Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

nazi-islam-salute-640x380

Is it racist to say that some minority races are more racist than others? (try repeating that when you’re drunk). I would say that it wasn’t, but the official arbiters of what constitutes ‘racism’ would likely disagree.

According to the physics of the liberal universe, only White Northern Europeans can be actively racist. Behaviour which seems like ‘racism’ from other groups is either hallucinated or inapplicable.

We all know this conventional thinking to be absurd. We might not be open about it, but we all know it nonetheless. White Northern Europeans are plainly not the most racist ethnic group present in Britain today. They may be the majority, but that is something quite different and not a crime in itself.

So who (which ethnic group) takes the biscuit so to speak? I’ve narrowed it down to three non-White sections of society: Iranians, Arabs, and Pakistanis.

The first group to be discussed here, known variously as Iranians and/or Persians, require little introduction in a racism contest. Even within (and by the standards of) the Islamic world, Iranians are considered especially bigoted, and this includes against closely-related ethnic groups like Afghans and Pakistanis.

In Iran itself (a very divided ethnic state), the politics of racial appearance matter immensely. Nowhere has so much Europeanizing plastic surgery been expended on a population than in the Islamic Republic. Here, 40% of women under 40 have had some kind of surgery on their faces. Commonly, these procedures involve ‘de-Indianising’ native Iranian features by techniques like ‘nose sharpening’, hair-bleaching, and ‘lip streamlining’. And this isn’t just true in the motherland, but the diaspora too. It’s said (jokingly, I think) that if you light a match in the Persian area of South Kensington, you risk creating a fireball from the airborne residue of skin-lightening cream.

I remember once over-hearing a group of Iranians talking about President Obama in an SK coffee shop after his first election to office. They were excitedly inferring that the American IQ was being steadily reduced by interbreeding with ‘Niggers’ (who, incidentally, had made a pact with ‘Zionists’ to promote their assimilation). In Iran, they boasted, such people would never even be allowed to settle.

Iranian racism may derive from a long-held misunderstanding of the linguistic term ‘Aryan’, as in the term ‘Indo-Aryan languages’. The name Iran itself means ‘Land of the Aryans’ and was chosen to display sympathy with the regime of Adolf Hitler. Iranians, Afghans, Western-Indians and Pakistanis are members of an extended ethno-linguistic family with historic links to the development of European languages. If one really (and I mean really) stretches this, one can make Iranians, Indians, Pakistanis and Afghans part of the European definition. As a result, there is a notable movement among the Iranian diaspora seeking to align Iran with the extreme-right, and specifically those groups self-identified as Neo-Nazi.

Secondly, let us consider the Persians’ traditional ethnic rival, the Arabians. Some Arabs (although less racist on the whole than Iranians) are guilty specifically of anti-Black racism. In Syria and Lebanon, this chauvinism is deeply entrenched and rarely condemned. Black people in the Levant (almost always immigrant workers from East Africa) are frequently subject to verbal and physical abuse by employers and provided with lesser human rights than the majority. Even in Africa itself, such behaviour is commonplace. The genocide in Darfur, although not featuring a racial divide, was carried out by Arabic speaking Blacks against those who spoke native dialects, and was often framed in explicitly racist terms.

A more famous and less ambivalent case of race-hatred in the Arab world concerns the Jews. Long before the re-establishment of Israel, Jews were treated with suspicion by Arab populations, and many Arab leaders established favorable relations with Nazi Germany. Books like ‘Mein Kampf” and ‘The Protocols of the Elders of Zion’ became bestselling volumes shortly after their translations into Arabic. Both continue to do well to this day.

Finally, Pakistanis, being the most disliked group in modern English society, have also been known to seek comfort in racism. In their case, the targeting of the White majority.

On the 15th March 2004, Scottish teenager Kriss Donald was set upon on in Glasgow (for no other reason than his ethnicity) by a group of Pakistani Muslim men. After abducting him and driving him to a secluded location, they proceeded to torture him, repeatedly stabbing and slashing him with a kitchen knife and then finally setting his body on fire. According to The Scotsman newspaper, he died after having been set alight.

There have been many other cases of Pakistani-on-White murders, as well as innumerable cases of intimidation and harassment. All this is before we include the only recently revealed ‘grooming scandal’ which has seen young White (exclusively White) girls plied with alcohol and sedatives by Pakistani gangs and then pimped to a wide network of similar creatures.

So you see, dear reader, a case can be made that Islamic immigration not only imports the familiar curses of misogyny, homophobia and Anti-Semitism, but racism too. I should be clear in finishing that not every Iranian, Arab or Pakistani is guilty of racial hatred, and that is not the argument being put forward. I am merely pointing out that the Islamic world is infected as badly with ‘racism’ as anywhere else, and is possibly even worse. The Western world has made huge leaps forward to the point where racism is only possible underground or in private; A situation markedly different to that of modern Tehran, Cairo, and Karachi.

D, LDN.

Advertisements