White Rights

     These days you can visit a considerable number of places on the Web to hear racial rants, taunting, denunciations, and calls for this or that sort of “action.” The “Black Lives Matter” whores are only the currently most visible examples. Nearly all such sites are contemptible. But not all: some are worse. Clearly, this is an imbalance that demands to be redressed.

     Our esteemed Colonel Bunny has posted a statistics-laden piece that utterly refutes one of the most important lies currently bedeviling American society: the canard that American Caucasians of European descent, who will henceforth be referred to as whites, despise and are attempting to destroy the members of other races and ethnicities. The truly stunning thing about this deceit is that not only is it untrue, it’s the exact reverse of the truth:

• Crimes against whites by others utterly overwhelm crimes by whites against others.
• Whites have extended a hand of friendship and assistance to others, and have usually had it spat on, bitten, or swatted aside.
• Peaceful white neighborhoods have ceased to be peaceful when non-whites have moved into them – and not because the whites have tried to drive them out.
• Non-white racial and ethnic groups, though not united on other points, are utterly unanimous on this one: the “white devil” must be dispossessed and destroyed.
• Despite all the above, any hint of protest, much less counter-organization by whites is denounced as illegitimate, inherently racist, and an expression of hatred.

     This isn’t exactly new. More than thirty years ago, a young woman of no small intelligence nor achievement told me that should my neighborhood experience racial admixture of the sort well known to promote disorder and loss of property values, it would be my moral duty to remain here and endure it, because...well, just because. She could not articulate any objective reason; it was entirely a matter of her opinion.

     At one of his recent campaign appearances, Democratic presidential aspirant Martin O’Malley was shouted down for suggesting, in response to the chants of “Black Lives Matter” agitators, that all lives matter. Bernie Sanders has had to cope with something similar. Persons who dare to suggest that contemporary whites have no responsibility for the statistical differences between whites’ aggregate wealth and achievement and the wealth and achievement of other races and ethnicities are routinely branded as racists, haters, and persons who want to bring back slavery.

     This mick-wop honky has had quite enough.

---

     We on the Right have often complained that we lack conservative politicians with actual spines. In reflecting on that notion, it struck me that our politicians, while not a perfectly representative sample of our ranks, nevertheless are drawn from it. Thus, an increase in our overall Backbone Quotient – BQ? – would surely elevate that of our elected officials. (At the very least, we should be trying our best to raise the “lower end” of the bell curve.)

     Racial/ethnic matters are a significant venue for such improvements. Today, virtually no one in public office or seek to enter it is willing to say, publicly, any of the following:

• Violent crimes and crimes against property are overwhelmingly committed by non-whites.
• Neighborhoods characterized by disorder, squalor, and violence are almost always non-white.
• The quality of local schools is inversely proportional to their attendance by non-whites.
• Non-white communities routinely shelter the lawbreakers among them against public justice.
• Demands for “free stuff” emanate almost exclusively from non-whites and their mouthpieces.
• Non-whites who point out such facts are demonized: “Oreos,” “Uncle Toms,” “race traitors,” etc.

     Despite all that we have the phenomenon of black racialist groups demanding that a few states be separated off into a new all-black nation...which, however, would be supported by funds from the rest of the country. We have groups such as Aztlan and La Raza demanding open immigration from the south, and that the American Southwest be returned to union with Mexico. Newest on the scene are the exclaves dominated by Middle Eastern Muslim “immigrants” and “refugees” where the writ of law does not run and it is unsafe for whites to tread.

     But don’t you dare to say that white lives matter...that the Knockout Game, a.k.a. “polar bear hunting,” is a real phenomenon...that illegal aliens from south of the border commit huge numbers of violent crimes, whether against one another or against whites...or that the degradation of our public facilities correlates strongly with the invasion of nearby neighborhoods by non-whites.

     It’s been said more times than anyone could count that it’s impossible to address a problem you aren’t willing to name. Someone must name it. It appears that the mantle has descended on me:

     The problem is non-whites.

---

     It’s time for a countermeasure. Indeed, it’s possible that we’re already too late. Nevertheless, I propose a blatant, in-your-face approach that makes plain that American whites will stand for no more:

Restore The Rights Of American Whites!

     Those rights include all the following:

• Freedom of association, including the freedom to discriminate in buying and selling.
• Freedom of enterprise, including the right to hire, fire, promote, and demote upon arbitrary criteria.
• Repeal of all laws that distinguish any racial, ethnic, or religious group from any other, regardless of context.
• The elimination of “stakeholder” laws and judicial presumptions that award privileges to recognized groups.
• The right to form proprietary communities protected by enforceable covenants, including covenants that restrict residency according to race or ethnicity.

     Note that none of the above propositions would create legal privileges that only whites would enjoy. Indeed, the condition of the country at this time is such that only whites are, de facto, denied any of the above rights. Blacks and Hispanics can form race or ethnicity-based groups and associations without fear of legal penalty. Black employers can hire blacks exclusively without worrying about what the EEOC will say, and of course the same is true for Hispanics and Muslims. Though the laws would appear to weigh as heavily on non-whites’ discrimination against whites as the reverse, they’re not enforced when the target would be a non-white business or organization.

     It’s time not merely to halt the locomotive of racial-ethnic degradation, but to reverse it. If non-whites want the fruits of the American blessing that whites experience, let them earn those fruits on the same plane as we did. Those who’d prefer not to make the effort can choose among the other continents of the world...assuming those lands would have them.

If This Goes On

     An early Robert A. Heinlein novella with the above title described an American theocracy that was eventually brought down in a violent revolution. I have no idea whether the young Heinlein was subject to influences that might have predisposed him to believe that such a future was probable. However, the Afterword to his collection Revolt in 2100, in which that novella appeared, suggests that he did think it plausible at least.

     No, that future didn’t arrive. Instead, the United States has turned in the opposite direction: secular and hedonistic. But Heinlein wasn’t the only writer to explore the idea of an American theocracy. Michael Flynn, whose work has often been compared with Heinlein’s, sketched such a future in his The Nanotech Chronicles. If he was guided by presentiments like Heinlein’s, he gave no indication of it.

     As usual, I’m sort of skirting my point here, so I’ll put it right out in the open:

Many trends are merely mental artifacts.

     One can “assemble” such a “trend” by choosing what to look at and what to ignore, which your detractors will call “cherry-picking” the news. However, the counterpoised effect is just as important:

Many who deny a trend simply refuse to see it.

     And inasmuch as some trends are pretty BLEEP!ing scary, the urge to take refuge in I-don’t-see-it denial can be very strong.

     The previous 250 words are prefatory. I see a trend in motion. It’s beginning to look to me like an avalanche. And I don’t like what it portends. But I’ll allow that I could be wrong; it’s the absolute requirement of intellectual honesty. In fact, I want to be wrong. So in reading what follows, please, Gentle Reader, do your best to:

• Refrain from an emotional response;
• Focus on the available data;
• If you don’t see it, tell me so and why.

     We begin.

---

     The day had worn him down. His prior case, the fifty-seventh of the day, had just been dragged weeping from the office, but he could not rest. He was behind his quota. The ships were already behind their sailing schedules. He had to plow onward.

     He pressed the button on his phone console that signaled to the pen outside that he was ready for his next case. The indicator light beside it went from dark to bright green. Barely a minute had passed when the door across from his desk opened and two husky guards brought him number fifty-eight. This one was female. She looked aged beyond her natural count of years, though the stress of the upheavals could do that to anyone.

     The guards sat her none too gently in the restraint chair, secured her shackles to the chair’s hard points, and laid her paperwork on his desk before stepping back to line his office doorway. He reviewed the short description of her status and noted the contents of the check box. He’d seen it checked fifty-three times that day. This made fifty-four.

     She’ll have two options. No others.

     He steeled himself and faced her squarely. She seemed unable to meet his gaze.

     “Have you been informed about what happens here...” He glanced at her form again. Her given name was one of the trendy sort that he found too challenging to pronounce. “...Miss?”

     She shook her head, but remained mute.

     “I’m your routing officer. You and I have the responsibility for determining the next stage of your life. I’m constrained by the law, but you will have a choice, though your choices are rather limited. The person who limited them was you.”

     He picked up the form and waved it at her. “Do you know what this paper says about you?”

     She sniffed and shook her head.

     “Were you given a chance to read it?”

     “Can’t read,” she said.

     “Then I’ll read it to you. ‘Miss Jones is 34 years old and a single mother of two sons. Son Tyrell was killed at age 18 during a police raid of a crack den. Son James was serving a life sentence for a gang-related murder when the Sterilization Orders came down. He was 16 at the time of his execution. Miss Jones has never been self-supporting. She tests positive for cocaine, syphilis, and hepatitis B.’”

     He looked directly into her eyes. “Do you deny any of that?”

     She would not answer.

     “Miss Jones, if I go by what’s on this paper, your future will not be a happy one. And I have to go by it unless you can convince me that what it says is not true.”

     “Can’t,” she said at last. “It’s right. Never got married. Got by on the welfare. My boys was bad asses. Baddest in the hood.” Her eyes rose to meet his at long last. They flashed in challenge. “Ain’t gonna cry over it. Any of it.”

     She thinks she’s hard. Maybe she is. She should hope so.

     “Miss Jones, if all this is true, then under the Separation Edicts, there are only two places you can go when you leave this room.” He rose and pointed toward his eastward window. Her gaze followed his gesture and lit on the giant ship that stood waiting in the harbor.

     “That,” he said, “is an exile ship. It’s one of your choices. If you choose it, it will take you to another continent, a place where you’ll be set free to live out your life as best you can. There are no whites there, no courts or prisons, and no welfare, either. And very little that you’d recognize from your life here in America.”

     She looked out at the giant vessel, plainly uncomprehending. Before the upheaval it had been a cargo carrier. On every trip it had ferried two hundred thousand tons of cargo in steel containers, each one filled with some item the residents of other lands valued, across the breadth of the Atlantic Ocean. Its holds had been refitted as row upon row of barred cells. Its next journey would convey ten thousand exiles to their new homeland. They would next see sunlight, if they saw it at all, when they debarked on the west coast of Africa, in the land that had once been called Liberia.

     Most of those exiles had been personally guilty of nothing. They’d merely abetted a race war. Some had promoted hatred of whites. Others, by their promiscuity and negligent parenting, had produced generation upon generation of layabouts and violent predators. Still others had done nothing but subsist on the handouts of a too-generous society, indolently declining to add to its riches.

     Many of them had declined to board the ship. Far too many of them.

     “Are you willing to board that ship, Miss Jones?”

     She glowered at him sullenly. “Ain’t gettin’ on no ship.”

     “I see. Well, you do have another choice, but I can’t recommend it.” He nodded toward the door to the right of his desk. “It goes through that door.” He started to describe what took place on the other side of the door, stopped himself. It might be better if she didn’t know.

     “Would you like me to tell you about that second choice, Miss Jones?”

     She sneered and looked away. “Ain’t gettin’ on no ship.”

     “I need an answer, Miss Jones. Will you board, yes or no?”

     She shook her head.

     I suppose that’s good enough.

     He nodded to the guards. They released her shackles from the restraint chair and stepped back.

     “Then whenever you’re ready, just step through that door and close it behind you. You’ll be given instructions about what to do next.”

     She gave him one more contemptuous sneer and shuffled to the side door. The three men watched in silence as she stepped through it and closed it behind her. The yellow phase indicator lit on his phone console. A moment later it changed to red. It glowed red for perhaps a minute before going out.

     “Sir?” one of the guards said. “Why didn’t you tell her?”

     He grimaced. “I thought it might be kinder this way.”

     The guard frowned. “Maybe.” He glanced out at the exile ship. “It sure as hell ain’t gonna be kind for them.” They stepped out the door through which they had entered.

     He lowered his face into his hands.

     I volunteered. I understood the necessity. I still do. But it’s harder than anything I’ve ever done.

     Colonel John MacKenzie had led troops into battle. His battalion had been the first into Monrovia, and had led its pacification. He’d killed men who’d been trying their best to kill him. He’d weathered it all and had come home to a wife who’d loved him unreservedly despite it all. She’d refused to let him doubt himself.

     But they were armed, at least. They went to war knowing the risks. Miss Jones wasn’t armed with anything worse than her attitude.

     He felt his tears rising again and sternly shoved them down.

     Those are for the men I led who died in honorable combat. Not for the Miss Joneses of the world. They brought this upon themselves even if they were too dull to know it.

     He pressed the button that would bring him number fifty-nine.

---

     Think it won’t happen, Gentle Reader? Think it can’t happen?

     I must disagree. It’s drawing nearer all the time. The indicators have never shone more garishly:

• Trayvon Martin.
• “Bryce Williams.”
• Ferguson, Missouri.
• Baltimore, Maryland.
• The “knockout game.”
• The New Black Panthers;
• Black illegitimacy at 69%;
• ”Flash mobs” of black teens;
• Black racialists openly inciting violence against whites.
• The many outbreaks of black-on-white violence chronicled by Colin Flaherty.
• And the rising tide of sentiment among normally peaceable whites that we have had enough.

     If it happens, it will be horrible beyond measure. I don’t want it to happen. I fear it greatly. More people will die than have died in all of America’s wars together. But neither my fears nor anyone else’s will prevent it. Only a massive outbreak of good sense among American Negroes, most especially the willingness and determination to discipline their own and accept the verdicts of the judicial system when that discipline fails, can stave off the racial cleansing of the United States: the Separation Edicts and Sterilization Orders of the little story above.

     “Bryce Williams” described himself as a “powder keg.” His focus was wrong; it’s America that’s the powder keg. His murders seem to me to bring the match very close to the fuse. We can’t have much time or many chances left to avert the explosion.

     If I’m wrong, tell me I’m wrong...but tell me why. Convince me.

     And pray.

Racial Madness

     It would seem that we haven’t seen the last of it:

     Gangs of blacks are targeting Walmart departments stores and other outlets all across the country in targeted attacks while terrorizing shoppers and perpetrating retail theft and property damage, police say.

     The latest black mob was a planned attack on a Walmart in Macon, Georgia on Tuesday where shoppers were injured — including a disabled man in a motorized wheelchair — merchandise was destroyed and stolen, and at least one arrest was made.

     The group of about 50 blacks ransacked the Macon Walmart causing an estimated $2,000 in damage, all in an effort to “see how much damage” they could wreak.

     During the 1:45 AM attack, mobbing blacks pulled a disabled man from his wheelchair and threw him to the floor.

     A black suspect who was later arrested reportedly told a Walmart employee: “This was a planned event, and that they had planned to see how much damage they could cause.”

     Have you heard of any rampaging mobs of white teenagers trashing shopping centers or terrorizing passers-by, Gentle Reader? I haven’t.

     I have a few other questions:

• According to The Telegraph, the mob originated at a nearby party. Who owns the location of that party?
• Were there any adults at that gathering?
• Why has only one suspect – an idiot who returned to the store to retrieve his dropped cell phone – been arrested?
• Will the Bibb County authorities pursue the identities of the other rioters vigorously, that restitution may be extracted from them, or will they leave it to Walmart’s insurers to cover the destruction?
• Apparently, the aforementioned idiot has a mother and a father, who came to collect him after his arrest:
  • Are they Christians?
  • Are they married to one another?
  • What responsibility will they take for having reared the criminal pictured below?

     I imagine that the store’s managers and other staff will have questions of their own.

---

     Incidents such as this are the fruits of several converging influences:

• The destruction of the Negro family by welfarism (69% of Negro children are born out of wedlock);
• Racialists’ incitement of resentment and entitlement syndrome among American Negroes;
• Failure to enforce the law and to prosecute lawbreakers when race is a factor;
• The weakening of parental authority over minor and adolescent children;
• The loss of influence among religious authorities.

     In many ways, the last of the above factors is the most important one. Hearken to Clay Christensen in the following brief video. Trust me; it’s worth your time.

     Rose Wilder Lane made approximately the same point in The Discovery Of Freedom. It’s not the fear of arrest, prosecution, conviction, and punishment that safeguards life and property, but the near-to-unanimous respect for those things that Americans feel...or perhaps we should say, in light of the developments of recent years, that Americans once felt. Such respect can be acquired in only two ways:

• By symmetry arguments and perturbation analysis, a tough intellectual journey;
• By the inculcation of moral norms as sacred precepts.

     In a nation of approximately normal intellectual distribution, widespread respect for the sanctity of life and property depend heavily on the power of religious convictions...and sad to say, the distribution of intelligence in these United States is no better than normal.

---

     The Left has deliberately set out to create racial divisions. Its mouthpieces have repeatedly told American Negroes that they’re “owed,” that “Whitey” is determined to “keep them down,” that they’re not responsible for their own condition – and that their young are not responsible for their own deeds. How could we have expected any results but the ones before us? Even if all the contentions above were true, which they most assuredly are not, the resulting resentments and lack of respect for moral and social norms would have eventuated exactly as we have seen. Sowing the wind always reaps the whirlwind.

     Factor in the halving of so many Negro households, the weakening of parental authority, and the disdain for religious authority so many youth exhibit. Is it not clear that we’ve been sitting on a huge sociological bomb – a bomb that might be in the process of exploding as we watch?

     Daniel Patrick Moynihan pinned it many years ago:

     In a paper prepared for the Progressive Policy Institute, Elaine Ciulla Kamarck and William A. Galston wrote that "if the economic effects of family breakdown are clear, the psychological effects are just now coming into focus." They cite Karl Zinsmeister:

     There is a mountain of scientific evidence showing that when families disintegrate children often end up with intellectual, physical, and emotional scars that persist for life. . . We talk about the drug crisis, the education crisis, and the problems of teen pregnancy and juvenile crime. But all these ills trace back predominantly to one source: broken families.

     As for juvenile crime, they cite Douglas Smith and G. Boger Jarjoura: "Neighborhoods with larger percentages of youth (those aged 12 to 20) and areas with higher percentages of single-parent households also have higher rates of violent crime." They add: "The relationship is so strong that controlling for family configuration erases the relationship between race and crime and between low income and crime. This conclusion shows up time and time again in the literature; poverty is far from the sole determinant of crime." But the large point is avoided. In a 1992 essay "The Expert's Story of Marriage," Barbara Dafoe Whitehead examined "the story of marriage as it is conveyed in today's high school and college textbooks." Nothing amiss in this tale.

     It goes like this: The life course is full of exciting options. The lifestyle options available to individuals seeking a fulfilling personal relationship include living a heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual single lifestyle; living in a commune; having a group marriage; being a single parent; or living together. Marriage is yet another lifestyle choice. However, before choosing marriage, individuals should weigh its costs and benefits against other lifestyle options and should consider what they want to get out of their intimate relationships. Even within marriage, different people want different things. For example, some people marry for companionship, some marry in order to have children, some marry for emotional and financial security. Though marriage can offer a rewarding path to personal growth, it is important to remember that it cannot provide a secure or permanent status. Many people will make the decision between marriage and singlehood many times throughout their life.

     Divorce represents part of the normal family life cycle. It should not be viewed as either deviant or tragic, as it has been in the past. Rather, it establishes a process for "uncoupling" and thereby serves as the foundation for individual renewal and "new beginning

     Need I say explicitly how important the loss of respect for religious authorities and precepts has been to family dissolution?

---

     A race war has been in progress for some time now: at least a full year. Catalogue the “knockout game” attacks of black youths on white passers-by. Chronicle the “flash mobs,” always uniformly composed of black teens and young adults. Consider outbreaks of racial violence such as we’ve seen in Ferguson, Missouri and Baltimore, Maryland. Ponder the full significance of the trial of George Zimmerman for killing Trayvon Martin and the hounding of Officer Darren Wilson out of his job and career for killing Michael Brown, in both cases in defense of their own lives.

     But don’t stop there. Go on to survey and comprehend the reactions of black racialists and how the media has kowtowed to them. Ponder the wholly gratuitous intrusions into these affairs of Barack Obama and Eric Holder. And try to imagine how things could possibly get better, rather than worse.

     We’re in for some dark times. Prepare accordingly.

The New Segregationists Yet Again: Public Facilities

     There are so many ways to approach the intractable problems that pertain to “public property” that I could write for ten years about nothing else. However, events in McKinney, Texas, coupled to similar developments in and around various American cities, have brought one especially troubling aspect of the matter to the forefront of my attention.

     Pour yourself another cup of coffee, Gentle Reader. I’m feeling particularly circumlocuitous today.

---

     Imagine for a moment that you’re the baron over a medieval fief. The responsibility that comes with that position includes keeping the peace in your realm. Believe it or not, most medieval nobles took that job seriously, and did what they could to suppress violence and predation within their domains. Sometimes, they had to get creative to do so.

     Now imagine that your region is beset by marauding robber-knights: men who have acquired mounts, weapons, and armor, and are using them to plunder your common folk. You could, of course, mobilize the knights sworn to your service and send them out a-hunting. That might work...but it would involve bloodshed, significant costs, and probable collateral damage to the lands and properties around you. So you hunt for a more agreeable approach while you keep that sort of direct confrontation in reserve.

     You could attempt to entice the robber-knights into your service, putting them nominally under your authority and that of your captains. Again, that might ameliorate matters...but it’s unlikely that all would accept your service, and very likely that among those who do accept it there would be some who would simply go on as they’d begun – except that they would also have “the color of law” at their backs. As that would blacken your reputation, and possibly even invite intervention by your liege lord the king, you reject that approach categorically.

     But wait...what’s this? The local prelate has just announced a fresh Crusade! Splendid! That provides a new possibility: you could export the troublemakers as part of the Crusade army. Yes, there would be costs, but any bloodshed would take place outside your demesne. Nor would any odium for their deeds attach to you...at least, not directly enough to matter. Capital! So you have the prelate’s announcement trumpeted far and wide, add financial resources of your own to the Crusade fund, and watch as the marauders, their minds alight with the prospect of a salary for bringing plunder and rape to a foreign land, form up to board ships bound for the Holy Land.

     That was a significant part of the dynamic that powered the later Crusades, particularly the ones of the 14th Century. The nobles of France and Italy, while some of them did join the expeditions along with groups of their loyal retainers, were assiduous about exporting their troublemakers in this fashion. As a regional peacekeeping measure, it worked fairly well.

     Imagine how it would work if applied here in the United States. Of course, we’d have to identify the predators and entice them to go a-hunting elsewhere. We’d also have to choose an “elsewhere” to which they’d be sent. However, the cries of “racism” that would result would cause political tremors of serious magnitude. Worse, if we were to use the armed forces as the vehicle for this, there would be international blowback from it, possibly far more serious than any national gains in peace and prosperity would justify. Given the amorality of our political class, those considerations are probably why they haven’t yet tried it.

     That doesn’t mean that others aren’t trying something comparable.

---

     A public facility is, by definition, one intended for use by the public, albeit upon conditions. There might be a residency requirement. There might be a fee to be paid, which would go to the maintenance of the facility. There might be conditions of deportment to be observed; indeed, there almost certainly would be. Meet those conditions and you gain admittance.

     Imagine yourself to be a town supervisor or county executive contemplating a proposal for a new public facility, perhaps a public swimming pool. The idea is superficially attractive, especially since it would tap state or federal funds while still providing a pretext for new taxes and fees. Demographics now come into play. What sort of populace would use the facility? Is that populace inclined toward public discipline or public disorder? Should corrective measures be necessary – e.g., the invocation of the police to quell a disturbance – would the consequences be likely to affect you adversely? Would there be negative media coverage, perhaps even big-ticket lawsuits? Where would the balance fall between “public good” – i.e., favorable reactions toward you for creating the facility – and unintended, undesired consequences, of which there are guaranteed to be some?

     If you have an unruly, troublemaking demographic to deal with, you might prefer that a neighboring town or county build the facility. You could then export your troublemakers to that neighbor and let him deal with the consequences. This is a particularly attractive approach if the history of public facilities in your domain is marred by high costs, disorder, and violence. (It’s also attractive if your neighbor is a political thorn in your flesh.)

     Political decisions about facilities such as swimming pools open to the public often turn on exactly those considerations.

---

     No doubt the thought processes delineated above sound venal. They are venal; that’s politics in the “democratic” era. They’re also quite commonplace among a political elite whose members are generally without moral scruples and deem themselves to be above law and justice. The only thing that countervails them is public sentiment. That’s why politicians labor ceaselessly to gain control over the media, and why the Internet is such a threat to their little ways.

     Public facilities sited in predominantly black neighborhoods have a very poor history. They tend to deteriorate much faster than similar facilities in white neighborhoods. That gives rise to demands for external funding for replacement and repair (and cries of “racism” from idiots). It also gives rise to informal “emigration:” the unruly ones who trashed the facility tend to seek out other, nearby neighborhoods whose facilities are well maintained.

     I don’t need to describe what happens thereafter, do I, Gentle Reader? Colin Flaherty has already done an excellent job of it. The black intruders are usually treated as victims of “racism,” sometimes at the hands of “racist police.” The media’s coverage is consistently slanted against the predominantly white communities that experience the consequences. The Chicago Tribune’s recent diatribe on the “sad, racist history” of public swimming pools is a typical case.

     And those who continue to get their news from the Main Stream Media swallow it hook, line, and sinker, while an objective reporter who merely presents the facts, sometimes with historical foundations that suggest the causes of such disturbances, is treated as Public Enemy #1.

---

     In April 2007, when I wrote that the media are deeply complicit in race-based troubles in modern America:

     Journalists who downplay or conceal inter-racial crimes out of the mistaken notion that they're helping to avert further hostility are either deluded or hopelessly stupid. By furthering the conviction among private citizens that we're being lied to, they advance the concomitant conviction that "the other," about whose deeds we're being denied full and accurate reports, really is someone to be feared...someone to be located and destroyed, or cast out of our midst, for our own safety's sake.

     Thus, whatever their conscious motives and intentions, politically correct journalists who spike stories about horrific crimes by black perpetrators are the new segregationists. It is their decisions about which stories should be emphasized and which ones must be buried that will persuade white Americans that their black neighbors cannot be trusted and must be expelled from the body politic.

     ...I was as yet unaware of the full dimensions of the plague of racial violence, always black-on-white, that had erupted in our large cities. It was some time before I learned even the outlines thereof. It was not a pleasant experience.

     To what extent are white liberals, invincibly resistant to admitting that such violence emerges from black racism, complicit in the problem? To what extent does:

• Their denial of the racial aspects of the “knockout game;”
• Their acceptance of clearly biased media coverage of racial incidents;
• Their kowtowing toward “black spokesmen” such as Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton;
• Their refusal to allow that American blacks have the primary responsibility for the problem, owing to rampant black illegitimacy, black welfare dependency, and lax discipline of young blacks;

     ...exacerbate the increasing resentment of American whites and Orientals over being blamed for racial clashes such as McKinney?

     And to what extent is the intensifying reluctance of white voters to approve the construction of public recreational facilities and private gathering places such as enclosed shopping malls due to white neighborhoods’ awareness of the proximity of large, mobile black communities?

     Think it over.

The New Segregationists Yet Again: The McKinney Foofaurauw

     The media have made race the single most important factor in law enforcement. Media coverage of the Michael Brown upheaval, the death of Eric Garner, the Freddie Gray riots, and many similar cases has produced a state of affairs in which law-abiding Americans are unprotected, de facto, against mobs of unruly and violent Negroes who choose to invade their lives and properties.

     This should come as no surprise to any Gentle Reader. Incentives matter, and the media have changed the incentives with their coverage. In covering a disturbance or a riot, seemingly the only thing that matters to the media is race. In the cases enumerated above, a Negro was dead at the hands of the police. The media framed the event as a case of racial bigotry – whites’ bigotry toward blacks, of course – and the professional racialists leaped on the opportunity to foment disorder with their customary alacrity.

     Thus today, the police are increasingly fearful for their careers should they have to intervene in a situation heavily populated by Negroes. The media-fueled race-war Narrative trumps all other considerations even when no lives have been lost and no violence has occurred The uproar over McKinney, Texas merely adds a data point to the graph.

---

     Conservative Treehouse provides the full McKinney story:

     The woman who organized the event in McKinney, Texas is named Tatiana Rhodes (or Tatyana Rhodes). She is approximately 19-years-old; however, she retains a fake id and has began scrubbing most of her social media accounts, so her exact age is undetermined. Update: confirmed profile DOB 04/02/1995, so Tatiana Rhodes is 20.

     Tatiana had been promoting a party via twitter under the hashtag name “Dime Piece Cookout” for approximately a month. She planned the event at a sub-division called “Craig Ranch” in McKinney Texas.

     Tatiana (pictured below left) lives in the sub-division with her mother Lashana Burkes (pictured right). Both appear to be natives of Chicago....

     The Craig Ranch subdivision has a neighborhood park and a gated pool and clubhouse for residents. The pool and clubhouse is gated and a scan card is needed to gain access. (You an explore via google earth here)

     The subdivision has a Homeowners Association (HOA) which regulates and controls the activities in/around the HOA swimming pool and clubhouse and has strict rules for use thereof.

     ....Neither Tatiana Rhodes nor her mother sought permission to use the pool or clubhouse area as part of the event. However, Tatiana hired a DJ and promoted the event to include a pool party...

     The following was posted to Facebook by Michael Cory Quattrin, a resident of “Craig Ranch,” in the aftermath of the media’s predictably tendentious, race-centered coverage:

     A DJ setup in a public space next to the private pool in our neighborhood on Friday and played loud explicit (F-bomb) music for multiple hours....The teenagers (both black and white) were being brought into our neighborhood by the carload....The teens began fighting with each other and pushing their way into our private pool. Some were jumping our fence. The security guard was accosted when he tried to stop the beginnings of this mob scene. Some residesnts who live around the park/pool area tried to come out and settle things down. The teens started yelling racial slurs at our neighbors and started assaulting people and property (throwing bottles at cars and attacking a mother at the pool with 3 young children). The first officer on the scene was by himself, At that time the party had grown to a large, aggressive crowd. As the officer arrived, many teens started running through our neighborhood. Many of the teens were being very aggressive and yelling at the officers as more arrived....

     Now ask yourself what other outcome the “Dime Piece Cookout,” which was swarmed under by a huge group of unruly black teens and young adults, could possibly have produced. But Mr. Quattrin has a bit more to say:

     The news media has refused to hear the neighborhood’s side of this story. The video being distributed is only a very small segment of what happened. This information being distributed by the media and others is extremely distorted and in some cases outright lies.

     PLEASE HELP US STOP THE BROADCASTING OF THIS IGNORANCE. The media is trying to make it look like our neighborhood is a white’s only, racist area....The unfortunate result is that our neighbors are now being threatened. We have also had cars and property in and around the park vandalized this weekend. Unfortunately, the press and social media are trying to enflame the situation.

     Surprised?

---

     The media face incentives of their own, of course. Their editorial staffs continue to be dominated by Leftist ideology, but ideology doesn’t free them of the need for “eyeballs:” readership or viewership, the quintessential asset that sells advertising space. Therefore, they continually seek effective means to induce readership and viewership...and a tactic that will do that while conforming to their ideologically required Narrative is favored above all others.

     So they perpetuate the myth of white racism against blacks: the great, unending narrative of Caucasians oppressing “people of color.” It refuses to be quenched because the media, which find it exceedingly useful both commercially and ideologically, are determined to keep it going.

     When I wrote the initial “New Segregationist” pieces, the dynamic of the situation struck me as perfectly clear. Yet it remains unclear to a huge majority of well-meaning whites. Worse, there appears to be no way to induce the media to stop fanning the flames. They want a racial bonfire, as widespread and as hot as possible. They expect it to sell papers and air time. And it will...for a while.

     Remus’s wildly popular “Frankly My Dear” piece strikes a chord with so many Gentle Readers because it verbalizes the impulse behind gated communities, the steady blackening of coastal cities, and all the other phenomena grouped under “white flight:”

If you insist on acting like thugs,
We’ll simply distance ourselves from you.

     But thugs need victims. It’s a matter of “self-esteem.” And so, like the homing missile in Yar’s Revenge, the thugs will pursue the peaceable wherever the latter might seek refuge. And the media, desperate for as many “eyeballs” as it can collect as their hegemony over news dissemination decays, will pursue us along with them.

Somebody’s Gotta Say It

     The title of this piece is shamelessly stolen from Neal Boortz’s book of that name. I found that particular book unimpressive, mainly a compendium of soft libertarianisms. There was little original thought in it. It was still of some value; the freedom philosophy can always use another popular voice. My theft pertains to the sort of thing I’ve been writing lately, particularly on the ever-hazardous topic of race.

     We’ve been experiencing race riots. They’ve been massively destructive. They’ve inflicted injuries on both rioters, police, and the uninvolved. They’ve thrown the afflicted locales into social, economic, and political chaos, at least for a time. Yet despite the undiluted racial category of the rioters, the media have resolutely refrained from calling them race riots.

     One or two other low-gauge Internet commentators have noted the correlations and have dared to speak them aloud. Here’s one:

     Then there’s the other narrative, the one no one dares say for fear of being labeled a monster. On the television you see young black males mugging for the cameras as they commit pointless acts of mayhem. You see blacks running from burning stores with arms full of goods. Of course, the liquor store is robbed and you see blacks carrying away the liquor and beer. These scenes are narrated by the same old voices saying the same old things. To spice it up, they interview a local, who mumbles through the interview, confirming everything you see on TV.

     This, of course, is the simple reality of places like Baltimore, Detroit, East St. Louis and so on. When the government banned private discrimination in in the 1960’s, whites fled the cities to avoid having to send their kids to school with blacks. Responsible and intelligent blacks tried to keep it together, but they threw in the towel in the 80’s and 90’s when crack turned American cities into war zones. They headed for the suburbs to live with the whites. What’s left in these urban reservations are low-IQ violent nitwits.

     Of course, no one is allowed to say any of this in public. Racial solidarity requires blacks, who know better, to defend their dimwitted brothers rioting in the streets. Liberal whites think there’s profit in the riots so they cast about for a black hat on whom to pin the blame. Crime thinkers like John Derbyshire believe that the truth of things will eventually will out. I think John is right that reality will always win eventually, but I know I’ll never live to see it. Everyone alive today is too deeply invested in the myth that if we just turn the right knobs and push the right buttons, biology will be overcome. Fantasy is powerful stuff.

     Z Man is probably wiser than I in his decision to go by an anonymizing Internet moniker. It’s not my style and never has been; besides, I want my readers, whoever and wherever they may be, to know that I stand behind my words. If I’m proved wrong, I’ll admit it. This is a subject on which I’d like to be proved wrong. I just don’t think there’s much likelihood of it.

     The reason for my skepticism is the normal distribution.

---

     Here is a visual depiction of the normal distribution, perhaps better known as the “bell curve:”

     And here is an excellent survey of its properties for the intelligent layman. For the more mathematically inclined, the curve follows the following equation:

     ...where σ (the lower-case Greek letter sigma) is the usual symbol for the distribution’s standard deviation. The standard deviation is a reliable predictor of what percentage of the distribution will fall within a particular band around the horizontal axis of symmetry of the curve, which passes through the arithmetic mean. The mean indicates what it always does: 50% of the points under the curve lie to the left of that axis, and 50% lie to the right of it. (In the first graphic above, the mean has been arbitrarily taken to be 0, though this is merely for simplicity in the depiction of the curve.)

     As for the use of the standard deviation:

• 68% of the points under the curve lie within 1 standard deviation of the axis;
• 95% of the points under the curve lie within 2 standard deviations of the axis;
• 99.7% of the points under the curve lie within 3 standard deviations of the axis.

     Further than that from the axis lies very little indeed.

     The important point about the normal distribution is its normality. Virtually every human characteristic is distributed among humans according to this formula -- not because we want it that way, but because the laws of probability have decreed that it shall be so. Among those characteristics are:

• height;
• weight;
• intelligence;
• strength;
• speed;
• agility;
• propensity for aggression and lawlessness.

     More, there are some notable correlations among those factors, and between each of those factors and the three anthropologically agreed-upon races of Mankind.

---

     For as long as general intelligence – i.e., the ability to reason from abstract propositions when presented with specific cases in a relevant context -- has been measured, the scores of the races have fallen into a particular relation:

• All three curves have been normal distributions;
• The Caucasian race has exhibited a mean of 100.
• The Mongolian race has exhibited a mean of 107.
• The Negro race has exhibited a mean of 88.

     The standard deviation of those three normal distributions / bell curves is 15 points.

     Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray dared to discuss this openly, despite the enormous pressure put upon them by other researchers in the cognitive sciences to keep their conclusions to themselves. Those two unusually accomplished, bright, and candid men published anyway, expecting that controversy, dissension, and vilification would follow...and they got it in spades. But what none of their critics were able to do was to refute their conclusions.

     Those conclusions led immediately to a statement that John Derbyshire was roundly castigated for making:

     The mean intelligence of blacks is much lower than for whites. The least intelligent ten percent of whites have IQs below 81; forty percent of blacks have IQs that low. Only one black in six is more intelligent than the average white; five whites out of six are more intelligent than the average black. These differences show in every test of general cognitive ability that anyone, of any race or nationality, has yet been able to devise. They are reflected in countless everyday situations. “Life is an IQ test.”

     Poor John Derbyshire, an eloquent conservative and a mathematically able man inclined toward stating a conclusion when it stares him in the face, has been so viciously vilified for noting the above that he’s become anathema in conservative circles. He failed to comply with Heinlein’s Law:

Being Right Too Soon
Is Socially Unacceptable.

     Yet his numbers are accurate and his conclusions flow from them.

---

     There is another correlation with race that our media refuse to allow us to draw, mainly by suppressing the data that would lead us to it: the correlation between race and propensity for lawlessness.

     You will not see American Mongolians as rioters. You’ll see very few American Caucasians destroying property or looting stores. You will see an overwhelming preponderance of American Negroes at such an event. Some will even allow themselves to be filmed doing it.

     Are all American Negroes willing lawbreakers? Of course not. But the bell curve seems to have put a greater fraction of them reasonably close to the mean that when given a rationale, that fraction will riot, burn, and loot. There will be some inclined to help the police to restore order. However, as The Z Man notes in his above-cited essay:

     Responsible and intelligent blacks tried to keep it together, but they threw in the towel in the 80’s and 90’s when crack turned American cities into war zones. They headed for the suburbs to live with the whites. What’s left in these urban reservations are low-IQ violent nitwits.

     In other words, they did what sensible, adequately perceptive people do when confronted with a dangerous situation they’ve decided is beyond their control: they fled those environs. The ones that remained there are the lawless – the “low-IQ nitwits” – who have so narrow a reasoning horizon that they cannot or will not see that their actions will leave them worse off than before.

---

     For the purposes of this tirade, please take a collectivity to be a group of persons who share some observable characteristic and who exhibit behavioral cohesion. Following from that, the social acceptability of any collectivity will depend upon its discipline in adhering to social norms. Such discipline can only come from two places:

• From within the collectivity itself;
• From outside it.

     In the former case, there will be minimal tension between that collectivity and the larger society. In the latter, the collectivity will be deemed “unruly,” in need of “restraint,” perhaps requiring it to be “civilized.” If the measures put to that end are sufficient, the collectivity might eventually shed its unruly ways and thereafter be accepted equally in the larger society. If not, there are only two possible outcomes:

• Separation of the collectivity from the larger society;
• Warfare, possibly ending in the extermination of the collectivity.

     The American Negro collectivity has exhibited cohesion in several ways, but most important for the purposes of this tirade is its observable disinclination to discipline its unruly sub-cohort. The American Left, which dominates the educational system, the communications and entertainment media, and the political elite of both parties, has stood firmly against the external application of effective restraining or civilizing measures to that collectivity.

     Draw your own conclusions. I stand by mine.

     To suppress a truth is to give it force beyond endurance – Victor Hugo

The Burning Of Baltimore: A Coda

     I’m fairly sure my Gentle Readers are all thoroughly sick of the Baltimore atrocities by now...but I want to take this opportunity to make you all much, much sicker:

     House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer defended Baltimore city officials’ reaction to the riots erupting in the city by asking for more federal tax dollars.

     The Daily Caller asked Hoyer, a Maryland Democrat, if the city’s leadership had failed, since the West Baltimore area was still being rebuilt from the 1968 riots. Hoyer replied, “We have to invest in making sure that we have proper infrastructure and proper housing so that we have neighborhoods that are safe and that we have safe conditions in which to live.”

     “But I wouldn’t call it a failure, certainly, of Baltimore,” he added. “But we’re going to have to as a country invest if we’re going to have the kinds of communities we want.”

     A Democrat has responded to a question about the failure of Baltimore’s “leadership” – merciful God, how I hate the notion that political officials are our “leaders!” – by calling for more tax dollars paid into the Treasury by Americans from other cities and states to be expended on “infrastructure.”

     What an incredible surprise.

---

     It’s been said many times (now and then by me) that when a politician, or a political interest group, proposes the same “solution” to every “problem” that comes down the turnpike, you can bet your last dollar that the “solution,” not the “problem,” is what the politician or group really cares about.

     Add to that the observable, terrifying rate of failure of political “solutions” to proposed “problems.” Quoth H. L. Mencken on “the sex problem,” by which he was referring to the pervasiveness of prostitutes (and customers for them) in cities of significant size:

     There is no half-baked ecclesiastic, bawling in his galvanized-iron temple on a suburban lot, who doesn’t know precisely how it ought to be dealt with. There is no fantoddish old suffragette, sworn to get her revenge on man, who hasn’t a sovereign remedy for it. There is not a shyster of a district attorney, ambitious for higher office, who doesn’t offer to dispose of it in a few weeks, given only enough help from the city editors. And yet, by the same token, there is not a man who has honestly studied it and pondered it, bringing sound information to the business, and understanding of its inner difficulties and a clean and analytical mind, who doesn’t believe and hasn’t stated publicly that it is intrinsically and eternally insoluble. For example, Havelock Ellis. His remedy is simply a denial of all remedies. He admits that the disease is bad, but he shows that the medicine is infinitely worse, and so he proposes going back to the plain disease, and advocates bearing it with philosophy, as we bear colds in the head, marriage, the noises of the city, bad cooking and the certainty of death. Man is inherently vile—but he is never so vile as when he is trying to disguise and deny his vileness. No prostitute was ever so costly to a community as a prowling and obscene vice crusader, or as the dubious legislator or prosecuting officer who jumps at such swine pipe.

     Every political “solution” requires three things:

1. Laws,
2. Hands,
3. Funds.

     When the “solution” fails to eliminate or substantially reduce the “problem,” what follows?

1. Legislators virtually never repeal the applicable law; that would be an admission of error.
2. Those who “work” for the agency charged with the “solution” have livelihoods to protect, and will fight tooth and nail to retain them – even to enlarge them.
3. The money not spent on government employees is spent on material and outside “experts,” who acquire an interest in the perpetuation of the “solution” at least as strong as that of the government employees!

     Sociologists call this an “Iron Triangle,” which defends its politically created turf with the ferocity of a lioness protecting her cubs. This is the prime example of the importance of individual motivation and its priority over notions of “civic virtue:” To those with a personal stake in the “solution,” its perpetuation outranks the “problem” in importance.

     Theorists will theorize, moralists will moralize, and political strategists will politically strategize until the Moon should fall from the sky. None of them will ever change that central fact about government and government programs. It is the key to why all political systems, including anarchism, are inherently unstable.

---

     Race riots aren’t new. We’ve had fifty years to get accustomed to them. They invariably feature Negro mobs running rampant through urban districts, smashing and looting. There’s always a triggering event, of course, but the trigger is seldom of enduring importance. What matters is the facility racialist mouthpieces have developed at inciting anger among American Negroes, who have been remorselessly propagandized about how they’re “oppressed.” Raise that pitch high enough and they’ll riot.

     I’m about to say something that’s likely to offend a great many persons, so those with excessively tender sensibilities or generally weak constitutions should leave the website at this point.

     Have we cleared the room adequately? Good, ‘cause here I go:

When was the last riot by American Caucasians?

     It doesn’t matter whether the disparity is a consequence of intellectual deficiency, emotional susceptibility, or simple lust to loot and destroy. Negroes riot; Caucasians don’t. More, they’ll riot regardless of the merits of the triggering event. All they require is “just cause,” and yes, those are “sneer quotes.”

     John Derbyshire touched off a huge controversy with his column “The Talk: Nonblack Version.” Yet not one of his critics could refute his assertions. What those assertions amount to is that concentrations of American Negroes constitute a hazard to the life and property of non-Negroes.

     I submit that we have had enough demonstrations of this proposition to grant it our confidence.

     Negro racialists know their audience. They know how easily it can be whipped into a furor. They know how little can be done to restrain a black mob bent upon looting and destruction, if the authorities are unwilling to use force to the necessary degree and in the necessary amount. They know that at least for the present, the response of “authorities” to such riots is far more likely to be conciliatory – Steny Hoyer’s approach – than punitive. Last and most significant, they know how to profit personally from the sequelae.

     There will be more such riots, in more cities, over ever more trivial occurrences.

     Draw the moral.

A Quiet Riot

     (Say, wasn’t there a band named Quiet Riot?)

     From the national news media, you might not think matters in Baltimore were much different from their usual. From the national news media, you might infer that the death of Freddie Gray while in police custody is generally regarded as an explainable, if tragic occurrence – i.e., no big deal. From the national news media, you might assume that the political authorities and law enforcement agencies of Baltimore had the situation well in hand.

     You might. You’d be wrong.

---

     I expected there to be at least some unrest, and many strident calls for an independent inquiry, into why a young man who was healthy (apart from asthma) when the Baltimore police detained him should have died with his spine 80% severed. After all, he was black, and these days that’s considered cause enough to disrupt an American city.

     The reports I’ve read say that Freddie Gray was transported to detention in a police van, shackled but not seat-belted or otherwise secured. This appears to be the cause of the fatal spinal cord injury that took Gray’s life. But for the life of me, I can’t find the reason for which he was originally arrested. Apparently, the Baltimore police were out in force in a part of the city known for drug traffic, but I can’t find any information beyond that.

     No one in authority in Baltimore has yet said whether Gray was about to be charged with any crime. This might have been an arrest-on-suspicion. Suspicion of what is not definite, though the region’s reputation for drug activity seems most likely.

     One way or another, the police arrested a man for reasons they haven’t disclosed, and that man died in their hands. There’s a good chance that this was a fatal miscarriage of justice.

     But there’s no chance whatsoever that whatever happened can justify widespread violence and the destruction and looting of private property. Yet that’s what’s happening – and with the open connivance of the political authorities.

---

     Hearken to Sara Noble:

Former DC detective Rod Wheeler joined Fox & Friends this morning to explain what went on. Mr. Wheeler is a great guy but his promotion of the new policing techniques needs to be challenged.

The police deliberately allowed the protesters to do this, Mr. Wheeler observed. They stayed out of the picture. There were no military-type uniforms. There were no armored cars, he said.

Some officers didn’t wear helmets, he reported as if it was a positive step.

That seems to be putting the police in grave danger.

After they destroyed some cars and committed crimes, the police started moving in.

It’s similar to what went on in Ferguson when the mayor allowed 28 stores to burn down to keep the criminals calm.

Mr. Wheeler said the new tactics generated a different response from the crowd. It’s what they learned from Ferguson.

The crowd gets more aggressive if the police do, so now the police confine them to an area but when “they really start becoming destructive, we start moving in.”

“For the most part,” Wheeler said, “it wasn’t that bad.”

     I wonder if the persons injured in the riots and the proprietors of the stores that were looted and destroyed feel “it wasn’t that bad.”

---

     It’s beyond dispute that when a sufficient number of persons concurrently become inclined to violence and disorder, there will not be enough police to restrain them. Even an overtly totalitarian society can’t afford that much enforcement power. So under contemporary conditions, in which heavily propagandized American Negroes are easily provoked to mass violence, the police are effectively neutralized. An effective organized response would be on the order of a military invasion, which Americans are unwilling to tolerate.

     The only effective diffuse response would be for law-abiding citizens to go to their guns. But Baltimore is in Maryland, and Maryland is among the states most hostile to the private ownership of firearms. Atop that, should a store owner kill a rioter, upon whom do you think the authorities of the city would descend with the full weight of the “law?” To assist you in arriving at your answer, here’s a picture of the current Mayor of Baltimore:

     And here is what she said to the press about the tactics the police were instructed to adopt:

"I made it very clear that I work with the police and instructed them to do everything that they could to make sure that the protesters were able to exercise their right to free speech.

"It's a very delicate balancing act. Because while we try to make sure that they were protected from the cars and other things that were going on, we also gave those who wished to destroy space to do that as well. And we worked very hard to keep that balance and to put ourselves in the best position to de-escalate."

     That came from the mayor of a major American city – a city that, among other things, is the birthplace of Catholicism in the United States. It’s perfectly clear what she’d think of a private citizen who would dare to defend his property with force. A white store owner shot a black looter who was merely exercising his “right to free speech” by trashing the white man’s place of business? Unthinkable!

     But I don’t write merely to note a horrific development and express my disapproval. I’ve made it my mission to forecast what will come of it.

     I predict an outward migration of whites, especially white small-business owners, from the city of Baltimore. I predict that the cost of living in Baltimore will rise as insurers add “risk premiums” to their commercial coverage policies and the remaining businesses pass those cost increments down to their customers. I predict that as blacks in other cities “learn” from Baltimore’s example of laid-back riot “control,” the events there will be reproduced elsewhere, with similar demographic and economic consequences. I predict that racialist mouthpieces, starting with Al Sharpton, will blame the further deterioration in majority-black urban neighborhoods on “white greed.” And I predict that the national media, to the extent that they deign to cover those phenomena at all, will rationalize the violence as “to be expected” and deplore the flight of whites to safer, less racially mixed regions as “racist.”

     Who would like to bet against me?

It’s On: No Longer Just My Mad Notion

Think ol’ Curmudgeon Emeritus Fran has gone a bit overboard about the race war he considers to be in motion? Well, have you considered the opinions of this state senator? Have you asked for the sentiments of the Bosnian-Americans of St. Louis, Missouri? And what about this charming fellow:

Do his opinions carry any weight?

I don’t think it’s safe to laugh all of that off, Gentle Reader. Do you?

---

We approach a critical mass.

You cannot repeatedly dispense the most inflammatory, divisive imaginable rhetoric at a demographic without inflaming that group to violence. Indeed, the relentless exhortations to hatred of whites by blacks has reached such an intensity – now reinforced and amplified by subtle encouragements from the White House itself! – that the greatest wonder of the current situation is that white neighborhoods nationwide are not yet under open, armed attack by mobs of angry blacks.

Wait a moment. Let me check that. They’re not, are they? I mean, given the propensity of the Main Stream Media for reflexively suppressing such news... but no. Surely I would have heard about it some other way. The sound of gunfire travels very well.

American whites approach their own, far less well publicized critical mass. Many, especially in racially mixed regions of the country, are making ready: stuffing their pantries to bursting, checking the guns and laying in stocks of ammunition, and quietly conferring with their neighbors to ensure that their communities are prepared to react effectively should the chaos come their way. But should that occur, don’t bet on whites simply defending their homes and neighborhoods from the assault and then going back to their peaceable ways.

Will these critical masses form? They can still be headed off. Whether the steps necessary to avert calamity will be taken is uncertain. Indications to this point suggest that they won’t be:

• No public figure has yet demanded a stern response to the disorder.
• The National Guard has been deployed only after-the-fact, and to trivial effect.
• Firm suppressive measures (e.g., water cannons) have not been employed against embryonic riots.
• Police have actually tried to disperse – even arrest – armed private-citizen guardians of potential targets.
• The racial patterns in “knockout game” attacks, recent events such as the murder of Zemir Begic, and violent crime generally continue to be suppressed.

A plague of civil disorder can only be quelled by harsh measures. Indeed, they must be so harsh that even a slight possibility of being subjected to one will outweigh the pleasures of violence and the potential gains from looting. If such measures are not undertaken and applied remorselessly, the violence and looting will continue and increase, in obedience to their own internal dynamic. Race riots are not an exception to this rule.

Draw your own conclusions.

---

We met on the beach amid rumours of war
Your head in your hand, what you saw you won't say
As the newspapers flew in the wind.
I can see you're one of that kind
Who carry around a time bomb in their mind, no one knows
When you'll slip the pin.

Rumours of war...rumours of war.

I see that your dress is torn at the edge
You are lost, intense, like a man on a ledge, waiting to jump
As the waves break over the shore.
You say there's a storm that can't be delayed
And lately it seems to be coming this way, you can hear it break
Like the slam of a door.

Rumours of war...rumours of war.

You tell me, just look all around
At the past and the present, the cross and the crescent
The signs and the planets are lining up like before.
There are souls on fire in the day and the night
On the left and the right, in the black and the white
You can see it burn in the eyes of the rich and the poor.

Rumours of war...rumours of war.

[Alasdair Ian Stewart]

You cannot do wrong without suffering wrong. Justice is not postponed...Every secret is told, every crime is punished, every virtue rewarded, every wrong redressed, in silence and certainty.

[Ralph Waldo Emerson, Compensation]

If you’ve never seen me mention the vigilance committees of the latter Nineteenth-Century West, here’s your chance to acquaint yourself with them. They formed in response to public perceptions that the “authorities” were unable to do their proper jobs or were uninterested in doing them. Though they’ve been given a bad rap by sententious historians eager to ingratiate themselves with political power, they appear to have functioned at least as well as any “public” system of justice has ever functioned.

The vigilance committees were usually stimulated by breakdowns in the public peace far milder than an epidemic of race riots. Granted that I speak here of the pre-statehood West, whose population tended to be far more individualistic and assertive than the contemporary American populace; all the same, there is a tipping point somewhere. We might not determine its location without passing through it, after which all the theoretical questions will once again be matters for the historians.

---

It’s an unfortunate but irrefutable fact that the sole generally satisfactory agency for maintaining order within a cohesive demographic, whether the unifying factor is race or anything else, is that demographic’s own, internalized set of morals and ethics. If the demographic fails to enforce those morals and ethics upon those who flout them, there will be a corrective response from outside the demographic. If the demographic goes further, by not merely refusing to discipline its lawbreakers but affirmatively shielding them from correction, a violent us-versus-them confrontation becomes inevitable.

Of one thing we may be sure: every debt is paid. The social debt currently accruing, owing to blacks’ unwillingness to silence the racialist hucksters inciting violence and to discipline their own unruly elements (or to have others discipline them), will be paid. The sole questions are who will pay it, and when.

This law writes the laws of cities and nations. It is in vain to build or plot or combine against it. Things refuse to be mismanaged long. Res nolunt diu male administrari. Though no checks to a new evil appear, the checks exist, and will appear. If the government is cruel, the governor's life is not safe. If you tax too high, the revenue will yield nothing. If you make the criminal code sanguinary, juries will not convict. If the law is too mild, private vengeance comes in.

[Ralph Waldo Emerson, Compensation]

Verbum sat sapienti.

(Cross-posted at Liberty’s Torch.)

When Others Have Already Said It Ably...

...I feel no need and little incentive to repeat it in my own terms.

---

First up, the inimitable Fred Reed:

Two questions, methinks, arise from Ferguson's latest outburst. The first, political, is "Why does the country tolerate it?" The second, more anthropologically interesting, is "Why the eerie incapacity of underclass blacks to understand evidence, or law, or much of anything?" Of the countless explanations given for the poor performance and poor behavior of blacks in the US, one of them dares not speak its name: Low intelligence.

Yet it fits all the evidence. It explains why Africa never built cities, why it did not invent writing, why there was no African Fifth-Century Athens. It explains why Rhodesia, prosperous and an exporter of food when run by whites, fell immediately into hunger and barbarism when whites left. It explains the dysfunction of black societies from Africa to Haiti to Detroit. It explains why blacks invariably score far below whites and Asians on tests of IQ, on the SATs, GREs, on entrance and promotion exams for fire and police departments.

It explains the need for affirmative action and for departments of Black Studies in universities when black students can’t handle real courses. It explains why the gap in academic achievement never closes. It explains the criminality, the violence, the poor impulse control, the dependency on welfare, the unemployment, and the inability to integrate themselves into a high-tech society. It explains the constant scandals involving teachers in black schools giving students the answers on standardized tests.

Further, it explains why none of the programs intended to raise performance of blacks in the schools ever work. Head Start didn’t work. Integrated schools didn’t work, nor segregated schools, nor black schools with white teachers nor black schools with black teachers. Expensive laboratories and free computers didn't work. Schools run entirely by blacks with very high per-student expenditure (Washington, DC for example) didn’t work. There is no indication that anything at all will ever work. Low intelligence is the obvious explanation. There is precious little counterevidence.

---

Second, consider this from Sara Noble:

Time Magazine published an article by freelance writer Darlena Cunha. It provides a good trip through the liberal thought apparatus. It’s a frightening trip.

Cunha wrote an article about the Ferguson riots titled “Ferguson: In Defense of Rioting”. The violent protests that destroyed 25 businesses and put many in danger are, according to her, “part of the American experience.” Only the “mainstream” can enjoy the “luxury” of “peaceful protesting,” she says.

It’s a perfect example of how these new liberals think. They’re not your grandfather’s liberal.

Without considering the facts or the evidence, she said the “anger” in Ferguson was “inevitable” because a “police officer” shot “a young, unarmed black man in the streets.” She wrote “inevitable” as if the rioting is to be expected and she wrote “in the streets” as if Michael Brown was dragged into a gutter.

“Riots”, she states, “are a necessary part of the evolution of society.” People aren’t living in a “universal utopia” and they don’t have “basic human rights”.

---

Third, ponder this, from Lee Cary via Doug Ross:

On the morning after the Grand Jury No True Bill decision was announcement, it was clear that the policing authorities followed a planned, minimum-response strategy. They offered little resistance to looting and property destruction, perhaps in order to avoid bloodshed and media scrutiny.

The outcome: On the morning after, there were few, if any, reports of serious injuries. No media videos went viral showing police physically subduing looters. No ambulances were filmed loading bleeding rioters or police. Just the burned and broken evidence of an orgy of looting and property destruction....

When the welfare state begins to dial-down, and the value of EBT cards atrophy, some of those neighborhoods will burn at the hands of their own thug-teens. And policing authorizes will either be unwilling, or unable, to confront the lawlessness....

Meanwhile, the well-established, well-funded, social-activist organizations, many that have been active in Ferguson for months, hope to use Ferguson as a catapult to a sustained, new, civil rights movement. They are professional, crisis ambulance-chasers. The Ferguson looters are their cannon fodder. Wilding is a just one means to their social-transformation end.

---

Fourth and last, the great Thomas Sowell:

One of the reasons for being glad to be as old as I am is that I may be spared living to see a race war in America. Race wars are often wars in which nobody wins and everybody ends up much worse off than they were before.

Initial skirmishes in that race war have already begun and have in fact been going on for some years. But public officials pretend that it is not happening, and the mainstream media seldom publish it at all, except in ways that conceal what is really taking place.

---

What’s that? You didn’t come here to read a collage of quotes from other writers? You’re here for my peerless ranting? But Gentle Reader, haven’t we been here enough times already?

It’s on.

(Cross-posted at Liberty’s Torch.)

A Question Of Public Deportment

By now, the entire country knows what’s happened in Ferguson, Missouri in the wake of the “no true bill” decision by the grand jury that sat on Officer Darren Wilson’s fatal shooting of giant thug Michael Brown.

I had a predictable reaction to the rioting and looting:

You can take the savage out of the jungle,
But it’s much, much harder
To take the jungle out of the savage.

I claim that the videos that have surfaced since the disorder began support that evaluation, and no other.

---

Chiefest among the nominally nonviolent obscenities of this affair are the words of His August Majesty, Barack Hussein Obama, first Emperor of the United States:

That this man should have the gall to stand before an audience and prattle about the rule of law – he who routinely flouts the law! – is a blasphemy beyond my power to adequately condemn. That he should call the rioting “an understandable reaction” – he who accused the police of “acting stupidly” in the Henry Louis Gates matter, without having even a superficial acquaintance with the facts! – recalls Maxine Waters’s defense of the Los Angeles rioters after the acquittals in the “Rodney King” trials. Has there ever been a less sincere, more barefaced liar in any American public office, much less in the Oval Office?

America, your greatest shame isn’t allowing Obama the presidency. It’s having returned him to it.

---

But let’s not dwell on the present when we have the past and future to address. After all, they’re so much bigger!

Time was, there was no hesitation on the police’s part to enforce noncontroversial norms of public conduct. They would routinely tell “undesirables” to “keep moving.” Nor was there any unease among law-abiding citizens about the practice. It was well understood that we would grudgingly tolerate much that went on behind closed doors that we could not countenance in public. Absolute intolerance of public misbehavior expressed an understanding of “camel’s nose under the tent lip” dynamics: a “broken window theory” of public conduct that reached well beyond vandalism and random disorder.

The breakdown, as always, started with little things. Littering. Public nuisances such as loudly played radios and boom boxes. Jostling on crowded sidewalks. Much followed from the mistaken tolerance of such behavior – a refusal by ordinary citizens to haul the offenders up by the scruff of their necks and compel penance and redress – that few predicted at the time.

We were opening the door to savagery in the streets. Some of us saw it coming and said so. Not enough Americans listened.

Incentives to savagery won’t affect everyone equally, of course. Those who responded by “acting out,” in the common parlance, were already predisposed toward such conduct: the sullen, the wrathful, the violently inclined previously held in check by a sense that they’d never get away with it. That the great preponderance of them are Negroes should surprise no one. What other demographic cohort has systematically been told that it’s “owed,” that “Whitey is holding you down,” that “justice” demands the mulcting of the innocent as “reparations”...and of course, “no justice, no peace!” -- ?

No one can hear such a gospel year in and year out without reacting to it. A hefty fraction of American Negroes have internalized it. Thus we have reached a situation quite similar to that of Muslims. It’s often said that, whereas the radical Muslim wants to behead you, the “moderate” Muslim merely wants a radical Muslim to behead you. Similarly, whereas the black rioter wants to loot your store and burn it down – assuming he gets the order right, that is – many a “peaceable” black merely condones such conduct as “an understandable reaction.”

Needless to say, this is not a formula that will restore order to America’s cities.

---

The violence will continue. It’s likely to intensify, as the public reaction to it has been hesitant at best. Why, for example, have so few affected business owners not organized a private militia to guard their establishments? Why has no governor acted to arrest and confine those openly exhorting the “protesters” to violence and vandalism, as is licit under the doctrine of incitement to riot? Why has the president not federalized the National Guard nationwide and sent it to the sites of rioting and looting with orders to shoot to kill?

Given the identity and character of the president, I doubt we need an explanation for that last point.

Would anyone care to dispute John Derbyshire’s “The talk, non-black version” today?

There’s more and probably worse to come. Stay tuned.

(Cross-posted at Liberty’s Torch.)

Obama Fiddles While Ferguson Burns

I nave said this before,in various comments, and among friends ... and will say it again. I have some serious doubts as to the length of time the current resident of the Oval Office will stay in same. No, I am not talking about Obama being impeached and removed by that method, nor am I referring to a military coup (I have serious doubts about the current military leadership having the testicular fortitude needed to carry that one out. I would not want to take any bets on how many really take their "oath" to heart. I would love to be proven wrong about that.)

 I am talking about Obama using any opportunity available, to give him an excuse to place this country under Martial Law.

Now I am sure there are any number of you out there who are thinking what is this nut job talking about. Understand this, I have served, and I understand not only the Chain of Command, the Constitution, the three branches of government, and the power(s) granted to them, and the President.

I also know "The Oath".  Granted the version taken by enlisted varies somewhat from the Oath taken by the Officer corps, and by elected officials, the overall intent is the same.

This being said, we have, in Obama, an individual who has either sanctioned, directly enabled, or enacted himself, via "Executive Order", any number of events or actions which are in violation of the Constitution.

 Why then, would it be so surprising to find out this individual is not intent on using any excuse (available)  in order to insure either he, or those he so deems to take his place, are allowed to do so under the constitutional constraints provided by Martial Law?   In other words, there is no need for another Presidential Election...at least not until the current "National Unrest" is brought to a close.  This being the case, I am going to stay here, in DC, in the Oval Office, until order is restored.

We have, at the very moment I am typo-ing this, a town erupting in flames (matters not, for the moment, who or what started this). Obama has already gone on national television to pontificate on same.  With split screens on Fox and MSNBC, showing the lawlessness on one screen, and the rioting in Ferguson, on the other.  One wonders if this is the spark Obama is so devoutly hoping for. The one thing he needs to "validate" declaring Martial Law, for the safety of all (the children!!!).

 By all means, tell me I am wrong. And give me some concrete evidence. Because as the months and years have gone by with this current administration, and the confederacy of dunces we have comprising both the House and Senate, I don't have much else to place my faith in (the good Lord aside) other than my gut. And that puppy is a-grumbling.

 We are rushing toward Third World status. Sadly, a good chunk of this country isn't even warm enough to qualify as a banana republic.