MRDA vs. the Racial Massmind & The Tyranny of Slave Morality

Ridiculous is he who, while fellows of his tribe, family, nation, rank high, is – nothing but ‘puffed up’ over the merit of his fellows. [He] puts his worth….in connectedness, or in the ‘tie’ that conjoins him with others, in the ties of blood, of nationality…
– Max Stirner



One of the things about most of my acquaintances which really makes me not want to co-exist with them is the way that they venerate the norm to the status of deity; now when I speak of “normal”, I mean not what is rational or what makes sense, but rather what a large number of people would mistake for such; I’m talking of the average, the most commonplace, the banal, everyday and conventional. Now so far, so familiar for many of you, but today I’m gonna talk about one of the ways in which this veneration of the “norm” has affected me….

Today’s hot potato is racism!

Now when most peeps hear the word “racism” they think of evil Europeans persecuting poor, helpless Blacks/Asians/Jews/Latinos; or – if they’re not so P.C. infected – can think of it as discrimination by any one race against any particular, or every other race. However this variant of the slave morality doesn’t just manifest as conflict between races, but also within them. I’ve made mention of this conflict in an earlier post but I now feel the need to expand upon it….

I’ve been aware for a long time that, contrary to good sense, many people see their race as something above and greater than them – a divine sentience which dictates their every move, whim and interest. Thus we have the spectacle of people in effect declaring with their actions: “My kind, right or wrong”, eager to protect this phantom from the encroachment of outsiders; such a mentality reaches out to the extent of wanting this ethnic heritage to dictate not only the mind and movement of the subject, but also all those who share his racial lineage. I’m sure most people reading have met that “conscious” individual from their race who bangs on (and on and on) about the virtues of Black/White/Asian/Latino/Zentradi culture – ÜBER ALLES! Such people may or may not have good intentions behind doing so – wanting to protect a part of their characterlogical makeup from being eroded – but, as the wise well know, good intentions very often paveth the road to the inferno! What characterises the inferno I speak of? Massminded idiots, sacrificing whatever vestige of individuality they have to the Almighty Regent known as Race; this manifests itself in a strict segregation of ethnicities whether this be forced (Robert Mugabe kicking white farmers out of Zimbabwe and South African Apartheid) or chosen (American ghettoization); this serves the function of keeping the bloodlines “pure” and the culture “preserved”.

However, it doesn’t stop there – there’s also the matter of removing any alien elements within the race – the ones who can’t or won’t march in lockstep with the rest of the herd. Thus “the culture” and the race are conflated – bound together as one – making membership to the racial collective not just an affair of matter, but of mindset; thus anyone who deviates from the dictates of Regent Race and Countess Culture, and their offspring – the “Proper” Black/White/Asian/Latino/Saiyan – is spotlighted and stigmatized as an example of the Anti-normative – what one shouldn’t be!

Thus ethnocentrism soon leads to cerebral arrest in those who subscribe to its mandates. How do I know this? Because all too often I’ve had to bear such idiocy from the more cognitively-challenged members of my ethnic group. A recent example of this took place at work a few days ago with a colleague who saw fit to criticize me for my love of reading, denouncing me as “a White man trapped in a Black man’s body” (Gee, way to uplift Black people, Paul!); now this guy, for the merits he does have, is someone who buys the bullshit doctrine of ethnocentricity; I often have to put up with his jibes in regards to my music tastes and how I should “listen to Black music” (yawn!). When I later brought to his attention how much of a prick he comes across as at times, he responded with the whole “only joking” line of defence.

Joke or not in his mind, it’s not such a laughing matter for those who’ve have to put with such shit for a good half of their lives – simply for following their own bliss. Then again jibes such as “coconut”, “oreo”, “Uncle Tom”, “nigger-lover” and what have you really bring about intra-racial unity, do they not?

Now, reading the entries of some of the friends I’ve acquired, I see that this stigmatization by “fellow” race members is not a problem unique to myself. Beyond LJ, I’m willing to bet there are a considerable percentage of people made to feel like shit for not fitting into the arbitrary requirements of “the Race”. It’s actually quite ironic how often the members of these racial massminds project their own glaring flaw – self-hatred – onto the deviants in their midst; these ethnocentric fuck-ups think so little of themselves that they’re willing to kneel down and fellate an arbitrary, fetishized normative; these are the same fools who cry foul whenever the media pigeonholes their ethnic group in a “stereotypical” template – which is often the exact same template they insist upon for themselves and their “fellow” Blacks/Whites/Latinos/Asians – funny that!

If these “race leaders” really wanted to put an end to racism they’d address the real problems in their ethnic “communities” instead of whinging about (half the time) fabricated problems caused by other races. As it is, such mindsets – with their conceptions of what’s “proper” – are merely another carcinogen for the cancer of racism.

The way I see it, if anyone deserves to be purged from the gene pools, it’s the walking, breathing miscarriages who breed the falsehood that one’s ancestry has the first and final say in one’s destiny….


This entry was posted in Egoism, Moral Panic, Personal, Philosophy, Politics, Quotes, Racial Issues, Society and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

22 Responses to MRDA vs. the Racial Massmind & The Tyranny of Slave Morality

  1. Always remember most people don’t have minds of their own. And what little mind they do possess is often closed.
    Another thing to remember, we need the sheep. After all not everyone can be a leader. The problem comes in when you have the wrong shepperds…. And we have only had the wrong ones for far too long.
    Not everyone can be a leader or even follow their own path. And those who can follow their own path are often hated or at least misunderstood byu those who can’t.

    • MRDA says:

      This reminds me of a Lamb of God Lyric:
      “Smite the shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered!”
      But why do we need the sheep – as a comparison point? As tools? Expand please….

    • dgowers says:

      I thought that was always. I am reminded of a quote (unremembered author)
      “To avoid criticism, do nothing, say nothing, be nothing.”
      To be more precise, anyone who cannot imagine themselves being awesome hates awesomeness and the awesome, and school does the job it was set out to do, making 95% of people thus unimaginative in large or small lumps.

  2. harlockhero says:

    not much i can add besides a general nod of agreement.

  3. ubermensch says:

    The idea that another entity’s genetic and cultural similarities to one’s own self are of any normative relevance above and beyond the practical consequences they cause on one’s egoism is one of the most insidious and infectious spooks of our time. Genetic and cultural/linguistic heritage are nothing more than brute facts of history, incapable of making demands except to the delusional, with the demands they hear emanating from DNA and from acculturation every bit as fictitious and oppressive a slave moralist spook as, say, the christian diety figure. Perhaps even more so, since the nature of this particular spooks as being attached to real facts may make them look more legitimate and reasonable than spooks which send forth their demands from fictitious entities.

    • ubermensch says:

      *these particular spooks

    • MRDA says:

      “the demands they hear emanating from DNA and from acculturation every bit as fictitious and oppressive a slave moralist spook as, say, the christian diety figure. Perhaps even more so, since the nature of this particular spook as being attached to real facts may make them look more legitimate and reasonable than spooks which send forth their demands from fictitious entities.”
      It’s especially insidious in this (chronological) cultural climate which venerates ethnic “pride” as a counteraction to racism, unaware that it is simply the “nice” side of the same coin!
      God isn’t dead – merely reincarnate as the spook of “Race Consciousness/ Awareness” , amongst other things….

  4. phyrbyrd says:

    something similar happens to anyone who doesn’t fit into a neat box. I was in a stereotype box for a while, then I realised the only reason it was there was so I could kick the walls down. I am not a goth, or a beatnik, or a hippy, or an intellectual, or an art freak, or a rock chick or anything with a label. I have spent years proving that I am, above all, MYSELF.

  5. I agree with several of the points made by previous commentors. Of course we need the sheep and idiots, because without them it would reduce not only the population, but would induce a furious struggle. Once the bottom level is removed, those closest to it fall into the gap, if they are even slightly more intelligent, say, goats as opposed to sheep, they will try to climb back to their position. So what then transpires is in the struggle some of the goats trample the wolves, next up on the ladder, who of course now have to fight off the bottom tier and top tier for power, so on and so forth. What happens is that the once stable and balanced pyramid becomes a roiling, heaving ball of death and chaos. The docile, hopeless and stupid are necessary. They are the yin to the universal yang.
    Next, depending on your anthropological courses, you may or may not have read of research that basically negates the idea of “race” in practically every category, from skin color to finger prints to the pattern of hair growth. Essentially the assertion is that “race” from a scientific, empiricist point of view is a construction of the human mind, falling by the wayside with such myths as “shaving will make your hair grow back thicker”.
    Then we go onto the reason why these kinds of thoughts exist in the first place. Instincts and thought patterns are well-wired into us all. A very potent tool for survival back in the day was the us vs them idea. This expresses itself in everything from racism, to gangs, to wars, to cliques and extends into virtually every facet of human life. Even the most open-minded atheism pounding liberal has the mentality. The filthy moronic christians with their slave-mind! We’re so much better on this side! Which, I agree is true from our perspective. We might even have evidence and shit to back it up, but it’s kind of eerie how closely the realms of ignorance and enlightenment coexist.
    So what the hell was my point after all of that… o_0
    Um. You’re all probably robots and out for my sweet, sweet human blood. My friend Bob the shotgun (short for BABLOOM!) will save me from your vile machinations.
    Today’s program has been brought to you by the word “nipples”.

    • dgowers says:

      Even the most open-minded atheism pounding liberal has the mentality. The filthy moronic christians with their slave-mind! We’re so much better on this side! Which, I agree is true from our perspective. We might even have evidence and shit to back it up, but it’s kind of eerie how closely the realms of ignorance and enlightenment coexist.
      It is the same, and it is not necessary, and it always always fucks you up. If you watch someone good at speaking, they find a person as an example of what they’re trying to convey, and set you up to realize that there are others you know who are like that. ‘Net of questions’ pretty much describes the methodology.
      I (and probably you) am different in that aspect : I’m well prepared to explain exactly what it is you’re doing that pisses me off, and absolutely disinclined to say ‘group x pisses me off because they..’. Giving any appellations at all to a group is doubly lying, saying untruths about a hallucination.

      • MRDA says:

        Re: .
        I generally try to avoid the group hate; I must admit there are times when my disdain for religionists can lead me to deliver sweeping strikes, but I try to keep such to a minimum.
        I usually find using the qualifiers “some”, “many”, “a few” or even “most” helps me avoid the sweeping appellations.

    • MRDA says:

      “We might even have evidence and shit to back it up, but it’s kind of eerie how closely the realms of ignorance and enlightenment coexist.”
      It’s because you, I and others have “evidence and shit” behind us that saves us from falling into the rut of ignorance, Rage; ignorance is the absence of, or unwillingness to regard the knowledge….
      Saying that, one can be just as judgmental an atheist as the religionists they condemn (although not without good reason); this can lead to sweeping judgments such as “Death to all the christians!” or “Put all those Muslims in concentration camps!” if left unchecked.
      Criticism of religion, culture and the fanatics from each can be valid; sweeping judgments of everyone with even a trace of affiliation should be resisted.

      • Which in and of itself is kind of silly. I mean, what kind of literal semantic fuck would possibly say “When you say Christians are ignorant, do you mean exactly every single one? Because I can point out a few noteworthy…”
        Think about it… when you begin to PC watch your own phrases to make ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN that the qualifiers “some” “most” etc are there in order to placate your own burning need to NOT BE LIKE “them!”, it winds up becoming a game. You’re playing poker with yourself, you see all the cards! If what you mean to say is “Christians” but you edit it to “some Christians”, you’re really doing it for the sake of appearance, for the sake of the other person or person’s. You’re preserving image. You know internally that all of em aren’t bastards, and so the verbal spotting of your own speech becomes utter nonsense. If the person with whom you speak is so stupendously retarded that they truly would equate an academic point by point destruction of Christians and their doctrine (or whatever group) with your blanket hatred for every single last Christian EVER, then they aren’t worth talking to in the first place.
        Not to say, of course, that during dinner with your boss you launch into a diatribe about them filthy bible thumpers. Common sense. There’s no reason to be an asshole, per se, but there’s no reason to fear speaking normally without qualifying each statement for veracity to a scientific degree.
        Remember, if they get you to fear, they’ve already won.

        • MRDA says:

          I don’t think being precise is the same thing as being P.C. The way I see it, P.C is saying something like “Religion is a good thing – it’s just some who spoil it”, which is a view I’m no way prepared to defend. When I say “some Christians/Muslims” and the like, I mean to say “some Christians/Muslims are better than their wretched philosophy would have you believe” which is a statement of fact, as opposed to limpwristed P.C pandering.
          Like I said one should never shirk from bringing the justice to dodgy philosophies and their more twisted (read: hardcore or genuine) member, whilst at the same time remembering that there are some affiliates to said fucked-up philosophies who are egoistic/rational enough not to let it shut down their cognitive faculties completely….
          I’m precise not to “save face”, or any bullshit like that, but rather because the more accurate one is, the more chance one has of hitting one’s target with the minimum of collateral!

  6. dgowers says:

    Perfectly accurate; I add this:
    * This is equally true and equally damaging for near-any ‘I am’ or ‘they are’. Self-description is a self-fulfilling prophecy. This is why I refuse to seriously make an ‘I am..’ statement other than ‘I am me.’ . To summarize some of what you’ve said, the most damaging are political identifications, which all mean essentially ‘I’M not like THEM and THEY’RE not like ME’, ie. ‘I can’t/shouldn’t be like THAT.’ self-flagellation.
    I don’t yet know how to kill something as monstrous as identity politics.
    * When dealing with abuse like this, I find you must cut it off immediately and harshly at the first instance. I basically say ‘I say what is normal for me, if you don’t like it, begone’ (or ‘shut up’ if ..encouraging them to go away is not an option. And then I only have to frighten them once if I still need to knock the wind out of their sails.)

    • MRDA says:

      Re: .
      You make a good point; it can be easy to pigeonhole the self into a rut which suits some parts of one’s essential character at the expense of other parts; the self-flagellation you describe often leads to one beating away vital aspects of one’s character.
      As for the counter-attack, its certainly a valid step – and a good way of sifting potential friends from enemies; eventually I hope to shake away the fetters that hold me back rom fully asserting myself.
      Great to see you drop by! I recognize you from your comments on Rinku’s journal. One question though: who sent you (if anyone)?

      • dgowers says:

        Rinku’s friends page sent me 🙂
        I sent me.
        Awesome custom commenting-tags (? don’t know the name). ‘Prepare to defend the truth.. with your fists!’ is a great way to say ‘speak in defence of the truth’.

        • MRDA says:

          Re: Rinku’s friends page sent me 🙂
          Thanks! I got the quote from the Tekken animé; one of the best lines in an English language animé dub – ever! Almost like saying “own your views/words” or “follow through” – I thought it appropriate!

  7. newedition says:

    Another great entry!
    Sort of as extension of this… I’ve been wondering what the culture promoters are afraid of. If someone is not “acting black” or being “Asian enough” or whatever else, how does this harm the accuser?
    My idea is this: There are certain behavior patterns they wish to follow, which they believe represent their particular culture. These may or may not be good traits. When they see another supposed member of the culture not following these trends, it forces them to question the reasons for following these trends themselves. And they don’t like that, because it means they as individuals have the responsibility of choosing their own beliefs and behaviors.

    • MRDA says:

      Of course one could argue that racist judgments like “not Black enough” or such ‘n’ such are indeed powered by a certain resentment and a desire to invert values – at least in certain context. I’ve nothing against those of my race who embrace, say, the aesthetics of ghetto culture, yet are rational enough to treat their preference as a purely personal one, as opposed to some idealized racial template. But really, it’s amazing how some people are called “sellouts” from their race, when in reality, its the accuser who is selling him or herself down the river in order to satisfy some nebulous, arbitrary typecast – especially when the template is a negative one.
      The way I see it, the peeps who accept a racial template – especially a negative one – as “how one should be” is trying to justify their laziness and lack of independent thought; trying to make themselves feel better for being predominantly reactive massminders….

Leave a Reply