"Racism" is a modern term imbued heavily with "spin" so that it makes a certain belief seem as if it singles out race, among all other factors, and uses that as its most important value, by which it determines who lives or dies (since Adolf Hitler is history's most famous "racist," it is assumed that totalitarianism is behind it). However, this itself is bigotry, as it attempts to create a straw man out of Nationalism by construing it as the primitive "racism," and from that hopes to create popular bias against it because, after all, "it's not fair" to judge people by things over which they had no "choice."

It is impossible to disregard the race issue as a result, as it has become highly politicized with both guilt and commerce, the latter benefitting from people of a uniform mixed racial consistency. People take two approaches to race: either they advocate the destruction of race, a decision which in all forms equates to assimilation and interbreeding to a degree that racial differences are initially annihilated, or they advocate preservation of race, at which point they are called "racists" and "haters" and drummed out of their jobs, homes, families and normal lives for public crucifixion.

(From experience: nothing that requires such a taboo can stand on its own.)

Nationalism is the belief that political entities should be smaller, localized, independent nations which may form confederations but exist ultimately by their own autonomy. Because of the necessity of forming tightly knit groups of roughly the same cultural expectations for this model to work, Nationalists believe in the oldest definition of the word "nation": those sharing a common localized heritage, of which culture and race are equally indispensable parts. OMFG that is blasphemy in the current time.

However, those of us who see globalism as the greatest threat present an alternate view of humanity: all serving American-style economic systems, we have been bred into uniformity and thus have no heritage except shopping at the same type of malls, watching the same TV, and purchasing the same type of lifestyle items. Money culture is all that holds us together. The traditions and heritages of the past have been obliterated, leaving us to fight wars over religion, money and power itself. Since we are all equal, we all must serve the machine equally and none may have a more important voice than others, especially those pretentious upstarts who periodically try to tell us that our society is not the best possible method of keeping humanity as a whole healthy.

Looking at history, the record is very clear: mixed race nations rapidly collapse because, lacking a common heritage, they cannot agree on social goals other than in the broadest and most unenforcible terms, and as a result they default to the lowest common denominator, money and power. Anything that can be sold, is; thus even nature, our bodies, and our loyalties have a price tag on them not as an exception to the rule but as the absolute rule, because to do otherwise is to leave oneself vulnerable to those wielding more basic motivations.

Seeing this past and this possible future together is enough to make many of us bypass the taboo and insist on our right to be "racist" if we deem it is necessary, so that we preserve diversity by not breeding us into a common strain, and by extension, by preserving culture. For someone of mixed race to attempt to be, say, a Scottish Highlander, makes no sense at all as there is no connection between that past and the present; they're merely playacting, and have no vested interest in that heritage. Because this is consistent for all races, it is necessary that Nationalism separate each race and the tribes within it in order to preserve those unique characteristics from the assimilative drive of industrial society.

Yet we must go further, and separate ourselves from "racism" as a basic urge, instead placing it into the context of Nationalism only. Some people out there will use anything they can to find a reason to justify hurting other people, but Nationalism does not include this necessary violence and anger, although Nationalists now have a right to be angry when they see how their beliefs are slandered by the industrial media. Nationalism is about nurturing what's unique in every race more than it is in finding reasons for antipathy, and only with that guiding principle is it sensible.

What follows is the original article from this site, which is also germaine especially in the context of what was stated above.

"Racism" is an issue that will never die in America, given the history of America, and because of the US dominance of world media, thus the issue will never die and the world as a whole will hear what the US wants it to hear about racism. There are few ways to end a conversation more quickly than by bringing up racism in any vaguely positive form. Despite the extremity of racism as a topic, it remains a popular tool for achieving political unity and removing obstacles to global commerce.

Americans don't want to hear anything about it, having been dragged through the mud for a racially segregated past by the media, pop stars, writers and artists. Europe is tired of hearing about WWII and wants the problem to just go away. In short, racism is a taboo, or a subject which is not to be mentioned lest you get associated with the Un-American activity of political heresy. Why is race such an almost religiously attended issue?

First, there is the issue of history, in which race has constantly been a hot topic and a cause for conflict. But more importantly, the foundations of our society since the introduction of Judeo-Christian beliefs call for a celebration of the "individual." Christianity spoke of a personal relationship between "God" and the individual, who was then judged on the basis of his or her degree of moral rightness. After the Renaissance in Europe, this view became secularized into humanism, which inspired many of the fundamental tenets of the new American republic, including "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

At the basis of all of these beliefs is the assumption that humans are not physical beings, but souls connected to physical beings, and that while the exterior may have a wide range of appearances, the interior is essentially the same. This assumption was useful in handling the problem of evil in a world created by an omnipotent god; how could people be "evil" unless they were literally of another source or essence? In the secular liberal/humanist view, this justification is extended to the idea that all people and all decisions are "good," except for those which are specifically "bad."

In the modern time, democracy has made the upholding of these views more important. Because the number of people gathering behind any political idea gives it a chance of succeeding, demagoguery has become an accepted norm because of the convenience with which money can sway democratic societies. As a result, only the broadest base of appeals can support any idea, which means - as in movies and most books - that entreaties must apply to the grand ideas of emotion, visual aspect, or self-importance, or even better, all three. Thus racism has become another powerful method of manipulation, either by slandering an opponent or claiming to alleviate an "evil."

Because of this political intensity, there is currently a good deal of public discourse about the nature of evolutionary theory, and how minimal the differences between the races are. However, this all occurs before the human genome is decoded, and with radical variations in our knowledge are discovered frequently. We do not even know the encoding scheme of human DNA. This reveals that these attempts are premature, and motivated by political reasons, while our science is still insufficient to tell us exactly what the truth is.

Why would the issue be important either way? Many contend that race is only physical appearance, and that the soul or personality lies outside of genetics entirely. The other side comes back equally strong by advocating that humans are purely physical beings ("animals" in biological terms) and that there is no dualistic nature of consciousness: all thoughts originate in the physical mind. For proof of this they offer the differences in intelligence between children of highly intelligent parents and the norm. Accordingly, they claim race is important because unique genetic characteristics of body and consequently, mind, are passed along in each ethnicity.

In this they are correct: the risk of eliminating "racism" is that ethnicities and cultures may be lost. If those who created civilizations such as ancient Rome and Greece were correct, ethnicity and heritage are inseparable, and within those hierarchy is unavoidable. The human future which awaits may involve the merging of all races into a single normed population, at which point the distinct traits created over thousands of years of social differentiation are lost. However, society's pretense of "equality" is enforced and the newly enfranchised voters are pleased, and with their loss of pride in unique cultures, now make better consumers for products of multinational corporations.