Bad Time in Baltimore

Bad Time in Baltimore

http://www.fredoneverything.net/Baltimore.shtml

A Time for Attention

Date

.I found on the Drudge Report yesterday a cell-phone video of yet another attack against whites by feral blacks in the cities, in this case Baltimore, where in a McDonald’s two black females kicked a white girl into convulsions, presumably due to brain damage. It seems there was a dispute over precedence for the rest room.

You can see the video here, at the site of the American Renaissance. AmRen is regarded as racist, and is, but consists mostly of articles from legitimate newspapers. It doesn’t make up its facts. The comments at the bottom are interesting in that they represent the response to the beating by a large part of the American population. Most don’t post such thoughts where the thought police can find them. They think them, and express them to friends.

Things are bad out in the world, with blacks openly furious at whites and a whole lot of whites quietly so in return. It isn’t a recipe for domestic tranquility. A price will be paid.

Two things stand out about the video. First, cell phones with video cameras built into them are changing the landscape of journalism. All teenagers and most adults now carry video cameras, the difference being that the teenagers know how to use them.

This is not unimportant. Note that such siege howitzers of the media as the BBC frequently run shaky, wobbly, low-res footage of such things as Syrian police beating people, or of citizens dying of bloody head wounds. These can be embarrassing enough to affect policy, and make it harder for repressive governments to control the press. It is now a crime in parts of the US to photograph a policeman; here, as in Syria, governments move to hide the behavior of their “security forces.” This is why China censors the internet, and Washington very much wants to. When the Egyptian public erupted, the government immediately shut down the net. It is interesting that Obama wants an “internet kill switch.”

The other salient point of the beating in Baltimore is that the Drudge Report, a huge, huge, huge site, posted the video under a banner headline almost as huge. I don’t know Matt Drudge, and so can’t speak to his motives, but he had to know that posting video of godawful beating of a white girl by blacks is Something One Doesn’t Do.

Various voices ask, Was it racial? Of course it was. You don’t beat someone into convulsing brain-damaged semi-consciousness over precedence in a line for the bathroom. Ravening homicidal hatred is needed. Welcome to the ghetto.

This sort of thing is not uncommon. In a previous life as a police reporter I encountered or knew of many instances, always of a gang of blacks beating hell out of a white, and in a manner to do serious damage. The maidens in the video wanted to hurt the girl, wanted to hur her badly, and continued kicking her dangerously when they had her helpless. It is one thing to punch someone’s lights out, another to kick him repeatedly in the head.

Always the media respond by describing the attackers as “teenagers” and “youths,” and by burying the story as quickly as possible. When I was writing my Police Beat column for the Washington Times, any mention of racial hatred disappeared during editing.

Ignoring the hatred is not going to serve anyone well, black or white. In the Cook County Jail in Chicago, I once interviewed a Three Star Perfect Elite, if my memory of the title serves, a high-ranking man in the BGD, Black Gangster Disciples. These were and probably are a serious gang. Why, I asked him, do black gang-bangers spend so much time killing other blacks?
“we’d rather kill whites, but we know we’d lose,” he said, stone cold. This disappeared in editing.

This is not remotely the sentiment of blacks in general, but of the decaying, jobless, culturally isolated slums. If if it boils over, which is entirely possible, nobody is going to like it. More accurately perhaps, a few blacks and whites would very much like it, but it would be hideous to decent people. You don’t solve a problem by hiding its existence.

Why do the media hide the attacks? I suspect that underlying the circumspection is a half-aware realization that if whites really knew what was happening, some might respond in kind, in which case God help the nation. Having no better idea what to do—I don’t either—journalists figure to keep the lid on and hope the problem goes away, which it won’t. The whole business smells of trouble.
Further, journalism is a rigorously conformist profession. You know what you have to say you believe. You say it. Joe Sobran once defined public opinion as “what everybody thinks everybody else thinks.” Exactly.

And the press corps in Washington lives in a hothouse, insulated from the rest of the country, for most of which they have contempt. They pride themselves on racial correctness yet, in a city the majority of which is black, they have only a few black friends unresembling those of the urban badlands of Northeast, and you never see them in restaurants and clubs where most patrons are black. Many seem to want to protect blacks from criticism. They don’t report reality because they don’t see it. What does this accomplish?

Thus if you point out that black schools in the cities are terrible, an assertion with which every black columnist in the US would agree, many journalists will furiously argue that it isn’t true—not quite calling you a racist, but very nearly. And so nothing changes.

Stray thought: What would you think of an oncologist who insisted that your tumor didn’t exist?

I wonder how wise this wanton inattention probably isn’t. The United States has a grave racial problem that isn’t getting better. The problem is not the black middle class, which is about like any other, but the dangerously angry underclass of the graveyard cities—Newark, Detroit, DC, Chicago, Trenton, Dade, Richmond, Atlanta, on and on. I’ve spent many nights in such places. It’s ugly. And it’s explosive. Depending on your politics, you can blame blacks, whites, God, terrorists, or sunspots, none of which changes anything.

Psychology trumps politics. We can do the liberals-vs-conservatives dance, call each other racists, howl and yowl and pose and prance. What fun. But a spring is being wound. The economy declines, auguring cuts in social subsidies and perilous unrest. Los Angeles burned. It can burn again. The hatred is still there. If there is a solution to the racial disaster, we had better find it.

A Brief History of the United States

From Beginning to End

March 21, 2011

In 1492 Columbus rediscovered America, and the settlers, destructively exploiting its vast resources, achieved a success which they attributed to their own near-miraculous virtues, some of which they actually had: courage, rude vigor, industry, and an independent spirit. Shortly after, they emerged from WWII unscathed due to the military genius embodied in two oceans while competitors—Europe, Russia, China, and Japan—lay prostrate. America’s intact military and an economy up and running allowed the establishment of a fairly benign empire and an astonishing commercial dominance, both being attributed to near-miraculous virtues and regarded as permanent.

They didn’t see it coming.

Japan revived and began producing something it called a Toyota while Detroit, sure of its market, manufactured lousy cars that arrived falling apart, final assembly by owner. Germany revived. Communism still protected America from China, and no one foresaw that this would change. Airbus Industries appeared, but no one believed that it could compete with American know-how and engineering. It did. One by one American manufacturers of airliners took shelter in the military market until only Boeing was left, more or less equal to Airbus. But Americans knew that Europe was socialist and had no work ethic.

Before long Japan had completely devoured the market for consumer electronics, cameras, and suchlike. Ship-building went, except for builders catering to the captive military market. The steel industry left for foreign shores. Few noticed. Americans knew that their prosperity sprang from their near-miraculous virtues, which foreigners could never achieve.

Eventually China gave up on communism and became 1.3 billion smart, hard-working people who saw nothing wrong with the idea of becoming the world’s dominant power. Brazil began making airliners and American airlines began buying them. Even India showed signs of life. Americans didn’t worry because they knew that these funny countries couldn’t compete with America’s democratic values.

Manufacturing jobs began flowing to Asia, first a trickle and then a torrent. Americans didn’t pay attention, not knowing exactly where Asia was. Anyway, those foreigners were comic little people with squinty eyes and ate with sticks. Who could take them seriously? Then design work and programming began emigrating eastward. American had invented the internet and now would pay the price. Intellectual capital had broken free from physical capital. Oops.

American industry largely ceased to exist, or at least ceased to be American. The big companies became free-floating international entities, adventitiously putting down roots wherever taxes were low and labor cheap, which wasn’t America. An HP laptop now consisted of a CPU from Intel but made perhaps in Ireland, the motherboard, hard drive, power supply and case made in Taiwan, RAM and screen from Samsung, assembled in Taiwan or China, but the label said HP, so it was American.

The trade balance went sour, and then very sour. The country had long since become captive to consumerism both national and individual, “He who dies with the most toys wins” being a bumper-sticker anthem. At every level America began living on credit, but America’s credit was good, which American’s attributed to near-miraculous virtues which they no longer had, if they had ever had them.

As the economy invisibly declined, the military’s budget grew and grew. The country could no longer afford it, but the Pentagon was so deeply embedded in the economy and Congress that the country couldn’t stop affording it. The five-sided money hole spent on, an aging kept woman with no obvious purpose since, with the fall of the Soviet Union, America had no military enemies.

Consequences sometimes arrive tardily. After WWII, Zionists had conquered Palestine and begun mistreating its people in the manner of white South Africans at their worst. Moslems, of whom it later turned out there were quite a few, came to hate Zionists and, by extension, all Jews. Since America supplied the bombs that Israel used to kill Moslems, these came to hate the US. Thus 9/11. This was used as a pretext for war by hawkish wimps, now called Neocons. The conflicts were  embraced by the Pentagon, which needed a raison d’etre in the face of the lack of enemies. The ensuing wars were enthusiastically supported by evangelicals, more Zionists, confused patriots, imperialists, military industry, and those who just wanted to kill some Arabs, any Arabs. President W. Bush with his eternal martial priapism and yokel grasp was just the man. The military budget now was about a trillion a year in a country that owed more money than it could ever repay.

Many things had changed since the arrival of Columbus and smallpox. Americans still imagined themselves as Marlboro Man, rugged individualists, though many had never actually seen a live horse. In fact the country had become a society of mass conformist consumerism with its tastes designed at corporate. America was still a land of opportunity, if you were an Ivy techy with an IQ in excess of 180, but everybody else was pretty much screwed. Most people lived in velvet serfdom, afraid of the boss and imprisoned by the retirement system. Few young males could any longer meet the physical requirements for induction. The Army softened training so they could appear to get through. So much for Davy Crockett.

Americans had become the Frightened People, afraid of terror, of Moslems, of an outside world they couldn’t find or, in many cases, spell. The government used this bounty from heaven to justify rapid elimination of civil liberties, telling the public that it was to protect them. They still prided themselves on their democracy, without any longer having one, and on being a light to the world, which hated them. “The whole world hates us. What is wrong with the whole world?” they asked, deeply puzzled.

The looters came. In the past there had been an element of noblesse oblige, of concern for the nation, a sense among the upper classes that they ought to pay some slight attention to keeping the country alive while picking its bones.  This changed. The country was now ruled by the tightly interlocking directorates of Wall Street, Congress, the upper reaches of the executive branch, and the big corporations, none of whose members had ever worked a night shift at Walmart while living in a rented trailer. The worst and brightest went to Harvard and then into i-banking. Thus the sub-prime adventure. This catastrophe was regarded as a cyclical correction instead of as the first notes of the knell.

By this time the country was acquiring the attributes of the Third World. Impunity: financiers did not go to jail for financial crimes, nor generals for war crimes, nor congressmen for anything. National incapacity: The government handled natural disasters with the adroitness one might expect of Burundi. Intractable slums festered in the cores of its great cities. Over its age America had achieved greatly, done much that was admirable and much that wasn’t, and now, overreaching, still convinced of its miraculous virtues, was perilously close to falling on its face.

Let’s Invade Mexico!

Let’s take poison. Let’s ride a motorcycle blind-folded, and other bright ideas.

November 26, 2010

.

Almost forever, the record for stupidity was held by Lumbo, a Cambrian trilobyte born to an early family of retarded trilobites. Lumbo also had Down’s Syndrome. It ws an unbeatable combination.  Nobody and nothing was as slow as Lumbo. It was thought that he would hold the record for all time, but then came the governor of Texas, Rick Perry. He thinks it might be a good idea to invade Mexico.

Lumbo doesn’t come close.

The governor thinks, barely, that such a martial lunge might help rid Mexico of drugs, or do something about immigration. He thinks it should perhaps be done with the permission of the Mexican government. It is my hope that Washington will not adopt the governor’s idea, but, given America’s penchant for lurching into catastriphic wars, perhaps we should examine the notion for advisability.

The governor’s wise plan begins by embodying the mistake the Pentagon always makes when it sets out to lose a war, which seems to be every time it holds a war. He, and it, begin by having no faint grasp of the people to be invaded, or of people at all.

Soldiers have difficulty with the notion of people, of citizens, of populations, who are mere impediments to the proper management of a swell war. The military longs for mechanized battle in which men in machines destroy other men in other machines, tank against tank, fighter plane against fighter plane, in a spirit of simple-minded adolescentt romanticism. You know,  battle-scarred tanks growling across the Algerian desert, against a flaming red sunset burning out to night, desert wind blowing scarves of heroic etc. People don’t figure in this dream, which is why the results are so regularly dismal.

Now, some practical considerations, a kind traditionally of little interest to military men:

You don’t just sort of invade Mexico as an abstraction. You have to invade an actual part of it. Which?

Well, you could try the cities thick with narcos: Tijuana, Juarez, Culiacan, Ciudad Victoria, all the gang. Good idea, that. As any intelligent officer will tell you—one was reported in Anhalt-Zerbst in 1654, but this was never confirmed—fighting in cities is not a lot of fun. The narcos have AKs and RPGs. They are expert at urban ambushes. They know the cities. They speak the language. They can fade into the population. Consequently frustrated Gis, quickly coming to view the population as subhuman, will begin killing people at random and…have we seen this before?

As an equally unwise plan, the good governor might advocate sending troops after the narcos in the wild, in the Sierra Madre Occidental, up around Copper Canyon, the Barranca del Cobre. Have you seen the barranca country? I have, on the Chihuahua Pacific railway from Los Mochis to Chihuahua. It is like Afghanistan, but with difficult terrain and tree cover. Roads are few. There are canyons in which you could drop the Grand Canyon and have trouble finding it the next day. Did I mention AKs and RPGs? Trees? Rocks? Things to hide behind?

Sefl-explanatory. I hope.

Phredphoto

What the Pentaloons don’t understand, being armed Boy Scouts who believe their own propaganda—“Ooo-rah! Yes sir! Yes sir! Can do, sir!” is that they usually can’t. The chief reason is that people really, really do not like American soldiers invading their countries, wrecking cities and killing their children. The military, which thinks at right angles, cannot wrap its mind around this difficult thought. Thus Americans invariably begin by thinking, “We are right. We are for democracy. We are trying to help these people. Therefore they will love us.”

The second step to disaster is to set up a puppet government, by purchase or intimidation, declare it an ally, and assert that America is helping the legitimate government of a beloved fellow nation. Think Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and note that the Governor Perry says he wants to invade “with Mexico’s permission,” which means puppetizing the government. Of course no government that supports invaders who kill Pablo’s three-year-old and her dog is going to enjoy a whole lot of legitimacy.

The approach doesn’t work, this being regarded as a minor defect by military minds. It’s the glory of the thing, the swoosh and bang and zowwee that count, not practical concerns like winning. But…does it seem salient to you that in all of our hobbyist wars, our locals—our Khmers, our Viets, our Afghans, and so on—fight poorly, while our enemies are passionate and stubborn? Note that after ten years our Afghan soldiers aren’t ready and disappear with their rifles, the Pakis collaborate with the Taliban and hate us, and the Iraqi police are permanently incapable.

Why might this be? Because, when you force part of a country to kill the other part, not too much enthusiasm ensues.

An essential  ingredient in our wars is underestimation of the enemy, reflecting a general American contempt for everybody else. Cheese-eating surrender monkeys, that sort of thing. The Viet Cong were rice-propelled paddy maggots who didn’t have a single B-52. Iraq would be a cake walk, the Afghans were louse-ridden towel-headed farmers, and so on.

An infantryman’s paradise, or gateway thereunto.

Phredphoto

Still, it is perhaps worth noting that as the US army lowers recruiting standards to reflect flabby American males, the Mexicans work construction. In the barranca country you find hard and hardy people, Tarahumaras and tough farmers who have trucks now thanks to the marijuana crop. Soft they are not. Mexicans have fought long and bloody wars—the Revolution, the Cristero War, the current drug wars in which 29,000 have died since 2006 in armed conflict (which suggests that there are a whole lot of them and not afraid to fight, doesn’t it?). Sound like Afghans?

Further: Mexicans, all Mexicans, are violently hostile to any invasion, on any terms at all, by the US. They’ve been down that trail before. I mentioned the governor’s idea to my (Mexican) wife. I’ve never seen her face so hard. This is universal. If you want to see a united Mexico, send the Gis.

The Mexicans are not as reliably hostile to the traffic in drugs, or to the traffickers, as Washington would like. The common attitude is that if the gringos don’t want drugs, why do they buy them? Why is it Mexico’s problem? The traffic has brought relative prosperity to places formerly without electricity. In a country not enamored of a corrupt government, the narcos not infrequently are seen as Robin Hoods. Various bands make a living singing narcocorridos, songs glorifying the traffoclers: Los Tigres del Norte, Los Tucanes de Tijuana, La Sombra Norteña.

Here we come to the final error of American military interventions: the belief that everybody wants to be like America, that they want democracy or are capable of it, that we just have to show them how we want them to live and they will gratefully do it. Ah, fond hope. We are going to make Afghanistan into a democracy, an idea as probable as making a frog into a television set. In Afghanistan the military invaded Marjuh and said it was going to impose a “government in a box,” whereupon an Afghan town would be just like a village in Iowa. Oh sure. Any day now. And in Mexico the Mérida Initiative is going to  produce honest police and judges, whereupon Mexico will resemble Switzerland.

Oh god. Lumbo is back. Some good advice to the Joint Chiefs: Stay the hell out.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s