Atlanta, Affirmative Action, and White Managerial Elites

Gone With the Wind: Atlanta, Affirmative Action, and White Managerial Elites

stuffblackpeopledontlike.blogspot.com

 

Ronald H. Bayor’s Race & The Shaping of Twentieth-Century Atlanta is one of Disingenuous White Liberal (DWL) scholarly books that blames the current state of the Black Mecca on the lingering vestiges of white racism.

The growth of Atlanta is in predominately white areas

Despite Atlanta – since 1973 – being a city firmly under the iron Black heel when it comes to who controls City Hall and the hiring/firing of public employees (not to mention the creation of the Minority Business Enterprise, which mandates a significant portion of city projects go to minority firms), Bayor’s book places all the blame for The City too Busy to Hate’s shortcomings on white people.

Just as in Detroit, it was white flight from Black criminality to virtually crime free white suburbs surrounding the city that allowed Black people to become the majority of Atlanta by 1970 and elect Maynard Jackson in 1973. This event was the culmination of years of cohesive actions by the Black community in Atlanta:

“The black response to a city being shaped by segregation was to form their own self-help organizations, develop businesses and colleges to serve the African-American community, negotiate for land and housing, fight for political inclusion, and, most important, to continually point out to white Atlantans what should have been obvious: measures that diminished black life in the city also had negative effects on whites. Black Atlanta’s community development, resistance to or bypassing of white policies, and implementation of their own policies after 1973 were some of the shaping aspects of race that one could see in Atlanta.”(p. 257, Race & The Shaping of Twentieth-Century Atlanta)

Black Atlanta did implement their own policies starting in 1973 (minority contracting mandates, which transferred tax-revenue to the Black community) as outlined here:

The election of Maynard Jackson, who has died of a heart attack aged 65, as the first black mayor of Atlanta, Georgia, in 1973 was a major landmark in the southern US city’s history.


It signposted a change of guard in the local political class from white to black; no white person has since been elected mayor.


Jackson, who served three terms in office, was a prominent exponent of affirmative action.


In his first two terms, he rattled Atlanta’s old cosy business relationships, alienating some, but wooing them back in his third term with deft deal-making skills. In 1978, he signed a law requiring 25% of the city’s projects to be set aside for minority firms. The policy, which still operates today, made Atlanta the most hospitable place in America for black entrepreneurs.


He also pushed through an affirmative action program that made it mandatory for contractors to take on minority-owned businesses as partners, and forced the city’s major law firms to hire African-American lawyers. He threatened that “tumbleweeds would run across the runways of Atlanta airport” if blacks were not included in city contracts.

This is the reason Atlanta is known as “The Black Mecca”; an aggressive affirmative action program implemented to enrich Black citizens of Atlanta, that resulted in enticing Black people from around the country to return to the city (and surrounding metro Atlanta area) to get a piece of the pie. An article from Ebony in 2002 notes:

Though Census figures show that Atlanta’s Black population has dipped slightly (it peaked at 282,911 in 1980 and stands at 255,689 today), more than 150,000 African-Americans still moved into the city during the 1990s. The real boom was in the surrounding bedroom communities in DeKalb, Fulton and Cobb counties. More than half a million Blacks swelled the population of those communities in the 1990s. In fact, more Blacks moved to metropolitan Atlanta than to any other metro area in the country during the last decade.

Even in once-segregated strongholds like DeKalb County, which cuts a small swath through the city of Atlanta, Blacks have changed the face of the social and political landscape. In November 2000, DeKalb residents elected 41-year-old Vernon Jones as the county’s first Black chief executive. “The times are definitely changing in and around this metropolitan area,” Jones maintains. “The whole area is just much more diverse, and that’s changing things. There are some glass ceilings, too. We still don’t have a Black senator or a Black governor. But the population is growing. More and more Black people are moving here, affluent Black people. That is making a difference.”

Today, Atlanta boasts more Black-owned companies per capita than any other city in the nation except Washington, D.C., according to the U.S. Department of Commerce. It is home to the nation’s second-largest Black insurance company, Atlanta Life. Citizens Trust Bank, the fourth-largest Black bank, also is based there.

“There are business role models here like Jesse Hill and Herman Russell who allow young people to see what the possibilities are,” says Thomas Dortch, national chairman of 100 Black Men of America.

But the new economic landscape produced by the labor, lobbying and civil rights leadership of Atlantans such as Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., Andrew Young and Congressman John Lewis also has created scintillating opportunities in areas where Blacks previously were shut out. As Atlanta has grown, so too have the fortunes of scores of Black businessmen who have participated in its amazing development. With the backing of Maynard Jackson, who is credited with initiating the building boom that put Atlanta on the map (some call Hartsfield airport “the airport that Maynard built”), business owners like construction magnate Herman J. Russell, whose H.J. Russell & Co. is the 14th-largest Black business in the country, literally paved the way for the unprecedented success of the Black businesses that followed.

Using aggressive affirmative action initiatives, Jackson ushered in an era in which the percentage of the contracts Black businesses received from the city grew from less than one-tenth of 1 percent in 1970 to more than $250 million today. It is said that 90 percent of the contracts that go to minority-owned firms that do business with American airports are at Hartsfield. Herman Russell, along with his partner, pioneering restaurateur James Paschal, operate several of those concessions, but many young Black business owners also have broken into this lucrative territory.

More and more Black people – who are vacating cities they helped ruin during the Great Migration of 20th century – are moving back to Atlanta. Fittingly, there is a correlation to property value drops, lower tax revenue collected – resulting in teacher and public employees layoffs and a lack of funds for improvements in infrastructure (and increased crime) – and further white flight from these counties Black people are settling in.

Attracted by affirmative action policies that helped enrich one segment of the population, one wonders if metro Atlanta’s white population would ever dare unite to defend their interests? The looming showdown over North Fulton vs. South Fulton would lead one to say “yes, they will.”

But its not just affirmative action policies that have helped enrich Black people in the private sector.

In describing Freaknic – a raucous Black spring break event that was eventually evicted from Atlanta – in the opening chapter of A Man in Full, Tom Wolfe writes:

Atlanta was their city, the Black Beacon, as the Mayor called it, 70 percent black. The Mayor was black… and twelve of the nineteen city council members were black, and the chief of police was black, and the fire chief was black, and practically the whole civil service was black, and the Power was black. (p.17)

But going back to that quote from Boyer, one glaring inconsistency with logic sticks out:

to continually point out to white Atlantans what should have been obvious: measures that diminished black life in the city also had negative effects on whites.

Actually, it’s measures that improved Black life in the city that have had negative effects on whites. More importantly, it’s had negative effects on Black people. Despite these affirmative action programs, poverty (and crime, which has no relation to poverty) in the Black community in metro Atlanta is at levels that rival any in all of America:

Atlanta’s status as a haven for African-Americans was greatly reinforced by the election of the city’s first black mayor, Maynard Jackson, in 1973. This accomplishment was due not to the progressive sentiments of the majority of Atlanta’s white population, but rather their departure from the city in big numbers. In the book Imagineering Atlanta: The Politics of Place in the City of Dreams, Charles Rutheiser reports:

He (Jackson) assumed a confrontationalist posture vis-a-vis the white business community, arguing passionately for a greater distribution of the benefit of growth among African-Americans. Ina  showdown over the new airport, Jackson succeeded in establishing a minority business enterprise program that became widely regarded as a model for minority set-asides for municipal contracts. Together, with extensive affirmative action hiring by Atlanta-based corporations like Coca-Cola and Delta Airlines, and an already-established black business community, the set-aside program made Atlanta a nationally known center for African-American economic opportunity in the latter part of the 1970s and 1980s.


Despite economic opportunities for the middle class and a continuous black presence at city hall for two decades, Atlanta was far from being a decent place, much less a paradise, for the majority of its African American residents. By any and every statistical measure, from poverty and unemployment to graduation rates and crime, the quality of life “enjoyed” by the city’s African-American majority plummeted during this period. The percentage of black households living in poverty nearly doubled between 1980 and 1990, to more than a third of all households. Over half of the city’s children lived in poverty. 


Nowhere was the divide between the two black Atlantas more manifest than in the area of crime. Atlanta was nationally renowned for its high crime rate in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Its homicide rate more than doubled between 1965 and 1970, making the city the country’s “murder capital.” Atlanta has retained the dubious honor of being one of the nation’s most violent cities to the present day. The vast majority of these crimes occurred, then as now, in the cities poorest census tracts to the south, east, and west of downtown, areas that are more than 95 percent African American.

Violent crime hasn’t stopped in Atlanta (where Black people have a virtual monopoly on crime), it’s just no longer reported by the police or the Atlanta Journal Constitution.

A simple question has to be asked at this point: who were those white people in power in Atlanta that caused Black people to unite and create cohesive organizations that would – in turn – consolidate political power in their own hands (both in the public and private sector)? Who were these white people that allowed Atlanta to become the Black Mecca?:

An incredibly close-knit group of friends, neighbors, and business partners from the city’s posh Northside, the power structure shared a common history. “Almost all of us had been born and raised within a mile or two each other,” remembered Ivan Allen Jr., a member of the group who would succeed (William) Hartsfield as Atlanta’s mayor from 1962 to 1970. “We had gone to the same schools, to the same churches, tot he same golf courses, to the same summer camps. We had dated the same girls. We had played and worked within our group.” Member of the power structure not only shared a common past and present; they shared a common vision of the future. In Allen’s telling, they were “dedicated to the betterment of Atlanta as much as a Boy Scout troop is dedicated to fresh milk and clean air.”(p. 28, White Flight: Atlanta and the Making of Modern Conservatism, by Kevin M. Kruse)

The actions by the white elite (what can only be described as the white “Managerial Elite” of Black-Run America) from 1940 – 1970 resulted in the vacating of the city by middle class whites (who couldn’t insulate their families from Black crime and integrated schools as the Northside elite could with private schools) and, in turn, resulted in the nightmarish of 2012 metro Atlanta: an entire metro area witnessing property depreciation, increased crime, and staggering costs for commutes.

Interesting that despite government mandated policies of affirmative action, minority contracts, and hiring practices that have turned all public jobs (tax supported) in the metro Atlanta area into a Black vocational program, Black communities there are in complete disarray.

Those areas that stayed white (despite a hostile government, private sector hiring practices that favor non-whites, and an onus on entrepreneurship): thriving. Atlanta has been rebuilt up Georgia 400 to Roswell, Sandy Springs, Alpharetta and Forsyth County.

The tallest buildings in all of suburban America, the 30+ story King and Queen Towers – The Concourse at Landmark Center in Sandy Springs – recently went on the market and analysts predict the sale will rival what the tallest building in the southeast (which was foreclosed), the Bank of America Plaza, went for. The former complex is located Outside the Perimeter, in a city that is majority white; the latter located in downtown Atlanta.

Sandy Springs is one of these primarily white cities in North Fulton that could secede from the county tomorrow and instantly see property values rise dramatically.

More on this later this week.

Since 1973, untold financial investing in the Black Mecca (through primarily white tax-dollars and the appropriation of collected revenue toward minority contracts and the establishment of an entrenched Black monopoly on public jobs) has resulted in the creation of a Black elite in Atlanta, which should now represent a sunk cost. No matter how many private companies enact affirmative action policies in hiring, this too will represent a sunk cost over time.

Atlanta – The City too Busy to Hate – represents a microcosm of how one can look at the entire nation after Black-Run America (BRA) rose to power: The white managerial elite rushing to cede power to Blacks, who have and always will maintain a close racial cohesion. It has been the zeitgeist in America for some time to be seen as “progressive” when it comes to Black America.

The state of 2012 Atlanta and the metro Atlanta area is directly correlated to two things: 1. Blacks moving from around the nation to city to take advantage of affirmative action policies enacted in 1973 that have created the facade of a “Black Mecca” — only because of the misappropriation of tax-dollars by a racially cohesive drive to augment Blacks, and, 2. White people trying to avoid living anywhere near Black people. No matter the distance of the commute, having limited interaction with Black people is preferred.

One will never be able to quantify (nor qualify) what might have been for Atlanta – and metro Atlanta – were a race-based policy not enacted in 1973 and instead, a merit-based policy enshrined into law.

The white managerial elite of Atlanta sold the city to Organized Blackness; as a result, every one has suffered.

Such is the case for all of America.

To look back at what Mr. Boyer stated in his book, it should become clear: the day that white people decide to do any of things he listed as the Black response to “segregation” in Atlanta, is the day BRA ends.

Hilariously, it looks like it will be in the very Northside of Atlanta (North Fulton) that sees secession attempted and a new county created… Look to a forthcoming essay on Vdare to see what this means.

The seeds of BRAs destruction are in the soil of Atlanta.

Race Wars

Race Wars

http://cliffsofinsanity2010.blogspot.com/2012/04/race-wars.html

 

So….Zimmerman will be charged with second degree murder.

What’s next?

Remember this?

And this . . .



and this…



The same template is being played out.

  • Violence against a black person behaving badly
  • Media suppression of the full story and/or fabrication of facts (or tampering with the entire jury pool on a national level)
  • Race hustlers play on stereotypes to whip up hatred and anger
  • A certain demographic expects death for the accused threatening “no justice, no peace”
  • The jury cannot reach the “correct” verdict
  • Mass riots happen
  • The accused will be hauled into court again and again until the “correct” outcome is determined
  • It’s an election year

Oh wait, was that waaaaacist to actually say that if the verdict doesn’t go a certain way that there will be riots?  Well, when you’ve got a Community Organizer In Chief that springs to the defense of someone like Robert Gates, Jr.-saying that the police acted stupidly, yet sits on the New Black Panther Party voter intimidation in 2008 and is silent on the $10,000 dead or alive bounty placed on Zimmerman’s head, what do you expect?


You think Eric “My People”, “Nation of Cowards” Holder is going to get in the way of that train that his boss is driving?  Eric Holder is nothing more than a Whitney Houston bodyguard (link) to Obama-or a doctor for Michael Jackson if you like.

The job for most handlers is not to protect the celebrity from himself/herself.  The job is to protect the celebrity from reality around them.  Shield them from consequences of their own reckless and stupid actions as well as from any unwashed masses who might touch the hem of their garments.

You are about to witness Rules for Radicals, #13 (Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it) being applied with the full force and weight of Leviathan against one man.  From where he lives, to what he drives, to where he works, to if he is allowed work in certain places, to where he shops, to whether he has any money with which to shop, to where he keeps what little money he will have left, to his church, to his family, to his very soul. They will never forgive him for living and they won’t be satisfied until Zimmerman self-immolates like Thomas J. Ball

Remember me?

And don’t forget the most important point, it’s an election year.  Most candidates for office might consider running on their record, if they actually have one.  Obama’s record is dismal and the country is teetering.  What do they have left?  Just like the Gabrielle Giffords rally, fear and smear. 

But now it’s time to draw contrasts to 1992 template. After all, it is not 1992.

In 1992, the National Guard, the Army and the Marines were eventually sent into L.A. to calm the riots.

“Never let a crisis go to waste”, may also be correctly interpreted as, “Don’t solve the problem too soon.  Wait until it’s big enough to be worth solving.”  Proof? 

In 2010, Barack Obama did everything that he could to hinder the repair and cleanup of the Deepwater Horizons oil mess in the Gulf of Mexico.  That BP was able to finally resolve it at all was irrelevant to Obama.  You remember as well as I do how The Regime handled the symptoms, the problem, and the principals involved.

With that in mind, do you see Obama being the kind of guy who would send in the US Army or Marines to quell rioters in Sanford, Florida-or anywhere else?  Or would it be more in character for him to shackle any and all efforts by police or private citizens to defend themselves and/or restore order?  Would it be more in character to wage lawfare against any and all efforts that are moderately successful at defending persons, property, or restoring order?

Team Obama will do everything that they possibly can to incite, expand, and perpetuate the unrest wherever it begins in America.  And they will do everything they can think of to hinder an end to such unrest.

Oh…and then there’s this blurb,

“As (U.N.) High Commissioner for Human Rights, I call for an immediate investigation,”

It’s pretty rich of the U.N. to be concerned for human rights violations in America given the way that so many other countries treat their people. 

So if it goes to riots and streetfighting, if Obama directs his attention against those who wish to restore order-thus extending the crisis and worsening the damage, then it makes a nice scenario for the blue helmets to suggest that maybe they could “help out”.  Just saying. . .

Remember what Gandalf says, “They are coming.”

Updated:
Continuing to contrast 1992 with today, it’s also worth considering that “climate change” has occurred.  The cry wolf of “racism” and “racist” have been used so many times since 1992 that a good number of Americans simply shrug their shoulders at it and blow it off.  Who could blame them?

Consider this visit by Quannell X and the NBPP to the Houston area in 2007 and the results.

Presumably, X, broadcast his intentions beforehand and folks responded with a “peaceful” rally in support of then 61 year old Joe Horn.  I wonder how it would have gone for folks had the NBPP decided to try and carry out the threats they repeatedly make?

Consider the change in the tools and thoughts of Americans since 1992 or 2007.  Another set of Rodney King Riots may happen again, but the outcome could be very different.

 

 

“Obama’s Son” Nkosi Thadiwe Targeted Brittany Watts for Being White

“Obama’s Son” Nkosi Thadiwe Targeted Brittany Watts for Being White

http://stuffblackpeopledontlike.blogspot.com/

Obama’s Son: Nkosi Tadiwe. Targeted three white girls for being white, reports WSBTV

Brian Nichols wanted to start a race war, believing that Black males were being unfairly incarcerated by an evil society bent on maintaining white supremacy. In actuality, it’s just Black people’s – primarily Black males’ –predilection for breaking the law that sees them incarcerated in such disproportionate numbers.

It appears that the accused killer of Brittany Watts (who also targeted two other white females) had delusions of racial grandeur similar to those of Nichols (Court records show race may be motive in shooting rampage, WSBTV. April 9, 2012):

Channel 2 Action News has learned new information about a possible motive in a deadly midtown shooting from last summer.

Police said a woman was killed and two others injured when a security guard went on a shooting rampage in a parking lot. Channel 2′s Dave Huddleston obtained the 43-page lawsuit from the case that was filed in state court April 5. The documents show that race may have played a role in the shootings.

The sound of gunfire echoed off midtown buildings July 15. When it was over, marketing executive Brittany Watts had been shot in the neck and killed. Police said the shooter, security guard Nkosi Thadiwe, took off in Watts’ car and fired a gun, randomly shooting two more – Lauren Garcia, who was paralyzed, and Tiffany Ferenczy.

Nine months after the shooting, lawsuits have been filed against the defendant, the security company he worked for, Allied Barton, and the owners of the building where the shooting took place.

They said Thandiwe demonstrated an intensely negative attitude toward another race, which was unnamed. About a month prior to the shooting, Thandiwe had an altercation with a visitor with the parking garage.

Documents state he assailed a visiting courier with racial epithets and had to be physically restrained by company personnel from striking and causing harm to visitors.

Company officials, lawyers and shooting victims declined to comment on the matter.

But attorney Musa Ghanayem, who is unaffiliated with the case, gave his legal perspective.

“I saw where there were a couple of instances prior where they have red flags come up; that Mr. Thandiwe has some issues as a security guard,” Ghanayem said.

Thadiwe is still in Fulton County jail. His defense team has asked the court for a mental evaluation. According to documents found before the shooting, there was another act of violence, Huddleston reported.

Black Rage killed Brittany Watts. No one cares nor marches with “hoodies”
For those wondering, Thadiwe is a Black man. He looks like Obama’s hypothetical son. 

Watts is dead and no one cares (save Nick Stix). The story of the murder of Brittany Watts has been buried in the Black hole that is Atlanta in much the same manner as are the continuous assaults on white Georgia Tech students by Black people.
The story of Watts being gunned down hit me hard.

And now, the second battle of Atlanta begins. This time, we wage war with a pen.

Brian Nichols hoped to start a race war, yet this was not covered by the Mainstream Media (MSM). Thadiwe targeted three white girls in Midtown (Atlanta) because of their race, and the silence of that same MSM – even the Atlanta press – while outrageous is tragically expected.

The privilege of being white indeed.

Brittany Watts will never have the chance to enjoy being a wife; a mother; a grandmother. How many other voiceless, now lifeless, citizens of Atlanta are in the same position?

She could have been any white girl who grew up in the metro Atlanta area, safe in one of the Whitopia’s that surround the Black Mecca of America. Moving to Atlanta to start her career and family, her life was taken in a moment of racial hate that doesn’t fit the politically correct narrative for a “hate crime” in Black-Run America (BRA).

Why We Don’t Care

Why We Don’t Care

Obama and Trayvon Martin

The saying goes that generals fight the last war. Obama, and his allies, politically are stuck in the 1960s. Everything for them, is Bull Connor setting police dogs and hoses on peaceful Black civil rights marchers, live on the three networks! But like the Nazi army in late 1942, they seem headed for failure. Not because of the brilliance of their enemies, but because of the fatal but unseen flaws in their own organization.

For the German Army, it was the lack of any real ability to logistically support a mechanized army in the field for any considerable distance. THAT was the reason Adolf Hitler ultimately failed. He inherited a magnificent military machine, whose NCOs to General Staff were superb.

Obama has seemingly fixated on the sad case of a Mestizo man, born to a Peruvian mother, and adopted by a Jewish man in Florida, who shot a 17 year old Black boy in a town near Orlando Florida, in what police ruled self-defense. Latinos are on notice, when they get into conflicts with Blacks, they are “White” (which is to say, automatically guilty). The media is in a 24/7 Trayvon Martin frenzy, with old photos of Martin from age 12-13, not his more recent Facebook photos flashing gang signs, and old photos of George Zimmerman age 20, looking like a fat thug, not a leaner guy in a suit and tie. The media frenzy is to whip up Black violence, for its own sake, to intimidate and create fear among Whites, as emotional payback, and also to create an image of 1965 and Bull Connor. A failed attempt if ever there was one. President Barack Dinkins? Crown Heights?

Yes, that event is coming, somewhere, to a city near you.

Meanwhile, the Daily Mail is full of stories about brutal Black criminals. In the case of the prior link, one Tyrone Woodfork, brutally raping and beating to death 86 year old Nancy Strait, and critically injuring her 90 year old husband Bob, a veteran of the Battle of the Bulge as a member of the 101st Airborne. Then there is the case the Daily Mail also reported on, two British tourists murdered in Sarasota Florida by a Black thug named Shawn Tyson.

Floating around the internet is the 2009 case of the 15 year old White boy set on fire in Deerfield Beach Florida, and the 13 year old White boy set on fire in Kansas City several weeks ago. Both were set on fire by Black “youths” as the links make clear (photos at the link of the accused). The boy in Florida nearly died, has massive burns, and faces a life with heart and kidney problems, as well as being permanently disfigured.

There is the “I will Kill the F*** out of you” video at the Daily Mail link here.

What is notable in the video are two things, which every thoughtful observer will have flagged immediately. First, the Black students are smirking and laughing, because they agree and endorse the sentiments of the Black woman having a melt-down, threatening her White Professor and White fellow students. Secondly, the angry passivity of the White students who have FEAR. FEAR of being the one charged, if they talk back to “fighting words,” FEAR if they retaliate for being shoved. FEAR of the entire legal and social system coming down upon them if they do anything but stare off into space with stony silence.

Such social FEAR is only really sustainable when good times are rolling. If money, and the things it brings comes in, people will put up with it. If not, they won’t. FEAR eventually turns into even more FEAR. The White students are not convinced of the holy goodness of all Black people. Merely reacting in FEAR to a physical threat backed up by a social system that takes the side of the aggressor and punishes them. That is not a healthy way to build society.

Now, the Daily Mail is in the business of delivering viewers to advertisers. It is the #1 Newspaper site according to comScore, surpassing the New York Times. The online edition (there is a special US version) appeals to Blue collar White women, offering celebrity gossip that takes the celebs down a peg or two, all sorts of true crime stories, unlike the US media clearly identifying Black suspects, and lifestyle stuff. Drudge Report does much the same, often linking to Daily Mail Online. Blue collar White women like the straight scoop on crime. After all, unlike their White collar sisters, they can’t escape it. They don’t live in gated communities, or security buildings. The Mail has plenty of White criminals featured (because their readers like reading about it), but does not shy away from portraying the reality of crime (mostly Black criminals in the US). As depressing as that may be for those searching for the Bonfire of the Vanities “Great White Defendant” or Law and Order re-runs.

White people are stuck. They cannot unlike say, those living in Detroit in the 1960′s, simply move. The housing market is down, people are underwater or nearly so in their mortgages, lenders are giving mortgages to only the best credit holders, and income and wages are down as prices go up. White flight is simply not possible in today’s economic environment.

Meanwhile, the White guilt such as it is, no longer exists. Bull Connor was nearly 50 years ago. Nobody cares anymore. The Civil Rights era is as distant to us as the end of WWI (47 years) was to the Civil Rights Era. No one in 1967 was really concerned with the fallout of the end of the Great War. No one today really cares, about the Edmund Pettis Bridge either. Too many OTHER things have happened since. The media blitzkrieg to replay the 1960′s civil rights movement is as doomed as the German occupation of Stalingrad or Rommel in North Africa in 1943.

Moreover, White people are reminded every day, that they will soon be (discriminated against) minorities in their own country. That’s entirely different from the carefully orchestrated story of peaceful, respectable Civil Rights marchers being beaten by Bull Connor. A population soon to be a minority, and one that will be second or third class at best, does not have a lot of give when it comes to attempts to bully and threaten.

But the most important difference between today and 1965, is the knowledge, the more powerful because it is seen only on the Daily Mail, and the internet (often in raw video from World Star Hip Hop), that Black on White violence is extensive and threatening. THAT is the problem Obama and company face in their own Stalingrad.

Martin Luther King Jr. did not merely choose non-violence because he was filled with moral goodness as a cardboard Jesus. To suggest that takes away from the man’s political genius and legacy as a political figure with no equal in the modern era. Rather, King knew that Whites would hunker down and fight, as they had when a decent, and good man, Homer Plessy challenged Segregation in the Supreme Court three generations prior, and lost. King leveraged the divisions between wealthy and middle class Northerners and Westerners, who lived nowhere near Blacks, and those of the “wrong sort of White people” among blue collar Catholic ethnics (Irish, Italians, Germans, Poles, and Hungarians mainly) and Protestant Hillbillies who did live near them. King understood the Northern, elite Whites, having rubbed shoulders with them at Boston University. Non-violence was a political ploy, as a minority population sought acceptance through adherence to non-threatening behavior. No matter how gratifying intimidation and thuggery might be on an emotional level. Had King embraced violence and intimidation, as Malcolm X argued for, even the Northern and Western Whites who loathed the “wrong sort” of White people — ethnic Catholics (think Rick Santorum and how the elite react to HIM) and “hillbillies” (think the disdain for Miley Cyrus and Britney Spears) — would have opposed Civil Rights.

King used non-violence as political judo. It does not always work. But in that case, it did. Fighting a majority population with violence rarely works out well. Ask the Tamil Tigers, they fought harder and more ruthlessly than any. They still lost.

In King’s time, rising income, a robust property market, and a need to socially distinguish one’s self from “the wrong sort of White person” led to inexorably, a larger elite system with many, many hangers-on and those aspiring to that status. King’s political Judo worked, not the least of which was the social class of “Semi-New Englanders” or Post-Puritans or Semi-Scandinavians (the Puritans nearly all came from the Danelaw, as David Hackett Fischer’s “Albion’s Seed” makes clear, and carried with them very Nordic cultural assumptions about well, everything) grew substantially. While those on the receiving end of Black violence shrunk. It was just so easy to sell out, leave historic neighborhoods, and move to the safe, NEW suburbs.

White Flight was the key component of the Civil Rights movement, as much as non-violence. White Flight not only helped create new “semi-elites” who felt “the wrong sort of White person” was the only one concerned about Black violence, it created therein a “virtuous circle” wherein more and more Whites moved to the suburbs. All predicated on cheap gas, easy credit, and booming markets in property.

However, King did not properly explain this political reality to Black leaders and more importantly, the people themselves. The ethnic cleansing of Detroit, 29% Black in 1960, 45% Black in 1970, 89% Black today, may have been satisfying and gained political control of the city, but produced no measurable increase in wealth among Blacks other than a few leaders, and permanent dependency upon the larger White population of the State and the US at large.

Black people are indeed angry. Angry that they have not attained financial success as they have embraced thuggery and ethnic cleansing of Whites out of their historic cities (Baltimore, Detroit, Philadelphia, Gary Indiana, to name a few). Not understanding that is one thing to chase people away with violence, another to create wealth. Like the Visigoths and Vandals before them, futilely trying to emulate the Rome they destroyed, Black populations in cities they control are angry that Black control has not meant Black wealth. Other than what can be extorted in the Chicago model, from surrounding White areas.

The anger is however, counter-productive. The images on TV and newspapers of angry, threatening Black crowds angry and “out for justice” (implication violence), with Louis Farrakhan offering a bounty, and Jessie Jackson saying “Blacks are under attack” (they are, from other Blacks) It certainly is emotionally satisfying, to threaten and intimidate. That is why people do it, making people afraid of you creates the feeling of power.

Certainly, when Delrick Miller IV was shot in his home, at age 9 months, in Detroit, by AK-47 wielding attackers, no one cared. There was a fight, among the all-Black attendees at a baby shower. Two women felt offended they could not get seats:

”A woman got mad because she couldn’t find a seat, so she started knocking tables down, and it escalated from there,” Wilkins said. “My daughter and her friends left the club, but (a group of men and women) followed them to a gas station, and there was a fight with one of the guys who was at the shower with my daughter. Then, they followed them to the house.

“I think they came back the next day and shot up the house,” said Wilkins, who sobbed as she recounted the events. “They went to the shower to celebrate life; instead, a life was destroyed.”

Who kills a 9 month baby over a fight about seats at a baby shower? Who fights over seats at a baby shower anyway?

Where was Louis Farrakhan then? Or Jessie Jackson? Or Al Sharpton? No one cared. Because it was business as usual. The price of intimidating and scaring Whites, is Black on Black violence. So far, the Black community has not only tolerated it, but protected it. Since any reasonable measure to stop it: stop and frisk of Black men, imprisoning gang members, is resisted tooth and nail by Black leaders and Black voters. Obama did not comment on the murder of Delric Miller IV. Al Sharpton did not fly to Detroit to threaten the killers. Louis Farrakhan did not put out a bounty on the killers. The most innocent of all — a nine month old baby! And the reaction was … nothing.

No one among Al Sharpton, Louis Farrakhan, Jessie Jackson, and yes Barack Obama and the media really cares about Trayvon Martin. Any more than they cared about Delrick Miller IV. They just want to flex their political muscle and intimidate (mostly White) people as a reflexive response. It is so ingrained it is instinctual. The aim is to over-turn gun laws, and “stand your ground” so that there is no possibility of defense, as Whites are stuck in place, against young thuggish Black men. That is the whole purpose of the exercise, in the short term. Just as Hitler ordered Von Rundstedt to stand his ground in Stalingrad, eager to hold and destroy the city named for the man he hated the most. [Who in fact resembled him in a number of ways, and before Operation Barbarossa counted Hitler as a friend. Oddly enough.]

Long term, Obama and company want riots and violence and cities burning. This he thinks will win him votes, as this has been successful in Chicago for decades. Pay to make the mob go away. Again, with Whites in place, stuck, that just guarantees a fight. Probably as an ultimate back-up plan, Obama wants violence so he can if he loses the election, institute Martial Law and rule by decree. His recent executive order allowing him to seize basically anything including newspapers, radio, TV, and the internet is part of that ultimate back-up plan.

Unlike Bill Clinton, who stole everything that was not nailed down (particularly the corrupt deal with Haiti Teleco involving Joseph Kennedy and Bill Clinton), Obama did not steal wisely. Clinton made sure to involve not just Republicans, but Republican interest groups in corrupt deals. That’s why Bill Clinton did not spend a day in jail, and only lost his law license, not the Presidency. Unlike Bill Clinton, Obama has not kept the good times rolling either, for many in the elites and the people as a whole. As far as corrupt Presidency models go, the Arkansas version was better than the Chicago one.

Obama has made too many enemies: on Wall Street, among energy companies, among utilities, among Silicon Valley, among home builders, among mining companies, among almost everyone but a few favored cronies. That’s the downside of the Chicago Way, you make powerful enemies who know they must destroy you or be destroyed in turn. There is no easy good-time corruption ala the Arkansas model, where everyone is happy.

Ultimately, however, the idea that “evil White racists” are killing Black people is unsustainable even for the Blitzkrieg media. It just isn’t true, and people know it. David Duke lives in a trailer in Mississippi. Louis Farrakhan has a mansion bigger than Oprah’s, and with more goons too. All those threats turn off the Middle Class, White female voters who are the swing and thus the decisive votes in the 2012 elections. It is satisfying, and the default mode for Black politicians and people, to make threats and noise at the White population. For decades it has been rewarded. Going national makes pretty much every White homeowner, renter, and everyone else stuck in place, unable to flee, ready to fight.

Indeed, rising gas prices threaten the fundamental basis for American social peace: Blacks would have a free hand in self-ruled cities that they ethnically cleansed (White flight was flight because Whites FEARED Blacks not because they hated them). Meanwhile Whites would live as far away as possible from them, while refraining from mentioning Black dysfunction and economic failure and dependency (upon White wealth transfers). Being unwilling to rock the boat of rising income, later rising credit replacing income, and cheap electronic toys. Whites do not HATE Blacks, they’d hardly have endorsed decades of fictional Black Presidents on TV and in movies, made a billionaire of Oprah, every White woman’s imaginary Black Best Friend(tm Whiskey), or consumed Rap and the NBA, NFL, obsessively. Again that is why David Duke lives in a trailer in Mississippi. There is no money in White hate for Blacks. There certainly is for Black hate for Whites: look at Sharpton’s mansion, or Louis Farrakhan’s which is bigger than Oprah’s with more goons.

This is why Trayvon Martin is Obama’s Stalingrad. He’s fighting the last war, with the tools used two and a half generations ago. White people are not consumed with hatred for Black people. Rather, they FEAR them. Almost no one speaks this openly, but the taboo can be broken,and fairly rapidly. The internet, as an entry into the nation’s id, is a scary place. It is quite likely Obama will get his own Crown Heights, as Mayor Dinkins did in New York City. The result was not a coronation of his reign, but un-interrupted Republican (and semi-Republican in the case of Nanny Bloomberg) rule ever since. Even Upper East Siders finding the Black Panthers scary-fun thrills, don’t like property values crashing due to race-riots.

Ultimately Hitler failed because he failed to understand one simple truth. His magnificent military machine could not supply food, fuel, ammunition, and clothing to his men more than a few hundred miles before the supply line collapsed. When German forces got to Greece, they descended like starving locusts, because they were in fact, starving. The German army was not capable of even providing them with food!

Obama and his media allies, Al Sharpton and Louis Farrakhan and the like, enter this Trayvon Martin conflict, hampered by the lack of understanding that they cannot control the alternative media, that Whites are not bigoted but fearful (rationally so) of Black crime, and that White flight is simply impossible in today’s economy.

After all, what did Tyrone Woodfork get for raping and beating to death an elderly White woman, and (all likelihood given his age) killing her husband? A beat-up old car, 12 years old, and a few things ransacked from the house. The killer of the two British tourists got nothing — he killed them because they had no money to rob. That sort of crime is not only stupid, it is senseless. The killers were soon caught. Cold comfort to survivors and the victims.

Whitey Bulger may have been responsible, over his criminal career, for more than fifty deaths. But those sorts of White criminals, by and large don’t commit random crimes informed more by racial hatred, or sheer stupidity, than anything else. Nothing like the murder of the Straits, or Delric Miller IV, can be laid to his doorstep. No money in it, and the risk too high. He quite likely is a monster, but one society can survive, because that kind of monster does not kill 9 month old babies sleeping in their homes because there were not enough seats at a baby shower. Nor do they kill robbery victims because they had no cash. Nor set teen boys on fire for sheer racial hatred. Nor rape, rob, and murder elderly couples for a few bucks and an old car.

White swing voters cannot be made to care about Trayvon Martin, because they are scared, for the most part, even if they won’t admit it in public. Too much push and they’ll start admitting it. Too much reflexive intimidation, in the Chicago Way, and they’ll push back. Obama might plan a Self-Coup, but he’ll find if he goes that route, he’s no Fujimori.

The Asymmetry of America

The Asymmetry of America

John Derbyshire and the unNational nonReview

During Easter Christians like to remember the crucifixion of an innocent man for his words, so it was entirely appropriate that John Derbyshire was sacked at this time from the National Review for innocently writing an article for another magazine that intruded on America’s central taboo of race. But there was more to it than that. This case also helped to reveal some of the “uncomfortable truths” (notice how these two words increasingly go together) about America and the decline of the national discourse once represented by the likes of the National Review.

This wasn’t the first time Derbyshire had expressed “politically incorrect” views on race. In the past he has even admitted to being a “tolerant racist,” so one has to wonder about the timing of his dismissal. Perhaps it was because his latest article came too close to the canonization of America’s latest saint, Saint Trayvon of Sanford, the patron saint of Skittles, or perhaps it was the fact that Derbyshire’s face was an increasingly bad fit among the growing ranks of wet-behind-the-ears, multicultural, Israel-loving Neo-Cons who have now ‘occupied’ the National Review.

Probably it also had something to do with the fact that paying readers are no longer as important in terms of generating income as they once were, as Derbyshire seems to have been one of NR’s most popular writers. Magazines now increasingly rely on advertising income and online operations, which means that the puritanical PR demands of companies not to be associated with anything “offensive” become disproportionately important. This represents something of a challenge, because, in order to remain interesting, magazines have to skate pretty close to the thin ice of offensiveness to keep up interest. For several years, Derbyshire’s writing seemed to be a good fit for NR, being interesting without being needlessly offensive.

Whatever reasons lie behind his sacking, the event itself was notable for a several reasons. First, there was the concerted “shitstorm.” This started with reliably leftist heavyweight publications, like The Atlantic and The Guardian in the UK, flagging up the article in the lowly Taki’s e-zine. This was then followed by a massive surge of anti-Derbyshire comments at Taki’s and elsewhere denouncing Derbyshire’s “racism” from people who had obviously never visited the site before and seemed to be using cut-and-paste garbage from some liberal/ leftist trollbook.

Given the time in the canonical calendar, this was all a bit reminiscent of the mob baying for Jesus’s blood. Next, Judas-like, National Review colleagues started leaving little messages on the internet, distancing themselves from Derbyshire, one-by-one, followed up by a coup-de-grace at the hands of Caiaphas himself, Richard Lowry the National Review’s editor.

When the magazine was set up in the 1950s, the case could still be made that America was a nation, and that because it was a reasonably coherent entity, there was some sense in establishing a Conservative political magazine that sought to review it as a whole; hence the magazine’s dull but descriptive name. Reviewing, by the way, means to look at, examine, and analyze something so as to offer opinion, insight, and enlightenment. Something to bear in mind in the present age.

Over several decades, however, the nation that the magazine was set up to review changed so spectacularly that there is no longer any certainty that it is an actual nation with a unified culture and identity. The most obvious of the many divisions that have arisen is that Blacks are no longer held to the same standards as the rest of the country, with the result that a great many of them have simply given up trying to live in a way compatible with Whites. While some see this as a disaster for the “Black family,” it can also be seen as the rejection of what are essentially Northern European modes of behaviour, and the reassertion of the tribal and extended family patterns inherent in African populations.

The changes that America has undergone are not only significant in themselves, they also have severe journalistic repercussions. These have beeb clearly revealed in the Derbyshire case. While the old National Review could critique the nation as a whole and examine the most important issues, including race, with a degree of frankness and honesty, the present day mainstream media do so at their peril.

With the recent sacking of Pat Buchanan from MSNBC and now Derbyshire many will say we are moving into a zone of growing intolerance and political correctness. This is partially true, but the real reason is that the changing nature of America means it can no longer bear the strain of being honestly debated by its own mainstream media. To do this honestly and frankly, as Buchanan and Derbyshire did, emphasizes the fault lines and threatens to rip them apart.

This creates a major difficulty because you can’t understand America or any of its aspects without bringing a frank discussion of race into the picture. For example, in the case of education, how do you deal with the problem of a failing public school system without looking at the real problem, the inherently lower IQs of a significant part of the population? To understand an entity like America without addressing the issue of race is simply unthinkable, but to bring race into it also unleashes the kind of emotions that makes a sensible debate practically impossible. Catch 22!

But America is not the only multicultural or multiracial society. There are scores throughout the world, and the truth is that most of them handle race a lot better than America does. For example, Switzerland with four separate languages is clearly a multicultural country, but there the different cultural groups can deal with their differences and common interests without claiming that Romansch, German, French, or Italian are “social constructs” or resorting to stupid platitudes about the content of each man’s character.

Malaysia is a multiracial society with quite different racial groups, each with its own interests, but through an honest racial dialogue they have managed to create a society where the cleverness of the Chinese can be partially balanced by affirmative action that benefits the indigenous Malays and allows the two groups to create a reasonably effective symbiosis.

An examination of Spain, Lebanon, India, Russia, and Egypt will reveal countries that admit and deal with significant cultural and racial differences. It’s not always pretty and there are often problems, but in none of these countries is race consigned to the realm of taboos as it is in America.

Compared to these states, America has a special problem. These other countries are largely the result of “organic” historical processes that pushed their different populations together. America, by contrast, is much more the product of far-ranging economic processes, like Trans-Atlantic emigration from Europe and the African slave trade overlaid with modern mass immigration. Because of this different racial elements have been thrown together, and are much more disparate in character. This creates much greater ‘asymmetry’ in the differing racial characteristics, especially between Blacks and Whites.

In Switzerland the German Swiss and French Swiss are different but there is a rough equivalence that allows them to work together with mutual respect, deal with differences, and strike deals that are mutually acceptable. The same can be said for Castilians, Catalans, and Basques in Spain, and Hundus, Sikhs, Muslims, Gujaratis, and Bengalis in India. These groups are all different, but the differences are not so great or one-sided as to render them completely asymmetrical. Where goodwill exists, the different groups can represent their racial and cultural interests and address problems in a quid pro quo manner without denying race as the American establishment does.

Between Blacks and Whites in the USA, this is simply impossible, because whenever racial issues are addressed the enormous “racial asymmetry” instantly becomes an issue. But what does this “racial asymmetry” consist of? In concrete terms it refers to the entirely lopsided relationship between two races. In the case of Blacks and Whites in America it includes the fact that Blacks on the negative side of so many indices compared to Whites. They are much poorer, more criminal, imprisoned in much greater numbers, less educated, depend much more on welfare, have much less conventional family stability, and report much lower IQ rates than Whites. By all the standards that matter in a modern society, Blacks trail disastrously behind Whites. It is this asymmetry that makes an honest discussion about race an impossibility in modern America.

Instead we get a dishonest discussion about race: Back in the 1950s and 60s, round about the time the National Review was getting on its feet, nice, kind White liberals popularized an explanation for all the above phenomena that tied them all together in a series of causes and effects in a manner that was not overly insulting and offensive to Black people. Basically it said that Blacks were suffering from slavery and racism and that once racism was removed they would soon catch up with Whites.

Interestingly, this face-saving explanation of racial asymmetry, which I will call the “Face-Saving Racial Myth,” has now become the dominant racial narrative across the entire mainsteam media and most of the political spectrum, not because it is true. Indeed, everybody secretly knows it is untrue in the same way that everybody secretly gives their kids exactly the same kind of advice that John Derbyshire said he gave his. No, this Fairy Godmother explanation of racial asymmetry is favoured simply for reasons of short-term political and economic expediency because America is a political entity and collection of economic entities that all run on short-term political and economic expediency.

The basic racial asymmetry between Blacks and Whites means that the “Face-Saving Racial Myth” must never be challenged, for when it is the already tattered national fabric starts ripping apart. Wherever you have a marked racial asymmetry, honest discussion of it will do two things. First it will be immensely offensive to the disadvantaged race and those who claim to speak for them. This doesn’t mean that they are right, but they can’t help feeling the way they do. They will be well and truly pissed. This is not an argument to placate them. It is just a statement of fact.

The second thing that will happen is that White people, who have nothing but goodwill for Blacks, will notice that the longer they honestly and frankly discuss race the more they will end up sounding exactly like “White supremacists” and so-called hard-line “racists.” This is not because they have “inherent racism” as leftists like to imagine, it is simply because the facts of the debate will push them in that direction.

Derbyshire’s article is a perfect example of both of these effects. Far from being hateful or racist, the tone of the article was one of stoical regret that things had to be the way they are, but that, because of undeniable facts, certain precautions were advisable to safeguard one’s children. Writing with his usual honesty and thoroughness, it wasn’t long before he was unwittingly saying things that couldn’t help but be offensive to Blacks, while nevertheless being completely true.

The direction that the debate goes was revealed on the on-line comment boards at Taki’s and several other publications that got involved in the fight. Where these weren’t censored, the debates all served to highlight the great racial asymmetry between Blacks and Whites. After Black crimes rates were mentioned, the debate tended to move on to why Blacks commit so much more crime than Whites, leading to issues of poverty, low IQs, and the failure of Blacks to progress since “racism” ended. This then led to the corruption, chaos, and devastation of Black-run areas, with countless examples, usually mentioning Detroit and occasionally Haiti, as well as African countries.

Against a plethora of hard facts and hard experience all that the defenders of Blacks have is the “Face-Saving Racial Myth,” creaking, ragged, and ridiculous from constant overuse since the early 1960s, and a flood of Nazi, klan, and hillbilly jibes to cover up the vacuum where there arguments and evidence should be.

In short, the more that race is honestly discussed the more insulting it inevitably becomes for Blacks, and the more Whites will find themselves slipping unwittingly into “supremacist” language and attitudes, simply because of the underlying racial asymmetry. As for discussing, in a mutually polite and respectful way, topics like the 20-point IQ gap, Black-on-White crime (with stats and examples), and racial profiling. Forget it!

Personally I have no wish to bang on about White “supremacy,” and I’m sure that John Derbyshire didn’t either, but when you have a frank, open, and honest discussion about race in America this is one of the inevitable by-products, and this is exactly why the National Review has stopped reviewing the nation, and fired the last writer on its books capable of living up to the magazine’s title.

 

 

 

The Kerner Report as Blueprint for Black-Run America (BRA)

http://stuffblackpeopledontlike.blogspot.com/search?updated-max=2012-03-26T18:58:00-07:00&max-results=7

It’s time to reject the Kerner Report
The days of democracy in the Black metropolis of Detroit are dwindling, denoting a truth that pierces the heart of the esteemed Walter Williams theory that liberalism is at fault for the failure of Black people. Portland, Austin (Texas), Boulder (Colorado), Silicon Valley (California), Seattle, and Burlington (Vermont) all thrive while they have the same progressive liberalism that Williams believes is the root cause for the collapse of Black-run cities like Philadelphia, Cleveland, and Detroit.
But these Stuff White People Like (SWPL) run cities aren’t mismanaging hundreds of millions of dollars in state grants over a 20-year period; they aren’t having their credit rating downgraded by Fitch Ratings and Moody’s Investor Services; no, they are some of the nicest places in America to live, in spite of the overwhelming whiteness and liberalism found in these cities.
In Detroit, the most homogenous big city in America (89 percent Black – at it’s height in 1950, it was 80 percent white), the state of Michigan is on the verge of repossessing the city:

A state-appointed review team unanimously agreed Wednesday that a “severe financial emergency” exists in Detroit and that some form of a consent agreement is necessary, but did not recommend a specific plan.
 The Rev. David Murray, a former Detroit school board member, said he feels sorry for the state panel because they are being used. 

“It’s a racist attack. I don’t care what color face they put in front of us,” the Rev. Murray said. “We don’t want a review team (or) a financial manager. We want our money. I’m asking if you will stand up against this tyranny and resign.”

What money? Detroit lost all of its wealth-producing tax-base after the 1967 Rebellion, when 10 percent of Detroit’s 500,000 Black population joined in the five-day riot that cost the lives of more than two score people, convincing the white citizens that it was time to evacuate the city.
Since, Detroit has limped along via generous federal grants to sustain a city where the sons and daughters of those who comprise the majority of the police, fire fighters, civil servants, city employees, and government officials produce the lowest standardized test scores in all of the nation.
This is what happens when you have an entire city whose political power is entirely in the hands of Black people, with massive affirmative action policies in place since the early 1960s replacing actual merit-based hiring.
One need only look at the student’s performance in Detroit Public Schools (DPS) to get a glimpse of the intelligence of those actually running the city’s government and in charge of sustaining the economy.
But why was all of this allowed? Why is all of this tolerated? The Detroit Riot of 1967 (described proudly as an “insurrection” or “rebellion” by the Black residents against the occupying white political establishment, though Black people were the ones who colonized the city via wave after wave of The Great Migration and eventually forced whites out because of high levels of crime) was one of hundreds of Black uprisings in the 1960s, largely due to the perceived police brutality the Black communities in cities with nearly all-white police forces faced.
The reason for this extra-scrutiny: Black people were the ones, just as now, committing the vast number of the crimes:

Throughout December 1960 and January 1961 both the Detroit Free Press and The Detroit News focused heavily on “black crime.” The News reported, for example, that although “blacks con- stituted 26 percent of the city’s population, they were responsible for almost 65 percent of serious crime.” The paper also blamed African American leaders and their communities for not doing enough to stop crime.

When white cops (95 percent of cops in Detroit were white in 1967) raided a speakeasy in late July 1967, Black people in Detroit protested the incursion of law into a lawless part of their neighborhood.
“This is a racial incident… it represents one simple thing: black people want control of black communities,” the Rev. Albert Cleage, a Detroit religious leader proclaimed.
Well, Rev. Cleage got his wish; white people ceded power to Black Detroiters by voting with their feet. Now, the state of Michigan wants Detroit back because Black people defaulted on Martin Luther King’s dream. They have been judged by their collective inability to display quality fiduciary character (the average credit score in Detroit is 619) in administering the budget and maintain the infrastructure of the first major American Black metropolis – thankfully built by white people who only needed a riot and continued high rates of Black criminality to convince them all to leave.
But what keeps people from admitting the true reason for the failure of Detroit, and instead has them blame “liberalism” when this same ideology is practiced and espoused by the primarily white citizens of Boulder, Colorado as they walk down the pristine avenue of Pearl Street?
Why does Walter Williams continue to blame “Liberalism” for the failure of Detroit, when other cities flourish under the same political mindset?
To state otherwise, that the Black citizens of Detroit are responsible for the fate of the city, would invalidate the official mission of the United States of the America since the smoke was still clearing in The Motor City in 1967.
Lyndon B. Johnson, having already spent billions to improve the lives of Black people in major cities throughout the nation, commissioned a report on the root cause of the Black riots that swept America in the 1960s.
The Kerner Report.
To understand why we live in what we have dubbed Black-Run America (BRA), the starting point for researching why Black people’s failures (especially why the complete collapse of Black-run Detroit) must never be blamed – and their choices, actions, decision, and thinking – on them can be traced to this one document.
What does the Kerner Report actually state?:

“This is our basic conclusion: Our nation is moving toward two societies, one black, one white – separate and unequal. Reaction to last summer’s disorders has quickened the movement and deepened the division. Discrimination and segregation have long permeated much of American life; they now threaten the future of every American.”

The future for every American is jeopardized because of the existence of what we call BRA; to continue to live under the delusion that Black people aren’t responsible for their actions threatens the future competitive nature of the United States, because of the misallocation of trillions of tax-dollars to fight so-called “white racism” as the fundamental cause of Black failure. This is what the Kerner Report blamed Black failure upon:

Despite the complexities, certain fundamental matters are clear. Of these, the most fundamental is the racial attitude and behavior of white Americans towards black Americans. Race prejudice has shaped our history decisively; it now threatens to affect our future.
 White racism is essentially responsible for the explosive mixture which has been accumulating in our cities since the end of World War II. Among the ingredients of this mixture are:  1.  Pervasive discrimination and segregation in employment, education, and housing, which has resulted in the continuing exclusion of great numbers of Negroes from the benefits of economic progress.
2.  Black in-migration and white exodus, which have produced the massive and growing concentrations of impoverished Negroes in our major cities, creating a growing crisis of deteriorating facilities and services and unmet human needs.
3.  The black ghettos where segregation and poverty converge on the young to destroy opportunity and enforce failure. Crime, drug addiction, dependency on welfare, and bitterness and resentment against society in general and white society in particular are the result.

 The document offers the blueprint for which our entire society has been based upon, going so far as to blame undesirable nature of the jobs available to Black people as the cause of poverty (instead of their intellectual ability, when the current vocations with the highest rate of Black employment 43 years after affirmative action went into overdrive to promote Black people above their station include barber, postal worker, taxi driver, and bellhop); blaming slavery and long periods of unemployment for the “Negro” family structure to be more matriarchal; and the criminality found in Black areas completely on poverty.
How many more cities must we lose?
From the ashes of American cities, the fires started by Black people upset that white police dared focus extra-attention on their communities because of higher rates of crime found within, spawned this report which findings still permeate throughout every level and operation of both the public and private sector life.
In 1988, The New York Times published an expose on how progress had been made to curb that white racism which was to blame for Black kids throwing bricks through windows and looting businesses all across the nation (burning them to the ground after absconding with stolen goods):

The National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, headed by Gov. Otto Kerner of Illinois, blamed ”white racism” for the ”continued polarization” of American society, and argued that only a ”compassionate, massive, and sustained” Government effort could reverse the overall trend. 

Cleveland and other American cities show the mixed record that has been compiled over the two decades. The worst-case prognosis of the Kerner report – the division of American into separate but unequal societies – has not come about, but the general direction predicted by the report and the stubborn persistence of the race problem in America have endured.
 Black progress is a difficult thing to measure, particularly in the current paradoxical situation, where some succeed as entire communities descend deeper into failure. But among the ingredients of change most often noted by scholars is the extraordinary increase of black political power, in Congress and other parts of the Federal Government and especially in the major cities.About 300 cities, including many of the nation’s biggest, have black mayors. The Rev. Jesse Jackson is a serious Presidential candidate. Mayor Andrew Young of Atlanta was the United States representative to the United Nations under President Carter. Representative William H. Gray 3d, a Pennsylvania Democrat, is chairman of the important Budget Committee.

Those big cities that Black people became mayor of have all largely collapsed (outside of Denver).
The New York Times would publish another article that relied heavily on the finding of the fabled Kerner Report to explain the Los Angeles Riots of 1992:

One of the report’s most famous and controversial findings was its conclusion that: “White racism is essentially responsible for the explosive mixture which has been accumulating in our cities since the end of World War II.” 

To some critics, the emphasis on racism, in both the report and the national civil rights debate, has obscured the degree to which the answers to the problems of the ghettos must come from within. 

“The assumption was that white America was the problem and therefore white America was the solution,” said Robert Woodson, a black who heads the National Center for Neighborhood Enterprise in Washington, which calls for conservative, self-help solutions to inner-city problems. “It set up the proposition that the destiny of black America rested with what white America did.” 

Representative Gary Franks of Connecticut, the only black Republican in Congress, said welfare dependency, crime and drugs are far more of a threat to the urban poor than white racism.

The destiny of America rests in the hands of the continued application of the findings of the Kerner Report or the outright rejection of them. It is Black individuals choice to take drugs, became a welfare dependent, or commit a crime; not the looming specter of white racism or slavery.
Black people were victorious in the 1967 Battle of Detroit, with white people fleeing the ashes of their city and awarding the Black rebels (colonizers would be the apt word) with the keys to “The Paris of the West” their parents and grandparents helped build.
It is in the decaying remnants of that city, one whose infrastructure that Black people were incapable of sustaining – even after they achieved total political power – that we see the fallacious nature of the Kerner Report findings.

But political power didn’t translate into economic success. 
Brick by brick that falls to the ground in neglect while Black people complain of persistent racism for the failure of Detroit under their control is demonstrative that the Kerner Report got it wrong.
Completely wrong.
America has been held hostage by Disingenuous White Liberals and Black Rage (think Organized Blackness) for too long. To abandon the official position of the American government as delineated in The Kerner Report, which ascribes all Black failure to the legacy of white racism and slavery, would represent a complete capitulation to the reality that the past 44 years of attempted social programming to the deny that nature does trump nurture would represent an event on par with the collapse of the Soviet Union or the Cultural Revolution in China.
The dogma of equality dies with the fall of Black-run Detroit.

The Kerner Report acted as a shield to hide the truth that nature consistently throws back in our face with each report of racial disparities in any measurable test (save the 40-yard-dash for NFL skilled position players).
Had Detroit flourished in the absence of white people and under the august and benevolent rule of Black people, we’d have to conclude the Kerner Report was correct. Blaming barriers to education, housing, and employment all died when the city became more than 80 percent Black in the 1980s.
Black people should have flourished economically without the impediment of white racism keeping them from reaching their potential; the only thing that flourished in Detroit post-1967 Rebellion was Black crime.
But the city did not.
Democracy dies in Detroit, with the impending appointment by the state of Michigan of an emergency manager to preside of the budget of “The Mogadishu of the West.”
Not only Democracy dies, but the Kerner Report has been invalidated.

The legitimacy of BRA has always been through the voluntary belief that eventually Black people would succeed; for BRA to continue, millions of people will have to be involuntary forced to believe this now.

Trayvon And Zimmerman—It’s All About Race Now

 If it had been a white teenager who was shot, and a 28-year-old black guy who shot him, the black guy would have been arrested.

So assert those demanding the arrest of George Zimmerman, who shot and killed Trayvon Martin.

And they may be right.

Yet if Trayvon had been shot dead by a black neighborhood watch volunteer, Jesse Jackson would not have been in a pulpit in Sanford, Fla., howling that he had been “murdered and martyred.”

Maxine Waters would not be screaming “hate crime.”

Rep. Hank Johnson would not be raging that Trayvon had been “executed.” And ex-Black Panther Bobby Rush would not have been wearing a hoodie in the well of the House.

Which tells you what this whipped-up hysteria is all about.

It is not about finding the truth about what happened that night in Sanford when Zimmerman followed Trayvon in his SUV, and the two wound up in a fight, with Trayvon dead.

It is about the exacerbation of and the exploitation of racial conflict.

And it is about an irreconcilable conflict of visions about what the real America is in the year 2012.

Zimmerman “profiled” Trayvon, we are told. And perhaps he did.

But why? What did George Zimmerman, self-styled protector of his gated community, see that night from the wheel of his SUV?

He saw a male. And males are 90 percent of prison inmates. He saw a stranger over 6 feet tall. And he saw a black man or youth with a hood over his head.

Why would this raise Zimmerman’s antennae?

Perhaps because black males between 16 and 36, though only 2 to 3 percent of the population, are responsible for a third of all our crimes.

In some cities, 40 percent of all black males are in jail or prison, on probation or parole, or have criminal records. This is not a product of white racism but of prosecutions and convictions of criminal acts.

Had Zimmerman seen a black woman or older man in his neighborhood, he likely would never have tensed up or called in.

For all the abuse he has received, Geraldo Rivera had a point.

Whenever cable TV runs hidden-camera footage of a liquor or convenience store being held up and someone behind the counter being shot, the perp is often a black male wearing a hoodie.

Listening to the heated rhetoric coming from demonstrations around the country, from the Black Caucus and TV talkers—about how America is a terrifying place for young black males to grow up in because of the constant danger from white vigilantes—one wonders what country of the mind these people are living in.

The real America is a country where the black crime rate is seven times as high as the white rate. It is a country where white criminals choose black victims in 3 percent of their crimes, but black criminals choose white victims in 45 percent of their crimes.

Black journalists point to the racism manifest even in progressive cities, where cabs deliberately pass them by to pick up white folks down the block.

That this happens is undeniable. But, again, what is behind it?

As Heather Mac Donald of the Manhattan Institute has written, from January to June 2008 in New York City, 83 percent of all identified gun assailants were black and 15 percent were Hispanics.

Together, blacks and Hispanics accounted for 98 percent of gun assaults.

Translated: If a cabdriver is going to be mugged or murdered in New York City by a fare, 49 times out of 50 his assailant or killer will be black or Hispanic.

Fernando Mateo of the New York State Federation of Taxi Drivers has told his drivers, “Profile your passengers” for your own protection. “The God’s honest truth is that 99 percent of the people that are robbing, stealing, killing these guys are blacks and Hispanics.”

Fernando Mateo is himself black and Hispanic.

To much of America’s black leadership and its media auxiliaries, what happened in Sanford was, as Jesse put it, that an innocent kid was “shot down in cold blood by a vigilante.”

Yet, from police reports, witness statements, and the father and friends of Zimmerman, another picture emerges.

Zimmerman followed Trayvon, confronted him, and was punched in the nose, knocked flat on his back and jumped on, getting his head pounded, when he pulled his gun and fired. That Trayvon’s body was found face down, not face up, would tend to support this.

But, to Florida Congresswoman Federica Wilson, “this sweet young boy … was hunted down like a dog, shot on the street, and his killer is still at large.”

Some Sanford police believed Zimmerman; others did not.

But now that it is being investigated by a special prosecutor, the FBI, the Justice Department and a coming grand jury, what is the purpose of this venomous portrayal of George Zimmerman?

As yet convicted of no crime, he is being crucified in the arena of public opinion as a hate-crime monster and murderer.

Is this our idea of justice?

No. But if the purpose here is to turn this into a national black-white face-off, instead of a mutual search for truth and justice, it is succeeding marvelously well.

 Patrick J. Buchanan needs no introduction to VDARE.COM readers; his book State of Emergency: The Third World Invasion and Conquest of America, can be ordered from Amazon.com. His most recent published book is Churchill, Hitler, and “The Unnecessary War”: How Britain Lost Its Empire and the West Lost the World,reviewed here by Paul Craig Roberts. His new book Suicide of a Superpower: Will America Survive to 2025? was released October 18, and is rocketing up the charts.