Over in socialist paradise Sweden, the clueless altruists are discovering that the “clash of civilizations” is about more than identity, but entirely different biological ways of life and genetic inclinations.
The social welfare office in Mönsterås, Sweden became the site of a small riot after officials tried to stop a child marriage. A 21-year-old Arab immigrant from Syria had married his 14-year-old cousin. This offended the morally righteous Swedes, who saw this as a form of child abuse, and demanded that the couple break up.
Naturally the immigrant community did not want to hear of this, and so when the man called his relatives, a mob of aggressive Arabs appeared and attacked the government officials. Police responded and arrested one person and took several others to the hospital. In the meantime, security at the office has been “increased significantly in order to safeguard personnel living in the new multicultural work environment.”
Time and again, the West learns that we are unique and our standards are not just unique to us, but to our genetics. Multiculturalism has failed but not everyone has got the memo yet, resulting in a miasma of rape, terrorism, dysfunction, crime, inbreeding and welfare abuse descending over Europe, starting with the archcucks in socialist Sweden.
A silence fell over the West today: the silence of not noticing a great event which has been building for some time. Like the fall of the Soviet Union, it has grown first in darkness, then in offhand casual remarks, and finally as a strong will expressed through uncompromising language. And now, a wall has fallen and for the first time, we can see the world beyond the managed environment which is the politically correct West.
In Aurora, Colorado, the unthinkable occurred — an anti-white hate crime was accepted as such from the initial investigation:
Police in Aurora are investigating a sexual assault that may have been a racially-motivated crime.
…Early Friday morning, two African-American men sexually assaulted the woman outside the shopping center. Police say the victim, who is white, didn’t know the attackers. During the assault, the men yelled racial slurs at the woman before fleeing the scene.
Aurora police would not comment on whether the case is being classified as a bias-related attack.
The wall has fallen, and those who were presumed to be the enemy are recognized as human again. Much as the world wanted to punish the Germans for WWII and then, in 1989, realized that the Berlin Wall was a great injustice, and then realized in 2016 that however wrong his methods were that Hitler was right about the incompatibility of different ethnic groups, and the suicidal insanity of even microscopic amounts of Leftism, we now realize that white people are human, too, and have a right to self-interest.
Even more than that, we are seeing a recognition that equality has failed. To implement equality, one must raise the lower or demote the higher; since the lower would have risen if they could have, this means in reality that equality always indicates a need to penalize the more successful to subsidize the less successful.
This anti-moral, anti-Darwnian approach is universally popular because people, especially smarter ones, view themselves as failures and see a need to be protected against the judgment by results that is the nature of reality. People want human intent, a cross between solipsism and social approval, to regulate who is acceptable, instead of results, because often results turn out badly, frequently by chance alone. Our fear leads to an addictive and compulsive illusion through the notion of “equality,” which means “equal inclusion” in reality, or forced social acceptance.
With the backlash against egalitarianism, which is such a mentally addictive concept that it becomes an all-consuming Moby-Dick or Lord of The Rings style obsession, the West is reversing the past centuries of decline. Egalitarianism is the root of ideology, or the notion that what humans intend is more important than what has worked in reality in the past; as egalitarianism falls, it will be replaced by realism, or the study of reality.
A day after Chicago police said they were questioning four people about a “sickening” video showing the torture of a mentally disabled teen, a second video has surfaced showing the suspects forcing the young man to drink out of a toilet.
Police have said the 18-year-old victimized in the videos is a northwest suburban resident with special needs who had been reported missing.
…Several people can be seen laughing and eating during the attack, in addition to making disparaging remarks about President-elect Donald Trump and using racially charged language. At one point, while the victim is backed into a corner, someone is heard shouting “F*** Donald Trump. F*** white people.”
The fascinating with Donald Trump was also seen in another attack in Chicago two months before in which a white motorist was hit by a black driver, and when he asked for insurance information, was attacked by people shouting anti-Trump and anti-white slogans.
Our media has carefully obscured this point: for minorities, the Donald Trump election is a clear victory for white people. White people, who are still mostly acting under the assumption that we can make diversity work somehow, have not yet figured this out, and so to them it seems more of a political disagreement than a racial one.
The kidnapping in Chicago put an end to all of this. It became clear that “Trump” and “white” were synonymous in the minds of the attackers, who clearly resented this re-assertion of white identity and self-interest, mainly because they perceived that it meant an end to America viewing itself as a custodial arrangement for minorities to be financed by whites. Ethnic self-interest is a zero-sum game.
What made this case interesting was that at first, the police refused to consider it a hate crime. Some in the Lügenpresse then tried to spin it as a hate crime, but against the mentally disabled, not white people. This was made difficult by the words of the perpetrators, as reported by a traditionally Left-leaning segment of the media:
His captors yelled “F*** Donald Trump, nigga! F**** white people, boy!”
This meant that it was hard to obscure the fact that this was a crime of racial resentment, motivated by a desire to act against whites/Trump. As the earlier Chicago attack showed, to African-Americans, the two are often equated. This means that screaming “F*** Trump” at a white person is roughly the same as howling “F*** MLK!” at a black person.
Outrage in response came from more corners than expected, in greater strength, and instead of hiding this on the back pages of media like the Christopher Newsom and Channon Christian in Knoxville, TN that happened a decade prior, this time the police and attorneys were motivated to consider this case a hate crime, mainly because legally it fit the profile:
Goff said that the casting of racism as an evil worthy of condemnation made all the ways white people expressed their bigotry taboo. Those taboos are, in part, what people are referring to when they rail against political correctness. And while those new constraints certainly didn’t end racism, they suppressed behaviors that created space for people of color to live more fully in America.
…In calling the kidnapping and assault racism, we’re staking claim to moral language — and uniquely powerful moral language — to which white people can’t easily lay claim, even in cases like the one in Chicago, which seems to qualify for the most vehement reproach available.
… One way to argue that the evil of racism is not uniquely wedded to whiteness is to argue that it is a moral failing that lives equally in blackness.
In other words, hate crimes laws were intended to protect blacks from whites, so using them in the other direction upsets the social assumptions under which they were created. And yet, if racism against one group is wrong, racism against another is also wrong, no matter who the perpetrators were. In other words, whites no longer perceive themselves as the group in power responsible for all racial wrongs; diversity means that any group can be racist.
The shocking lying media should have seen this one coming because the warning signs were evident a year earlier when it was revealed that most whites thought that unjust treatment of blacks was mostly resolved, but racism against whites was rising:
A new poll shows a large number of Americans believe discrimination against whites has become as much of a problem as against blacks and other minorities.
According to the poll released Wednesday by Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI), 43 percent of Americans think discrimination is just as big a problem for White people.
“Half (50%) of white Americans agree that discrimination against whites has become as big a problem today as discrimination against blacks and other minorities, while fewer than three in ten Hispanic (29%) and black Americans (25%) agree,” reads the report.
In addition, white people thought that the many laws and billions of dollars designed to ensure equitable treatment for blacks were working, and as a result, few of them believed that blacks faced unfair treatment in the workplace and law:
64% of black adults say blacks are treated less fairly than whites in the workplace, compared with 22% of whites who say the same – a 42-percentage-point gap. Blacks are also considerably more likely than whites – by margins of at least 20 points – to say that blacks are treated less fairly than whites in dealing with the police, in the courts, when applying for a loan or mortgage, in stores and restaurants and when voting in elections.
In the white mind, racism was over: it was no longer acceptable to publicly express or act out racist ideas by white people, as enforced by white people. If any gaps in outcome remained, that was the fault of something else, which meant that the success of non-whites was no longer contingent upon what white people did. “We fixed our problems, and the rest is up to you,” white America was saying.
This meant that when the tables turned, and we had a highly visible case of non-white racial sadism, white people were ready to call it a hate crime — even if the media, who leans heavily Left, was not. But in this case, public opinion beat back the controlled and lying press, and race relations were redefined as different ethnic groups in competition, rather than evil whites hurting angelic others.
Let us wander down memory lane, since this event will be crucial in future understanding of how anti-diversity politics — as distinct from anti-white or anti-black politics — rose in America. On November 10, 2016, a racial attack and carjacking in Chicago changed how Americans viewed our post-Obama future:
David Wilcox, 49, said he was about to turn left from Kedzie Avenue to Roosevelt Road around 1 p.m. Wednesday when a black sedan pulled up and scraped the right side of his Pontiac Bonneville.
“I stopped and parked. And I asked if they had insurance, and the next thing that I knew they were beating the s— out of me,” Wilcox said Thursday.
…As the fight picks up, people on the sidewalk away from the struggle yell taunts that include “You voted Trump,” “Beat his ass” and “Don’t vote Trump.”
The Lügenpresse immediately seized on this event and gave it a spin: This was not an anti-Trump attack, but a car accident and theft. But that sidesteps the real story, which is that this was a racial attack, and that Trump was only significant as a symbol of white self-interest awakening, which threatens other racial groups because it means they are not given a de facto position of angelic victim who is always right and deserving of subsidies from the white population in order to be made equal.
Certain factless fact-checkers like Snopes made a big deal of the fact that this began with a car accident and therefore was not a “political” event, if we limit our understanding of “political” to the question of voting for Trump. They deny that this was fundamentally an incident of racial violence:
Wilcox said he did vote for Trump on Tuesday, but no one in the crowd would have known that. He said the taunts appeared to come from people watching the beating, including one person at the bus stop who he heard say, “Yeah, it’s one of them white boy Trump guys.”
…Wilcox said he voted for Trump because “he’s gonna bring back the economy. I believe he’s gonna be the one to protect the (nation). I know he doesn’t speak politically correct sometimes, but 95 percent of the country doesn’t.”
What makes this interesting is that the newspaper noted the races of the perpetrators and victims in the first news story about it, something that was until recently taboo. The outrage at this incident also took more of a general anti-diversity sentiment, migrating from “Our multicultural society would be great except for these violent Africans” to “I don’t think this diversity thing is going to work out.”
To give these events historical context, Americans elected Barack Obama twice for the same reason they elected Bill Clinton: to end the racial fracture of this country. In their dimwitted view, Americans thought that the country was a proposition nation, or solely a creation of politics and economics, as expressed in this speech by former President George W. Bush:
America has never been united by blood or birth or soil. We are bound by ideals that move us beyond our backgrounds, lift us above our interests and teach us what it means to be citizens. Every child must be taught these principles. Every citizen must uphold them; and every immigrant, by embracing these ideals, makes our country more, not less, American.
The proposition nation is a creation of equality. With equality, we believe that inner traits such as intelligence and character are not important, and external traits such as willingness to slave through two decades or schooling or “work” twelve hours a day at a cubicle job are what distinguish people. This is entirely an outpouring the worker’s philosophy of the peasant revolts, French Revolution and Marxism: people are equal, so those that serve the people as a whole are worth more, and nothing else is important.
As the grip of Leftism fades, people are seeing that inner traits are more important than external ones. Good moral character and intelligence are more important than working hard on pretend work and time-fillers, and natural ability is more determinative of success than willingness to memorize facts, rules and laws. Arising from that, we can reject the idea that there is a universal brotherhood of workers independent of race.
Along with that realization comes the similar recognition that each racial group acts in its self-interest. Blacks suffer from the loss of Obama because he fought for their interests. Under diversity, we share a society, which means that self-interest is a zero-sum game, a concept from game theory about what happens when resources are shared:
A zero-sum game is one in which no wealth is created or destroyed. So, in a two-player zero-sum game, whatever one player wins, the other loses. Therefore, the player share no common interests.
Adding together the component partial utilities, the rational herdsman concludes that the only sensible course for him to pursue is to add another animal to his herd. And another; and another…. But this is the conclusion reached by each and every rational herdsman sharing a commons. Therein is the tragedy. Each man is locked into a system that compels him to increase his herd without limit–in a world that is limited. Ruin is the destination toward which all men rush, each pursuing his own best interest in a society that believes in the freedom of the commons. Freedom in a commons brings ruin to all.
The only relief from the tragedy of the commons comes when everyone in a society is working toward the same purpose and has agreed on the same principles, but these naturally vary between ethnic groups, mainly because each group must differentiate itself by having distinct values, language and culture in addition to distinct genetics.
Since this is true, ethnic groups do not share self-interest, but have conflicting self-interests, which is why diversity can never work. The Chicago beating of November 10, 2016 is just one of the steps along the path to that realization as modern citizens awaken from the utter stupor of addictive ideology and begin to rediscover reality again.
Here we gather again to mourn yet another race riot, this time in Charlotte, N.C. — although the media will not call it such.
Yet again we see the Leftist narrative debunked but only after it served its purpose, which was to inflame the community:
Quiet returned to Charlotte streets Wednesday after the police-involved shooting of an African-American man ignited a night of anger and violence that left windows smashed, stores looted, trucks set ablaze and 16 police officers wounded in the melee.
The violence erupted hours after the shooting death of Keith Lamont Scott, 43, who police say was armed and ignored several commands to drop his weapon.
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Chief Kerr Putney, at a news conference Wednesday, rejected claims Scott was holding a book, not a gun, and said the gun had been recovered by detectives. No book was found, Putney added.
As is typical, there are no solutions on the radar. The Left wants more power to minorities, including benefits payments and affirmative action; the Right wants people to stop pointing guns at cops; out here in the cold wilderness, us Realists want to look at the situation as a whole.
It makes sense to be sympathetic to the African-American point of view in the bigger picture. Not the specifics of this event, since those were rendered false by the Left-agenda narrative. But let us look at African-Americans and their situation, with compassion.
There is no possible solution for African-American angst in America. No matter what we do — trillions in welfare, lawsuits, benefits, affirmative action and draconian civil rights laws — they will always know that this society was founded by people other than them, designed for people other than them, and that African-Americans are only here because they were sold in Africa to slave traders for use as farm labor here.
Even with a black President, and former black Secretaries of Defense and State, with black Supreme Court justices and Martin Luther King Jr. as our official American Gandhi, black discontent roils. It does so not because of poverty, but because of the denial of pride.
For African-Americans, or any other population, to have pride in their nation they need to know it was founded by them, designed for them, and ruled by them since its creation. They need to have a sense of belonging that comes only from being the group that is the nation, and not one group of many, especially not one whose original utility was as chattel labor.
No matter what we do in response to this latest shooting and the resulting riots, nothing can ever be done that will make African-Americans happy, because the condition of their unhappiness is created by diversity.
Thus, as we contemplate this latest tragedy in a long line of American and European race riots, we should instead of looking for someone to blame, look at the conditions which make such events inevitable.
Anyone remember the old America? The one full of future promise and potential? The innocent, generous place that just tried to do the right thing?
You know that you are in trouble when every generation gripes about a golden age. When you filter out the usual fools and malcontents, you see that good people are saying this, too, which means they are probably all right. Then you see a cascade of lowered quality of life over the generations.
1970s America bounced back as best it could from the utter Leftist chaos of the 1960s. It was far from perfect, but not as far as what we have now. Unfortunately, the seeds of the bomb had been planted a generation before: the United States and Europe were going to devote themselves to “diversity,” or a mixed-race society, in order to avoid the horrors of those evil conservative Nationalists from WWII.
While The Holocaust™ appalls me, it pales before the killings of the Left in Russia, China, France and everywhere else they have been. We hear a lot about The Holocaust™ not because the victims were Jewish, but because the perpetrators were not Leftist. It is a means of distracting from the long list of Leftist murders.
But since the adoption of this diversity problem, life in America has been in free-fall. First, it requires a whole lot of government to force different populations together, including its most odious tool, affirmative action which in application (not theory) penalizes companies for hiring white people. Next, because diversity means that none of the ethnic groups involved has anything approximating control over its future or even a culture of its own, we seem to have constant race riots.
What happened in Los Angeles in 1992 set the stage. A member of a privileged group, Rodney King, was driving drunk and possibly on a cocktail of drugs, as he had in the past when not beating his wives or committing crimes. Getting a call about a possible African-American driver on sherm was not an unusual occurrence back then, and the cops knew the drill: subdue at all costs, before the suspect mutilates himself or harms bystanders, as is common when people flip out on PCP.
However, that gritty truth — that Rodney King was a disaster as an individual and that was more determinative of his treatment than his racial category — did not fit the Leftist Narrative, which states that in order to force diversity, the majority must be seen as bad and wallow in guilt, then hand over the cash. We are never allowed to look into the behavior of the “victim.”
Now we have two more dead African-American men, Alton Sterling and Philando Castile. Both seem to have been troubled individuals engaged in troubling non-legal activity, which fits a pattern we see with Michael Brown and Trayvon Martin who inspired riots over the last few years. Let us take a look at Alton Sterling, who was a sex offender who sold bootleg CDs:
His cousin Krystal says he was a “people person,” which is why he figured selling CDs on the street was a useful way around the fact that he couldn’t get work in the formal labor market, thanks to a conviction for having sex with a minor when he was a 19-year-old himself. His customers—neighbors, really—seemed to genuinely enjoy him; they called him “Big A.” And he was good at his work. As one woman told The Washington Post, “That’s the most legit bootleg man in Baton Rouge.”
Minnesota court records online show Castile had some misdemeanor violations, mainly related to driving.
Notice the weasel word “mainly.” What other misdemeanors are in that record, and why are those not the focus, since the driving misdemeanors are apparently so commonplace?
In both cases, we have a police confrontation where the police are a bit nervous, owing to several factors: (1) the higher danger to police in stopping African-Americans in cars, (2) the currently politicized situation, and (3) the generalized danger to police, since an officer is killed every 61 hours in the USA (a trend that is accelerating).
The point to take away from this is not “cops are bad” or “African-Americans are bad”; it is that diversity is bad because it pits groups against another. Minorities become dependent on the majority, which creates a frenemy relationship where the majority is both tasked with providing handouts and responsible for any problems that arise, since in Narrative theory the majority is “in control,” even though under diversity no group — in theory — is in control.
Much as happened in Ferguson and Baltimore, we now have violent riots with looting, much as happened in Los Angeles. But violent riots and looting break out after anti-Trump protests as well, which indicates a deeper discontent than about the shootings themselves. This is a conflict between groups, a clash of civilizations, a deep-seated resentment caused by diversity itself.
Further counter-Narrative facts: The officer who shot Philandro Castile was Jeronimo Yanez, who is likely of Amerind extraction. Police shoot more white guys than black guys, but minority deaths get more coverage.
“Would this have happened if the driver and the passengers were white? I don’t think it would have,” Dayton told reporters on Thursday. “This kind of racism exists and it’s incumbent on all of us to vow and ensure that it doesn’t continue to happen.”
He has almost none of the facts that will determine the truth of the statement he made. He did not speak to convey truth; he is conveying political symbols designed to make the audience like him.
Every society has its founding myth. With the advent of diversity, that myth can no longer persist, and is replaced by the myth of diversity, much as under Leftism all culture and origins are replaced with Leftism. This is what ideology does: it explains away reality and replaces it with comforting political symbols.
The American voters, like voters in the EU, cannot resist the steady Leftward surge created by political symbols. If you want to make people like you, you must be accepting to everyone, and inclusive of everyone. For that reason, all political symbols are inherently egalitarian, and egalitarianism is the theory of Leftism.
Like any civilization in a death spiral, societies in the modern West are playing a game of “follow the leader”: someone states the Narrative, and makes it seem plausible, which both flatters the voters and plays into their hope for conflict resolution through pacifism instead of having one part win enough influence to exert its will on others. People are sheep and sheep follow the leader right over a cliff, always believing themselves to be free.
As long as Americans insist on this pretentious approach of flattering each other with pleasant illusions, the shootings will continue. Either that or, as happened in Baltimore, fewer people will become police officers.
This shows us a situation which is inherently unstable and cannot endure. It conflicts with our apparent desire to look good to our friends and neighbors, as if showing off new clothes or a new iGadget. But as long as we indulge this pretense over reality, we will continue to achieve the same bad results, year after year.
If you’re eccentric like I am you may also be one of the six or so people in Alabama who enjoy a cold pint of beer and a rugby match at your local drinking establishment. For those of you more centered on the DSM axis of reference, bear with me please as I use a common rugby occurrence to spin an analogy to explain what is happening to urban crime in America. The perpetrators, career criminals and ne’er-do-wells are asking questions of the defense. The like the answers they are receiving, so the crime rates are going higher and may well do so exponentially until some of those answers they receive are different.
In rugby, a team asks questions of the defense by getting the ball to a large, fast bloke out in space and forcing their opponents to have to tackle him. If the defense gets the bloke down or figures out how to deny him ball, they pass the test. If instead, Jonah gets to successfully Lomu, the opposition gets to learn just how long an eighty-minute match truly is. The aforementioned Great One, Jonah Lomu gives us a flavor of how one properly asks questions of a defense in the video below.
James Comey directs the FBI in the United States. He partially got the job because of his willingness to oppose previous US President George W. Bush on civil libertarian issues surrounding the Global War on Terror. Current President Barack Obama now learns that Comey considers himself above partisan politics when Democrats are in office as well. Comey is a hard person to satisfy. Under Bush II, he accused the police of raping civil liberties. Now, in the Glorious Reign of Obama, he accuses them of being bedroom no-shows instead.
Maybe something in policing has changed. In today’s YouTube world, are officers reluctant to get out of their cars and do the work that controls violent crime? Are officers answering 911 calls but avoiding the informal contact that keeps bad guys from standing around, especially with guns? I spoke to officers privately in one big city precinct who described being surrounded by young people with mobile phone cameras held high, taunting them the moment they get out of their cars. They told me, “We feel like we’re under siege and we don’t feel much like getting out of our cars.” I’ve been told about a senior police leader who urged his force to remember that their political leadership has no tolerance for a viral video.
More accurately, in the wake of recent political pushback from both the Left and the Establishmentarian Right, police forces have decided they will acquiesce to the will of the loudmouthed. They are no longer policing people who do not want to be policed. The police are a law abiding citizen’s defense against the underworld. That defense is being asked questions. The answers are about the answers Jonah Lomu used to receive once he got that head of steam built up. Thus, we learn just how long and painful things can get when the defense does not give a good account of itself.
Most of America’s 50 largest cities have seen an increase in homicides and shootings this year, and many of them have seen a huge increase. These are cities with little in common except being American cities—places like Chicago, Tampa, Minneapolis, Sacramento, Orlando, Cleveland, and Dallas. In Washington, D.C., we’ve seen an increase in homicides of more than 20% in neighborhoods across the city. Baltimore, a city of 600,000 souls, is averaging more than one homicide a day—a rate higher than that of New York City, which has 13 times the people. Milwaukee’s murder rate has nearly doubled over the past year.
This is occurring because police have been perversely incentivized. They are avoiding controversy instead of stepping hard into the tackle with conviction. Fred Reed described how this process worked in one of his old Cop Columns for the Washington Times.
“Fred — After having read your article on 11/20/00 I have to state that YES!! We on the P.G.P.D for the most part are now looking the other way. After almost [deleted]years on the job I find this disheartening but a necessary fact to survive in today’s, what appears to most officers, an ANTI-POLICE environment. We are even being told by some supervisors to keep a low profile so “you’re not next on the front page”! I became a police officer to help people [deleted] years ago in P.G. County . . . but I now share the attitude of most officers, just let them eat each other, we have to survive.
Yes, society’s line of defense is being asked questions. If the answer continues to be “just let them eat each other”, then you, the law-abiding citizen now need to reevaluate the risk-reward decision implicit with living in a major US city. If these decisions get reevaluated on a major scale by lots of citizens and the major firms they work for, this will have a massively deleterious effect upon both the economy and sociology of Post-modern Amerika. This is what happens when the defense gets asked some questions they don’t have many good answers for.