EssaysHadding Scott

On the Origin of the Word “Racist”

Trotsky racist wrong

by Hadding Scott

THERE IS AN urban legend that has been floating around for some years now, that the word racist was coined by Leon Trotsky, for the purpose of cowing and intimidating opponents of leftist ideology. In his History of the Russian Revolution Trotsky applied the word racist to Slavophiles, who opposed Communism.

Just from the word’s etymology (the word race with a suffix added) it is not immediately apparent why this word is supposed to be inherently derogatory. Words like anarchist, communist, and fascist have a negative connotation for many people, but that is because of their perspectives on anarchism, communism, and fascism, not because the words are inherently derogatory. The words anarchist, communist, and fascist have objective content toward which one may be positively or negatively disposed. Likewise the word racist. Objectively, it seems to denote somebody for whom race is a concern.

Is it not possible that Trotsky’s use of the word, regardless of what his feelings about racism may have been, was merely descriptive, insofar as the effort of Slavs to assert and preserve their Slavic identity inherently involves a concern with race? Are not racists, as Trotsky regarded them, essentially just a species of anti-Communist, rejecting submersion into nondescript humanity under alien personalities and interests?

Our so-called conservatives in the United States do not ask such questions. If the left uses a term with a negative feeling attached, our conservatives accept that what the term denotes is objectively negative. If leftists and Jew-controlled mass-media disapprove of racists and racism, our so-called conservatives will not dispute that value judgment; for the purpose of rhetoric they will even embrace it. Conservatives outwardly accept that racists and racism are bad, and will not challenge it.

What the conservatives like to do instead of debunking their enemies’ assumptions, which are also supported by mass-media, is to try to find a way to throw an accusation back at them, even a ridiculous accusation based on a specious argument and a flimsy premise. (I believe that this preference for responding with accusations, rather than truth and reason, derives from the fact that staying on the attack means not having to clarify one’s own position on touchy matters. For somebody trying to win a popularity contest in the short term, rather than inform and educate for the long term, it makes perfect sense to try to keep one’s own positions obscure.) The legend that Leon Trotsky coined the word racist offers a basis for that kind of rhetoric. It seems a silly argument, but they will say something like, If you use the word racist then you are a bad person like Communist mass-murderer Leon Trotsky, because he invented that word!

Did Trotsky really invent that word? No, apparently not. The work in which Trotsky is supposed to have coined that word was written and published in Russian in 1930. I found several examples of the French form, raciste, preceding Trotsky’s use of the word by far.

I find pensée raciste (French for “racist thought”) and individualité raciste (“racist individuality”) in the volume of La Terro d’oc: revisto felibrenco e federalisto (a periodical championing the cultural and ethnic identity of people in southern France) for the year 1906. Here the word racist was used without a hint of negativity:

Je forme des voeux pour la réussité de vos projets, car je suis persuadé que, dans cette fédération des peuples de Langue d’Oc luttant pour leurs intérêts et l’émancipation de leur pensée raciste, le prestige de Toulouse trouvera son compte. (p. 101)

TRANSLATION: I express my best wishes for the success of your projects, because I am convinced that, in the federation of the peoples of Langue d’Oc fighting for their interests and the emancipation of their racist thought, the prestige of Toulouse will benefit.

Ce malheureux Midi! Il est victime, de toutes les façons! Ruiné, spolié, abruti, c’est un sort de pays vaincu qu’on lui réserve et tout ce qui serait de nature à caractériser son individualité raciste et dont la survivance ou le culte pourrait le faire reprendre conscience de lui-même pour l’arracher à sa torpeur et assurer la sauvegarde de ses intérêts matériels et moraux, est-il bon à autre chose qu’à être combattu et tourné en dérision? (p.68)

TRANSLATION: This unfortunate South! He is a victim in every way! Ruined, robbed, brutalized, it’s a fate of conquered countries that one reserves for him, and whatever would be likely to characterize his racist individuality and whatever’s survival or worship could make him regain consciousness of himself to snatch him from his torpor and safeguard his moral and material interests, is it good for anything except to be combated and ridiculed?

Map of Occitania
Occitanians were proudly racistes in 1906.

While racists were bad people for Leon Trotsky, some people in Occitania in 1906 did not share that value-judgment, because they had a different perspective and different interests. Why should I accept the value-judgments of my enemies? The label racist is only an effective attack if it is perceived as one, which means, only if the value-judgment attached to it is accepted. Don’t accept that! If you can stop worrying about being called a racist, if you can refrain from using a barrage of flaky counterattacks (the way “conservatives” do) to avoid talking about your own real views, then you can be sincere and really communicate with people. You might even have a chance to explain that almost everybody is racist and that it’s normal — which is a fundamental fact that every White person needs to know.

Even Earlier Examples

In Charles Malato’s Philosophie de l’Anarchie (1897) we find both raciste and racisme:

Nul doute qu’avant d’arriver à l’internationalisme complet, il y aura une étape qui sera le racisme; mais il y a lieu d’esperer que la halte ne sera pas trop longue, que l’étape sera brûlée. Le communisme qui, au début de son fonctionnement, apparait devoir être fatalement réglementé, surtout au point de vue des échanges internationaux, entrainera la constitution de fédérationsracistes (latine, slave, germaine, etc.) L’anarchie qu’on peut entrevoir au bout de deux ou trois générations, lorsque, par suite du développement de la production toute réglementation sera devenue superflue, amènera la fin du racisme et l’avénement d’une humanité sans frontiéres. (p.47)

TRANSLATION: No doubt that before arriving at complete internationalism, there will be a stage which will be racism; but it must be hoped that the layover will not be too long, that it will be rapidly surpassed. Communism, which appears that it must inevitably be regulated at the beginning of its functioning, especially in regard to international trade, will bring about the establishment of racist federations (Latin, Slavic, Germanic, etc.). Anarchy — which we can glimpse at the end of two or three generations when, as a result of the development of production, any regulations will have become superfluous — will bring the end of racism and the advent of a humanity without borders.

Charles Malato
Charles Malato

Although Malato was not in favor of racistes or racisme as such, regarding them as constituting an intermediate stage on the path from the destruction of the existing empires to his ideal of global anarchy, his use of those words back in the late 19th century was clearly not polemical but based on their objective content. Malato saw a tendency in Europe toward reorganizing political boundaries and allegiances along racial (or ethnic) lines, and he called this tendency racism. Note also that Malato specifically refers to Pan-Slavism as a form of racism, thus anticipating Trotsky’s application of the word.

First English Usage

A piece for National Public Radio (Gene Demby, “The Ugly, Fascinating History of the Word ‘Racism’,” 6 January 2014) cites the Oxford English Dictionary to the effect that the first use of the word racism (in English) was by Richard Pratt in 1902, five years after Malato’s use of raciste and racisme in French.

Pratt was a Baptist religious zealot who was particularly devoted to stamping out the identities of various North American tribes through assimilation. NPR’s author for some reason finds it paradoxical that somebody who condemns racism would be trying to stamp out the racial as well as the specific ethnic identities of Cheyenne, Choctaw, or Muscogee, when in fact it is perfectly consistent. Racism in its proper meaning, as we see with Charles Malato and the Occitanian separatists a century ago (contemporary with Pratt), means concern for one’s race (however that race is defined), and an impulse to preserve that race, and, in accord with that, organization along racial lines. To condemn racism as such is ultimately to condemn the preservation of any race, with the mongrelization of all mankind, explicitly hoped by some, being the predictable long-term result. Deliberate destruction of races through assimilation and mixture, as advanced — although in a more direct and obvious manner than we usually see — by Richard Henry Pratt with his Carlisle Indian Industrial School, is the ultimate implication of anti-racism. It is remarkable that anyone pretends to be confused about this.

* * *

Source: National-Socialist Worldview

Previous post

Florida: Black Gangs Openly Declare Shooting War on White Students

Next post

Alyaksandr Lukashenko Wants ‘All Jews in Belarus Under Control’

Notify of
Inline Feedback
View all comments
4 June, 2015 9:05 pm

well, but i think nobody said that Trotsky actually invented the word ‘racism’.
of course the word ‘racism’ already existed, but the word was generalized and given a bad connotation by Trotksy. this phenomen began in the 1930s.
before the 1930s the word ‘racism’ was barely used, and was merely a regional phenomen. besides, the word did not have a bad sense. it was ‘neutral’ or even positive.

Franklin Ryckaert
Franklin Ryckaert
5 June, 2015 8:57 am

The proper form for the word “racism” is racialism. Analogous to nation-national-nationalism the row race-racial-racialism should be formed.

Racialism is morally just as neutral as is nationalism. Both can be misused, but their misuse is not necessarily inherent. Nearly all modern socalled “anti-racists” (even if they themselves are White) are in reality anti-White, allowing to all non-White races to pursue their racial interests, but not to Whites, whom they have targetted for extinction through miscegenation.

The accusation of “racism” is always hypocritical. The only defense against this false accusation is to point out that “racism” is normal for all human groups and therefore should be accepted for all human groups, including Whites. Not accepting that is real racism, anti-White racism that is.

H. Millard
H. Millard
5 June, 2015 9:20 am

Nice column. I would go further. “White Racism” is not a bad thing at all when properly defined. It is a survival mechanism that keeps those with White Racism more likely to avoid miscegenation and be more aware of the danger, both in the short term as well as in the long term, of those who are not White. We are in eternal gene wars, that are a natural part of evolution. Whites need to know this and know that these are mostly subconscious and that in the gene wars no hate or evil intent is required. It is simply the genes of one type trying to wipe out the genes of other types. Know it and live intentionally White and you may not go extinct.

6 June, 2015 9:09 am

” We are in eternal gene wars,
that are a natural part of evolution.”

Indeed, and nature really only “cares”
for the winners in this trial of life.

The losers, or like the dinosaurs, do
only become a part of the past and no
longer in the present nor the future.

The golden thread of life once broken
is truly gone forever!

7 June, 2015 12:57 am

“Racist” is good-ist! It is perfectly natural, normal, healthy and good!

Long live “racism!”

Phil :)

James Duggan
James Duggan
19 March, 2017 11:10 am

Great writing on the subject. Thank you.

As for the music clip from Call of Blood, I would recommend listening to music without words, which has greater power to elevate the spirit which in turn brings the body into more balance and, shall we say, causes one to walk tall, chin up, proud to be human, whatever one’s racial origin.

As a White male, my favorite music for this purpose, if you will, is to listen, and watch, when I’m not multi tasking, so necessary these days just to keep up with the onslaught of the enemy, Valery Gergiev conducting works by Prokofiev. Both I understand come from the same place in the Caucasus mountains.

Thank you again.

charles nelson
charles nelson
29 April, 2017 4:50 am

I have on my lap a version of the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary from 1952.
The word Racism does not appear in it.

Frank Joseph Verderber
Frank Joseph Verderber
13 January, 2018 7:00 pm

Well, it is unfortunate that in your polemic you did not recognize that words and their meanings change over time. Your argument should have been presented in the 1930’s. Arguing for the archaic meaning is now useless. We see the same thing with the word, discriminating. It has not undergone thorough transfermation yet, however, one does not want to be referred to as a discriminationist [there is that ist again], but there is no problem in saying one is discriminating in taste for women. Some day that could infer a dislike for women of color of even Caucasion women, as is seen with Mulim men – for they say the white women are only good for one thing [explative missing]. The melding of words by use of its sound or… Read more »

20 December, 2020 10:23 am

I love how you socialist bigots attempt to “change” history.

Not racist
Not racist
3 February, 2021 4:19 pm

Soo this is where the racists gather huh? Interesting.

Reply to  Not racist
3 February, 2021 6:25 pm

Greetings Not racist. Actually, racists gather everywhere. This site is where those who are not anti-White racists or ‘anti-bigot bigots’ gather.

P.S. I think I invented the term ‘anti-bigot bigot’ for a university assignment about diversity (and perversity) a decade ago. I was asked to discuss two types of bigot. I elected to write about a) traditional bigots and b) anti-bigot bigots. My teacher was not amused.

William W Williams * National Alliance Chairman
William W Williams * National Alliance Chairman
Reply to  Not racist
3 February, 2021 8:55 pm

Did you read Hadding Scott’s article, Mr. or Miss Not racist?

He says “racist” seems to denote somebody for whom race is a concern. We Whites who gather here are concerned race-thinkers. We think our race is worth preserving.

If you are White and do not think your race is worth preserving, you will probably be more comfortable gathering with those who, like you identify as “not racist,” and who are not concerned about your race.

Josef Tone
Josef Tone
Reply to  Not racist
5 February, 2021 6:06 pm

Is a Chemist a person who hates chemistry?

Reply to  Josef Tone
7 November, 2021 5:02 pm

That would be an “anti-chemite” ;o

Reply to  Not racist
8 November, 2021 5:09 am

Many more gather in Israel and in the worlds kosher diaspora wherefrom they brazenly vilify Europeans while milking their taxes, while expelling Ethiopians and killing Palestinians in Israel…in South Africa, Afro’s chop up Boers and leave them in pieces in baths…in England Asian aliens specifically traffic English girls to rough orgies…you might find other sites re. the foregoing interessant.

Zan Zibar
Zan Zibar
Reply to  stefan
11 January, 2022 8:31 am

It is more so that Europeans on the Left vilify Europeans on the Right, and the Europeans on the Right blame the kosher ones on the Left for what the non-kosher Leftists are saying and doing.

7 November, 2021 4:58 pm

Not the point – In 1927,Trotsky applied the word as a DOG WHISTLE that has become the number one mantra of the deranged, Jew puppet left today.
That is inarguable.