[Shadow_Group] Fw: Seven Dirty Words

[shadowgroup-l at lists.resist.ca]

Seven Dirty Words 

by Edgar J. Steele

November 27, 2004

"There are some people who would have you not use certain words."
   -- George Carlin, Seven Dirty Words (1973)

When I was a kid, dirty words got you in trouble.  Today, the same
concept holds true, but the words have changed.

Comedian George Carlin broke forbidden ground by using dirty words in his
comedy routines, just as my generation came of age.  He was a true rebel
at the time.  Today, Carlin's routines are merely ordinary by most
standards.  He still skewers sacred cows, but these days the cows are the
ones proscribed by a politically-correct society, a society that Carlin's
ilk has gotten astride.  Carlin particularly delights in attacking
religion, especially Christianity.  That, however, is a topic for another
day.

Go here for a transcript of the routine that got Carlin in trouble back
in 1973 when it was broadcast by a radio station.  It took five years for
the legal system to offer up the US Supreme Court's affirmation of the
original FCC ruling that Carlin's routine was obscene, in an enunciation
of its new, seven-prong test for obscenity.

Today, we hear all of Carlin's forbidden words, and more, on the radio. 
They've been in our movies for years.  What's more, they are migrating to
prime-time network television.  Apparently, now the forbidden words are
acceptable for children, as well as adults.

But, as the saying goes, the more things change, the more they stay the
same.

Today, it's a whole different set of words that will get you in trouble
if you dare say them aloud, regardless of venue, and they reflect the
change in sensibility (insensibility?) that has occurred in American
society over the past generation (the one over which my generation has
presided, I am ashamed to say).  A change, I say, because these
newly-forbidden words commonly were in use throughout society before
Carlin's time.

Here, let's say them together:  Nigger, Spic, Wetback, Chink, Jap, White,
Jew.

That sentence just got this essay blocked by countless web sites.  A
large number of members of this list will have to go to
www.ConspiracyPenPal.com<http://www.conspiracypenpal.com/> to read this essay for that reason.  But I could
have given, instead, detailed instructions for "fisting" and this piece
would have sailed right through the filters and censors.

I gave an extended interview on a major radio station yesterday and, as
the conversation moved into the area of race, (as it always does -
there's a reason these radio hosts around the country have me on so
often, after all) I opened the topic by referring to "Whites."  There was
a discernible pause...dead air time in the parlance...as that word hung
out there, much as Carlin's words used to hang in the air.  A thought
crept into my mind:  "I wonder if this is how George Carlin felt?"

Notice that, of the seven new dirty words, five are pejorative forms of
racially-identifying nouns or adjectives (Nigger, Spic, Wetback, Chink
and Jap).  How times have changed!  After WWII, all Asians were referred
to as "Japs" by a still-angry American public.  Brazil nuts were
"niggertoes" to everybody in my childhood days.

Interestingly, only two of the new dirty words have yet to acquire
widespread negative connotations, except in certain select circles: 
White and Jew.  Even so, one quite simply does not mention either word in
polite company and, certainly, never over the air except in the context
of "legitimate" news reporting (where ethnicity typically is covered up
except when Whites are tagged as stupid bad guys and Jews are shown to be
undeserving but noble victims).  Yes, there are pejorative forms (Cracker
and Kike, for example), but neither White nor Jew are used with impunity
over the air as are Black, Hispanic, Chinese and Japanese; thus have they
attained a forbidden status both unique and apart from the other new
dirty words.  

Why the silence without the negative implications when it comes to the
words White and Jew?  Because Jews like to pose as White when it suits
their purposes (as when noses are counted in professions, ivy-league
college enrollment and governmental Administration positions), though
they vilify Whites when it suits other of their purposes (as in falsely
depicting Whites as victimizers of other races, so as to remove us from
contention for things and positions that Jews want...or don't want Whites
to have, which amounts to the same thing to them).

The ban on saying White and Jew aloud reflects the power struggle now
taking place between the two races (a struggle being won by Jews thus
far, though they are destroying America in the process).

A different reason applies to the other races, which is why only the
negative forms of racial identification are taboo.

In fact, anything that differentiates one race from another is taboo
these days, just as it is forbidden to suggest that two individuals might
have differences that set them apart from one another in any respect. 
"No child left behind" comes to mind.  Of course, nobody left behind
means nobody out in front, either.  

Why?  Because ours is a merit-based societal structure that today is
morphing into pure socialism.  Therefore, we need to have precisely the
same outcome for everybody.  How do we do that and still maintain the
illusion of rewarding merit?  Why, we declare everyone to be the winner,
of course.  And there are no losers.  Everyone "merits" the same outcome.
 How perfect.  How coincidental that the result is so...socialistic. 
It's kind of like how we get to "elect" our President these days, isn't
it?

In fact, the whole topic of race and, even racism, except when used to
vilify whites, is becoming taboo.  Witness how many printers and vanity
publishers passed on my book, Defensive Racism, simply because of the
title.  Incidentally, Barnes and Noble now has declined to carry
Defensive Racism, though it still is available through Amazon.com.  Don't
forget, you still can get a $5 discount from the cover price by ordering
directly from the publisher, through www.DefensiveRacism.com<http://www.defensiveracism.com/> .  

American Free Press, pre-eminent weekly of the Patriot Movement (You say
you don't receive AFP?  For shame!  Subscribe here), recently ran a
review of Defensive Racism that was so complimentary that I am almost
embarrassed to post it.  Almost.  Go here for a reproduction of the AFP
review (penned by the inimitable Michael C. Piper) and the ad that I have
run in AFP a couple of times now:  www.DefensiveRacism.com/afp.doc<http://www.defensiveracism.com/afp.doc> 

In 1964, while grappling with the concept of obscenity, Supreme Court
Justice Potter Stewart issued his now-famous concurring opinion in which
he stated:  "I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of
material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description;
and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it
when I see it..."  Of course, now that Justice Stewart is dead, you have
to wonder how we're supposed to apply his rule to the new dirty words.

New America.  An idea whose time has come. 



-ed 

"I didn't say it would be easy.  I just said it would be the truth." 
            - Morpheus 

Copyright ©2004, Edgar J. Steele

Forward as you wish.  Permission is granted to circulate

among private individuals and groups, post on all Internet

sites and publish in full in all not-for-profit publications. 

Contact author for all other rights, which are reserved.

 

On-Line link to this article in HTML format: 
http://www.conspiracypenpal.com/columns/seven.htm<http://www.conspiracypenpal.com/columns/seven.htm>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.resist.ca/pipermail/shadowgroup-l/attachments/20041129/ec4ca95e/attachment.html>