Wordism is the idea that there is some Book by Karl Marx or Ayn Rand or somebody that will make a successful nation out of any random collection of people.

Wordism, including Communism, religious wars, and the rest, has killed more people than racism ever could have. Also you cannot have both Wordism and freedom of speech.

If you define loyalty as attachment to a set of words, then you must define treason as any other set of words. We can see that in action today as a "diverse" society becomes a state ruled by the politically Correct Thought Police.

I believe in identity, that a people can only be united by a common bond of kinship.

Where a person belongs as a matter of kinship, widely different ideas can be tolerated.

There has never been a free society that was racially diverse. There never will be. There never can be.

Another form of government which destroys identity is Classism.

As the flood of third world immigration began in Britain, the Queen put herself solidly on the side of the third world against her own people. She said that anyone who held a British passport, which huge numbers of people in the colonies did, had as much right in Britain as someone whose family had been there a thousand years.

The Queen said all of them were HER loyal subjects, and loyalty to HER was the only criterion of whether one was British or not. The only thing that mattered was her own right of birth as Queen.

The fact that some of her subjects felt that their own birth on the island for thousands of years gave them some special rights to be there was irrelevant.

One of the immediate causes of the American Revolution was the fact that the King banned all white settlement by whites from Appalachia to the Mississippi River. That land, said the king, belonged to the Indians, who were as much his subjects as the whites east of that line.

Since there was about one Indian every two square miles on that land, the king was granting each Indian more land than the average large land holder had in Britain.

But to the King, who thought in terms of class, there was no difference between an Indian subject and a white subject.

To right-wingers, my objection to classism is heresy.

I have no illusions about the Natural Equality of Man. But when a person starts building his world around his class in society, he is doing the same thing a Wordist does. His loyalty becomes fixed to his class rather than to his identity.

I very much object to calling classism "aristocracy." Aristocracy means rule by the best. Classism is naciocracy, rule by birth. It has no relation to aristocracy.

A naciocrat EARNS the trust of his own people by his loyalty to them. A classist DEMANDS his right to rule because of his birth. If the people won't give it to him, he will not hesitate to ally with enemies in order to get the power he demands.

So when the colonists rebelled against the English Crown, the King used Indians to attack them.

To a classist, all peasants are created equal.