one's race and that the source of an individual's identity is his ethnic heritage." -- Peter Schwartz in "The Racism of 'Diversity'," HERE|
|"Frankly, I'd be
insulted if I were told the reason I was being hired was
because of my ancestry. I would much rather work for
someone like T.J.
Rodgers, who is known to take time during meetings
to tell his staff (which originated from almost every
continent in the world) that they're there because they're
the best at what they do, not because of whoever their
ancestors were." -- Rick Gaber
"Money dissolves skin colour on contact. The fact that Silicon Valley, the freest market in the world, has produced the United Colours of Geek proves it." -- Dan Gardner
|"Racism is a variant of collectivism, the doctrine that the individual is valueless [except] as an appendage of a group. One's 'race' is an evaluation based on nonessential attributes ... such as the dimensions of facial/physical features and the wavelengths of light reflected by pigmentation." -- Gregory Gerig (emphasis added)|
|"The HUMAN 'race' has been in existence in its present form in only an infinitesimal amount of time, evolutionarily speaking. . Nonetheless, if everyone could trace his family tree back 70,000 years, let alone 700,000, he will find that the skin colors of his ancestors changed ten or twenty times, probably including every hue and tint you can imagine over and over again. Likewise for every variation of facial and body type. Therefore, other than the distinction between Cro-Magnon Man and the recently-extinct Neanderthal Man, there is no such thing as race. There are certainly such things as vastly different cultures, most manifesting dramatically distinct lifestyles and opportunities (or lack of such) for growth, advancement, fulfillment and happiness, but race? A thoroughly counter-productive, let alone unrealistic, concept." -- Rick Gaber|
get racism mixed up with bigotry or prejudice.
We need to get our terminology straightened out.
We obviously have racial problems that need
solving. The first step in solving a problem is
to identify it. If we keep mis-identifying
bigotry and prejudice as racism we’ll never make any
headway" -- Neal Boortz, here
"You CAN NOT judge previous generations by today's standards. Today Mark Twain is called by many, a racist. By the standards of his time, he was a social liberal. Even Teddy Roosevelt was a social liberal at the time, but he accepted as fact that idea that Caucasians were inherently superior to all other races. That makes him a racist in the CORRECT definition of the term." -- Neal Boortz, here
"Racism is a belief in the
inherent superiority of one race over another." -- Neal
And NOW, a college professor so fed up with the misuse of the term "racism" (as so often slung by certain humorless, self-righteous, perpetually-indignant people who go out of their way to shove their permanent shoulder chips in your face) that he's come up with his own brand-new, tongue-in-cheek definition of Racism HERE.
|Also see: What is collectivism? at:
The Kristallnacht of the Altruist Nazis at: http://tiadaily.com/php-bin/news/showArticle.php?id=1062 and
Reason vs. Racism at: reason vs racism
The Destruction of Martin Luther King's Dream at http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=119 and
What are rights? at:
Ayn Rand: The Age of Envy
Ayn Rand: The Cult of Moral Grayness
Ayn Rand: Is there a final authority in ethics?
Faith and Force: The Destroyers of the Modern World
Ayn Rand: The Roots of War
Ayn Rand: Selfishness Without a Self
More texts and excerpts by Ayn Rand
find an easier-to-copy version of this page HERE