It’s Not Racism, it’s Marketing

*Humans are tribal by nature. We know that there is strength in numbers, so we stick together. The glue that holds these bonds together is called mutual self-interest. For the lazy thinkers out there, the quickest way to create or assign affinity is to do so by race/skin color. Love at first sight.

 

*Now there’s this thing called culture, which is the tried and true tool to control the conduct of any tribe. Black Americans and Black Africans are vastly different in culture, but when they come together, they experience this double-dutch moment: you’re like me but you’re not; I trust you but I don’t.

 

*Even though the Irish and the English are both typically white, they somehow manage to fight; shouting criticism of the other while bolstering pride for their group. The only thing that separates them is their birth nation and accent, and of course, culture.

 

*Being creatures of culture, not of race, we stick with our tribe because it satisfies our survivial instinct/emotional need to belong. Puerto-ricans hate being called Mexican; Argentinians think they are European; Dominicans hate Hatians despite being similar ethnically (as we all are). Aside from language (culture), dress (culture), and food (culture).

 

*Through a multitude of wars, migration, fucking our invaders or protecting our bloodline with in-breeding, the world has been shaped as we now see it. Then and now, the things we identified with are purely superficial and diffident (class, age, nation, hair, skin color, counterculture or mainstream, political parties, etc) which have their own bubble that can be controlled, marketed to, and leveraged when a foreign group wishes to impose it’s will, or the native ruling class wishes to maintain it’s own power.

 

*Example of such a marketing strategy was when whites in the south toiled in the sun next to their black brethren as slaves. Along the line, the slaves were beginning to rebel. To stop this, they separated them by telling the whites that they were just like their slave-owners, white, and that although still a slave, they had the potential to rule just as they did and henceforth treated them better than the other slaves. Classic divide and conquer. Marketing. Us vs. Them. It always works, and few can resist the pull of preferential treatment over someone of “equal standing.”

 

Here is an interesting find that racists don’t mention:

https://unifiedserenity.wordpress.com/2013/07/15/white-slaves-in-america-outnumbered-black-slaves-bet-you-didnt-know-that-did-you/

 

See how demographics are used to control behavior like sheep:

http://www.finalcall.com/artman/publish/Perspectives_1/Willie_Lynch_letter_The_Making_of_a_Slave.shtml

 

*Fast-forward and there are endless demographics and egos to insult or manipulate and sell to, encouraging unity for that demographic but using in-group bias to commit the same crimes they condemn in different groups.

 

*When you think of racism, you’re seeing marketing at it’s finest. Manipulation and insecurities in a wonderful swirl of exploitation and campaigning. If you differ from the group, any group, and stand outside the drawn circle, you risk being outcast from that group (black republicans being called uncle tom) and even death (Islam, BLM, and other war/crime syndicates); blood in, blood out.

 

 

Regards,

Kimmuriel

4 Replies to “It’s Not Racism, it’s Marketing”

  1. “which have their own bubble that can be controlled, marketed to, and leveraged when a foreign group wishes to impose it’s will, or the native ruling class wishes to maintain it’s own power.”
    What kinds of racial/tribal marketing have you observed in the political environment of the last 2 years?
    This is all very interesting, It goes way deeper than people can imagine. Jonathon Haidt, famous NYU psychologist, says that we have this tendency to split off into teams (US vs THEM) and I would go further in saying that identity politics intentionally pits races against another and exacerbates tribalism. Media manipulation to push a narrative, in order to gain conformity of ethnic groups. Who is the cui bono – who stands to gain from this – is one party more guilty of this than the other? or are they all doing it?

    Like

    1. Your 1st question: BLM and Men vs Women, Trans vs Gay, White Liberal vs. White National, legal immigrants vs. Illegal Immigrants

      2. Who stands to gain? No one. Even the ruling class or the people who are the richest who exploit divided factions aren’t safe. True power and wealth come from a wide base and freely. If you have to look over your shoulder constantly or worry about internal scheming, is that power or a liability?

      Like

      1. Interesting, the war-on-women thing that was pushed in 2014(Men vs Women): http://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/the-gop-war-on-women-hasnt-died-down-125500483680
        Do you think there is a political/power undertone behind this new term “Intersectionality” that is being pushed by college professors and gaining support by feminists, BLM, trans, muslims, social justice warriors, (&other “oppressed groups”) so on?
        It’s the intersectional experience that all these victim factions experience, and somehow relate to each other because of this. My opinion is that this word is marketing that tries to unify factions by saying that they all are oppressed in similar ways, and need to band together to fight it head on.

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s