Concepts, not words

Stop accepting ideology disguised as definitions and descriptions

LUDWIG WITTGENSTEIN (above)

“Language disguises the thought; so that from the external form of the clothes one cannot infer the form of the thought they clothe, because the external form of the clothes is constructed with quite another object than to let the form of the body be recognized.” — Ludwig Wittgenstein

As 2025 ends and 2026 begins, words remain a weapon employed with great success by the Left. For instance:

“Colonialism.” This refers to the activity of one a political system taking over a country or land foreign to that land’s beliefs. If it were applied accurately, Islam would be fingered as its most successful advocate. When Islam booted up in the 7th century, zero countries were Muslim. A mere three centuries later, formerly Christian Egypt and formerly Zoroastrian Persia were Muslim countries. They had been colonized. Islamic colonization continued until today, when 53 countries — none of which were originally Muslim — genuflect to Mecca and intone those hideous calls to prayer that Obama says he loves so much. And you have to be blind, deaf, dumb, and butt-stupid not to see that Islam today is attempting to continue its colonial project in the UK and Europe, as well as places like Dearborn, Michigan.

And yet, ask AI for a “history of colonialism,” and this is what you get:

“Colonialism's modern era began in the 15th century with European maritime powers like Portugal and Spain exploring, conquering, and settling territories, kicking off what's often called the Age of Discovery, with major waves expanding into the Americas, Africa, and Asia until the mid-20th century. While forms of empire existed earlier (like ancient Greece/Rome), the systematic, state-driven control of distant lands by European nations marks the start of modern colonialism, driven by trade and capitalism.”

In other words, Europeans virtually invented colonialism. Colonialism prior to “the modern era” is not even mentioned, because to do so would make ignoring Islam impossible. Rule No. 1: Always blame white people and capitalism. If they are not to blame, figure a way to make it look as if they are. This clothes the concept (in this case, the idea of colonialism) in a word (“colonialism”) that hides the concept’s real meaning and substitutes “quite another object” in its place. (See the Wittgenstein quote above.)

Israel recently joined Europe on the list of countries called “colonialist,” which is darkly hilarious when you realize that Jews have been living in the area for millennia, and that Israel is a tiny speck of real estate surrounded by gigantic states that Islam colonized in recent centuries.

You may have noticed that the word we use for the actual concept, “colonialism,” is the same as the word used to hide the concept. This is what makes getting at the truth almost unbreakably difficult. We must use words to get past words, must disentangle our minds from the lies of words by means of words themselves. The main thing to remember is never to take a word to mean what it purports to mean in everyday discourse, but to look deeply into its original, authentic meaning — the concept behind the linguistic symbol. “Colonialism” has an authentic meaning, and it didn’t start with Europeans.

And then there’s….

“White nationalism.” This is assumed in daily chat to be a deep evil, where “black nationalism” and “brown nationalism” are assumed to be next-to-holy. That would be labeled an instance of racism if the word “racism” actually held any meaning. But for years now, “racism” has clothed the concept of anti-racism. If you believe that merit alone determines worth, or that certain truths are universal and apply to all humans, then you are a “racist,” which is to say, an anti-racist.

I know that “white nationalism” does exist and it ain’t pretty, though I’ve never personally met a white nationalist. So-called “alt-right” activist Nick Fuentes really is a white nationalist, as well as a real-deal racist piece of filth. I’d like to think he’s in the minority, though I can’t confirm it. Most people who are called “white nationalists” aren’t even remotely racist. They are simply white. For instance, many on the Left besmirch Charlie Kirk’s memory by calling him “racist,” yet when it is pointed out that Kirk founded, at his own expense, a non-profit organization for the promotion of black entrepreneurs, his accusers ignore it. Kirk was white and unashamed of being white. Therefore, he was a “white nationalist.” So are tens of millions of us by that definition.

Far more common than actual white nationalists like Fuentes are what might be called “American nationalists,” people who love their country in spite of the flaws of which they are all too well aware. These include many black and brown Americans, and exclude a big chunk of white people. I personally hold white people like Hunter Biden and Tim Walz in utter contempt, yet I have nothing but admiration and gratitude for black Americans like Clarence Thomas and Thomas Sowell. This makes me a “white nationalist” to Leftist moralizers.

And of course there’s….

“Immigrants.”

Watch Godfather II again, and take special note of the scene early on when young Vito arrives by ship in New York Harbor after escaping execution by a Mafia boss in Sicily. See the crowd on board look up with awe at the Statue of Liberty, filled with a quiet hope. Watch as each newcomer registers with an official and is examined for disease. While it is not shown in the film, it is also true that people newly arrived from other countries needed to show proof that they had relatives or friends already in the United States, and that they were qualified to work. These people were immigrants.

Now consider the millions of people from dozens of countries around the world who have crossed our borders in the last several years without bothering to notify the government of the country they’ve entered, and who then take up residence and demand to be housed, fed, and generally taken care of while also waving the flags of the countries they’ve escaped, committing crimes on a scale out of proportion to their numbers and speaking ill of the United States. These people are not immigrants.

They are invaders.

Immigrants wish to partake in the benefits of their new country but also to contribute to it. Invaders seek to plunder the land they’ve entered. For evidence that we have been invaded, looking no further than the Somali population of Minnesota. Somalia is a destitute country in which the biggest contributor to the GDP is piracy — literally. In other words, Somalia fosters corruption. Instead of shedding their corruption upon arrival here, they put their worst tendencies to work, at first by merely signing up for tax-funded stuff (81 percent — EIGHTY-ONE PERCENT — of Somalians are on welfare), and then defrauding the government of literally billions of dollars. (If you are unaware of what I’m talking about, you probably rely only upon The New York Times, aka Pravda USA, for information.) While I am pleased by the work done by alternative journalists to unveil this atrocity, the reportage would be greatly improved if the proper word was used.

Consider the difference between these two statements:

“Somalian immigrants are responsible for stealing billions in tax dollars.”

“Somalian invaders are responsible for stealing billions in tax dollars.”

The second one has more punch because it is accurate. If this is recognized, Pres. Trump’s stated desire to kick Somalis out of the country is not the heartless “racist” rant the mainstream press has predictably dismissed it as being, but a perfectly reasonable response to an overtly evil act.

Unfortunately, the current political lexicon forbids me to call “evil” an act taken by “oppressed” populations. If Somalis, or Afghans, or Pakistanis, or members of any third-world population commit crimes ranging from illegal entry of the country to outright murder it’s okay, because they’re oppressed. Remember the Jewish couple murdered in D.C. by a man shouting “Free Palestine”? How long did the outrage over that event last? A few days, perhaps. If a Jewish man had murdered a Palestinian couple in D.C. (an event I can’t even imagine happening) we would still be hearing about it. Moral culpability is now weighted by national and ethnic identity.

The list of abused words could go on at some length. “Compassion” and “empathy,” misused massively, would be near the top. But the word most urgently in need of reclamation is fascism, a product of Left thinking that the Left blames on the Right. In that regard, I’m happy to announce that a marketing campaign is set to be launched next month for my book, Communists Are Fascists (and too stupid to know it). Published in October, Communists Are Fascists has not sold well, but my belief in the importance of its message prompted me to engage a marketing firm in promoting it. Fortunately, I was approached by a marketing agent who understands my book and is sympathetic to its message. I consider this my Christmas miracle! Look for promotions of my book starting in January.

+++