Trotsky Invented Racism
Over the course of the last few decades the term “racism” has devolved into little more than a petty insult. This insult is usually employed against anyone opposed to the liberal / cultural Marxist worldview that has dominated America and Europe since the late 1960s. The term was once utilized to advance the cause of “civil rights” and condemn antebellum slaveholders. Today, it is the intellectual equivalent of calling someone a “meanie-face” or “jerk” on the school playground. If a person or group says or does something vaguely against one’s interests it has become acceptable to dismiss them as racists.

Who invented this insult? Has it ever been anything more than an insult? Most Americans imagine that racism has existed since the dawn of human history, and that it represents a crime against one’s fellow man. When one evaluates the history of human ethics, however, a very different narrative emerges. For all of humanity’s pre-Marxist history what is now labeled “racism” has been regarded as necessary moral duty.

This becomes obvious following a cursory history of racism as an idea. Until the twentieth century the term had never been used in any language or form. The first time it was employed by any writer in in its modern usage was in a 1930 Russian book written by Marxist thinker Leo Trotsky. He used the term “racists” to insult Slavic traditionalists who sought to protect their own ethnic group, religion, and culture rather than join Trotsky’s worldwide communist revolution. A quick Google search on the frequency of the terms “racist” and “racism” in the English language will reveal graphs demonstrating the word did not reach anything approaching common usage until the 1950s; only a decade and half before the overthrow of the American South’s ethnic based social organization.

Having searched American and Christian history thoroughly on the topic, I can find no past parallel terms or ideas employed to condemn or describe the alleged moral fault of racism. It is probable the idea is simply a modern social construct with little basis in historical understandings of morality and ethics. Racism as sin was created by a decadent and immoral post-Christian West.

Some may object to this understanding by pointing to older movements like ante-bellum abolitionism and Christian opposition to the excesses of colonialism which pre-date the origin of the modern word “racism.” It is important, however, to note that abolitionists did not oppose slave holders from the perspective of racial bias as sin, their argument against slavery was rooted in abstract principles inspired by post-enlightenment liberalism. For example, socio-political “freedom,” and “equality.” The abolitionists could not reasonably use traditional morality to oppose slavery because the Bible clearly endorses the institution throughout (a fact the South never failed to indicate in defense of their cause). Christian protests against imperialism were based on the Golden Rule and appeals to common decency, not on some vague idea of racial bias as an eternal anathema. In the past, some have argued for the basic biological equality of the world’s ethnic groups, but this was done from a scientific or proto-sociological perspective not from a moralistic high ground.

Historically, behavior now labeled “racist” was regarded as natural in-group bias, and in-group bias was regarded as healthy and necessary for the functioning of human society. If a person had no natural in-group bias they possessed no identity or role in the world. For example, if a father did not show any in-group bias towards his own biological family he would spread his earned resources to numerous strangers while his own family became homeless and starved. Because one’s ethnicity has universally been regarded as one’s extended family group, by the Bible and the world’s populations, in-group bias has always been considered morally necessary. To favor one’s own ethnic group was to favor one’s own family, and the Apostle Paul told Timothy, “If anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for members of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.”
To provide for one’s own extended family/kin group necessitates a certain neglect of other ethnicities. If one can only hire one person for a job and the choice comes down to a financially struggling family and a financially struggling ethnic “other” the employer is obligated by duty to give the job to the family member. The world does not contain limitless resources which can be shuffled equally among all groups. Differences in productivity and intelligence, rooted in genetics, standard of living perceptions, and sheer luck affect the way humans distribute resources and opportunities. The natural God created inequality characteristic of mankind’s existence produces disparities between ethnic groups that are unavoidable. These disparities do not require a Christian of European descent to betray their own family members for the sake of a vague unreachable concept of equality that is nowhere given as a Biblical mandate.

In conclusion, “racism” is a modern social construct that has no validity in human ethics, Christian morality, or basic socio-political facts. The term originated as an anti-traditionalist slur invented by a communist revolutionary disillusioned by the God given in-group bias he saw hindering his ambition to overthrow the traditional power structure of Christendom. Euroethnic Christians should not fear being labeled “racist.” The term is simply a weapon employed by our enemies.