Dugin Gets in the Ring

Dugin Gets in the Ring

Whither the Fourth Political Theory?

Dugin Gets in the Ring “Dasein is negotiable but the beard stays”

The Fourth Political Theory is a book that is clearly not short on ambition. I haven’t actually read it, but I already know more or less what is in it from past writings by its author Professor Alexander Dugin, as well as the lengthy video presentation he gave of his ideas at the Identitarian Ideas conference held earlier this year in Stockholm.

Dugin believes there have been three great ideologies in modern history – Liberalism, Communism, and Fascism/National Socialism – and that we are now seeing the formation of the Fourth, which is still waiting to be properly christened and so is known by an ordinal. In the footsteps of Locke, Marx, and Mussolini, we now have Dugin.

I greatly respect and like Dugin. With his Tolstoyan beard and aura of an old church father, he’s a personable and reassuring presence. But I also know how the academic world works, and how it finds all sorts of clever ways to serve different masters, and Professor Dugin is certainly well-connected to a lot of people in the Russian establishment. Is it a coincidence that his ideas support the existence of the Russian Orthodox Church or the multi-ethnic imperialism that is the unavoidable basis for a strong Russian state?

But onto the Fourth Political Theory, with its Millenialist feel of being the fourth and final horseman of the ideological apocalypse. OK, the Theory straps a cushion to its forehead by claiming to be a work in progress, so that any blows landed on it will be softened, but already much of the groundwork has been clearly laid. The road isn’t finished, but we can more or less see where it is headed under the guidance of Professor Dugin.

The Theory supposedly arises from the criticism and deconstruction of the previous three theories, which history has already revealed to be full of flaws and responsible for a great deal of suffering and confusion. Dugin seems happy enough to ride along with modern Liberalism’s historical demolition of Marxism and Fascism, as this makes it a tidy knuckle-to-knuckle, winner-takes-all match between his Fourth Theory and the still undefeated champion, Liberalism.

Seconds out – Ding! Ding! Ding!

Despite past attempts by the Second and Third Theories to claim the crown of modernity, Dugin believes that Liberalism has triumphed here and has managed to irrevocably present itself as the only truly “modern” way. It has also succeeded in presenting itself as the “natural order,” rather than a mere ideology.

To destroy Liberalism, Dugin strikes as these points. But rather than trying to claim that the Fourth Theory is more modern than Liberalism, his strategy is to try to get away from the whole idea of modernity itself by appealing to pre-modern values and conceptualizing them as post-modern eternal values. There is more than a touch of his Old Believer Russian Orthodoxy here.

This is not so much a heavy punch to the ribs of Liberalism as a bit of fancy footwork to avoid Liberalism’s nasty left hook. Modernity is not so easily discarded, as Dugin seems to believe. It operates as the measure of ideological victory, without which no battle can take place. His call to discard modernity is therefore a call for a defensive ceasefire or a time out.

Another key point for Dugin to attack is the subjects or agents of the other three theories. The economic classes of Marxism are presented as outmoded; Fascism’s state as something of a bourgeois innovation; and National Socialist race as a “kind of construction” and not very useful.

Although his punches are only glancing ones here, it does not matter, as these two systems are supposedly punch-drunk losers propping up the bar, muttering “I coulda been a contender.” Where Dugin is more effective is in battering Liberalism’s all-important individual.

This is his mighty opponent’s soft spot and Dugin makes hay here and even gets into position to unleash his KO, but this is where his attack comes unstuck. While all the previous systems have strong subjects/agents that human beings can all feel passionate about – race, nation, class, and our own beloved selves – the Fourth Theory substitutes Heidegger’s flat-footed and abstruse “Dasein” concept. You couldn’t imagine the Bastille being stormed or Stalingrad being held for the sheer pleasure of “being there”!

As a philosophical phrase that says very little by saying too much, it is appropriate that it is then extrapolated into a kind of blanket multi-polarity and call for a true multiculturalism (depoliticized in the case of Russia) and even multi-chronology. Regarding this latter concept, Dugin calls for a world where societies can exist that operate on different temporal patterns, such as cyclical, linear, or more complex. He also calls for the rejection of universal values and comparisons. This is clearly heavily defensive boxing, aimed at avoiding the clever jabs and looming thump that Liberalism is aiming at Putin’s Russia.

The Ascendant Order

Dugin’s interpretation of the previous three theories has a kind of grace, regularity, and ascendant pattern to it. There is natural and elegant progression from the individual to class, and from class to the state (or race). While the other three ideologies nobly struggled in the ring of modernity, and had subjects/agents that could inspire the masses, the Fourth Political Theory has a snatch of Heidegger embroidered on its boxing shorts and seems to be climbing through the ropes with its towel flying through the air behind it.

Perhaps the problem is ideology itself. While Dugin is happy to abandon notions of modernity, he is less happy to abandon ideology. This is only to be expected from an academic who eats, sleeps, and breathes ideology. So, do we actually need it?

Ideology has a progressive nature that does not endear it to many on the Right, but progress is essential in any system that is not based on pure stagnation. Even a cyclical system needs progress to get to the point of its collapse and rebirth. Ideology creates progress through competing with the status quo, or by helping a rising system to become manifest. Therefore, in addition to each ideology having a subject or an agent, history also demonstrates that it needs some kind of enemy or rival: Liberalism’s enemy was the old order; Marxism’s was Liberalism; Fascism’s was Marxism; and Neo-Liberalism’s was Fascism and Marxism.

The problem of the Neo-Liberal world order is that there seems no longer to be any enemy, thus endless stagnation looms. Progress will only arise when Neo-Liberalism in its turn becomes the defeated enemy. On this basis, a strong case exists for the necessity of a Fourth Ideology. But after this, will we need a fifth or sixth, and so on into infinity? The chances are that our technologically enhanced world cannot handle this kind of vast, intense dialectical struggle many times more, so it is essential that the Fourth Political Theory should internalize the engine of progress that has previously come from ideological conflict.

Escaping the Dialectical

As it now stands, the Fourth Political Theory is more a reflection of Russo-centric concerns, and also seems inconsistent with the broader ideological framework that Dugin has outlined. In order for it to gain wider credibility it will have to take on board some of the following points:

Firstly, it should be entirely divorced from any agenda that reflects specific political or religious goals or interests, such as those elements of Russian political pragmatism I constantly detect in Dugin’s work.

Secondly, modernity should not be abandoned. If we are to have an ideological battle, we need winners and losers, and we need a common standard by which to judge them. Communism understood this and so did Fascism, and both were ahead of Liberalism on points for most of their bouts. “Da Sein” and multi-chronology is a form of retreatism.

Thirdly, dismissing Communism and Fascism is premature. Although both were defeated, neither was a purely ideological defeat. Fascism’s defeat was mainly military, while Communism’s was economic. To use boxing terminology one last time, you could say that both were lucky knock outs. These two contestants should be readmitted to the ideological battle until they are defeated ideologically. Neo-liberalism is not capable of doing this. Only a later political theory will be capable of this.

Fourthly, the Fourth Political Theory should be adjusted to fit more neatly into Dugin’s grand pattern of ideological evolution. Only when this is done will it be successful. History shows that Marxism opposed but also used elements of Liberalism. Fascism opposed but also used elements of Marxism and to a lesser extent Liberalism. Therefore it seems likely that the Fourth Political Theory should oppose but also include elements of Fascism and to a lesser extent Marxism.

Fifthly, the Fourth Political Theory needs to find an appropriate subject/agent, one with an existence that the masses can relate to, and one that fits into the ascendant pattern of individual, class, and state/race. The only subject that fits this bill is humanity itself.

Sixthly, to avoid the dangers of endless stagnation and further dialectical struggles resulting in Armageddon, the Fourth Political Theory will need to internalize the progressive impetus.

“Far right” to rally this weekend in Europa

(CNN) — Far-right groups from across Europe are gathering in Denmark on Saturday for a rally they say is meant to make their governments act against the threat of Islamic extremism.
Those attending want to send a “clear message to the leaders of Europe,” according to the English Defence League (EDL), one of the organizers of the event.

The rally is due to take place in the port city of Aarhus, with speeches from a dozen speakers.

“Our governments and our media behave as if Islamic extremism exists only in the head of a few extremists, and claim that it is unfair to make the connection between Islam and extremism,” an online EDL statement says.

“This is ridiculous, just as it is ridiculous to claim that anyone who criticizes Islam must be an extremist in their own right. We believe in fair criticism of Islam and in the defence of our cultures, our nations, and the rights and freedoms that they have long protected.”

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.

Memo From Middle America | Zimmerman Lynch Mob Exposes “Hispanic” Paper Tiger

The MSM “narrative” of the Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman tragedy shooting—White Man shoots Black Teenager!—was barely changed by the revelation that the shooter can technically be classified as “Hispanic”. (His mother is Peruvian).

Zimmerman is also a registered Democrat, for what that’s worth. And Zimmerman is sometimes a Jewish name, as in the case of his father’s namesake “Robert Zimmerman” a.k.a. Bob Dylan, but a post over on Tablet Mag (which describes itself as a “daily online magazine of Jewish news, ideas, and culture.”) reassures the readers that “Zimmerman, Trayvon Martins Killer is not Jewish” [By Marc Tracy, March 21, 2012]. Apparently, George Zimmerman was raised Catholic, even serving as an altar boy.

The only effect of the revelation of Zimmerman’s ethnicity: the MSM switched to calling him a “white Hispanic”—a term, as Ellison Lodge pointed out last night, that a Google search shows was previously almost unknown.

The lynch mob continues to assemble—incited by none other than the President of the United States.

Which leads to the next question. Are Hispanics, especially the numerous self-appointed professional Hispanic  noise-makers, defending George Zimmerman? And if not, why not?

The National Council of La Raza did issue a statement by its CEO Janet Murguia, A Complete Investigation is Vital for Justice in Trayvon Martin Case

Well, I’m sure we could all agree on that. But the statement was hardly a ringing endorsement:

Later, Rush Limbaugh actually pointed out that La Raza wasn’t defending Zimmerman. La Raza spokeswoman Lisa Navarrete responded with “We really regret people trying to use this to divide blacks and Latinos. It’s disturbing to us that Rush Limbaugh has this theory. The only time he apparently cares about what happens to a Latino is when they may have happened to kill a young African-American man.”

La Raza says it’s Not ignoring Trayvon Martin Case, by Nick Valencia, CNN, March 28, 2012

The folks over at LULAC, League of Latin American Citizens don’t appear to be defending Zimmerman either. I checked out the LULAC website, League of Latin American Citizens, and didn’t find anything.

Nor is La Opinion, a leading Spanish-language Los Angeles newspaper. In fact its articles just seem to follow the Leftist party line. Its front page story on March 29, 2012 is Visten sudaderas por Trayvon, about California legislators dressing in hoodies (!) for a press conference.

The Mexican media, from what I’ve seen, don’t seem real interested in the story either. This March 24 article   didn’t even mention the Hispanic angle. [“De tener un hijo, sería como Trayvon” | Obama exige aclarar asesinato de joven afroestadounidense]

Of course, this is a big contrast to how the Mexican media goes on and on about issues related to illegal alien Mexicans in the U.S.

Florida is full of Cubans, but the Spanish-language media there has nothing particular to say.

It occurred to me, though, how about the Peruvian media? After all, George Zimmerman’s mother was Peruvian.

Sure enough, this connection was acknowledged in the Peruvian media. But I found no ringing defense of George Zimmerman there either. For example:

George Zimmerman, el hombre de raíces peruanas odiado en EE.UU. (George Zimmerman, the man of Peruvian roots hated in the U.S.) El Comercio, March 24, 2012

This was followed up with Peruano-estadounidense mató a joven negro en defensa propia (“Peruvian-American Kills Young Black Man in Self-Defense”) El Comercio, March 26, 2012

There was some discussion of Zimmerman on this Peruvian forum. But opinion was divided, and it didn’t seem that hot of a topic.

Most of these Latin American pieces on Zimmerman pretty much follow the American Mainstream Media, without much original reporting.

Basically, what seems have happened is that the U.S. Left set the agenda through its control of the MSM, and professional Hispanics, and Spanish-language journalists, are following along.

But it may not be working. A white Panamanian-American writer by the name of Carlos Harrison [Email him] looked at the Hispanic-Black angle in an article entitled Trayvon Martin Shooting Does Not Incite Hispanic-Black Tension, Focus Remains On Police, (Huffington Post, March 22, 2012). Harrison writes that

“The tension that the killing of 17-year-old Trayvon has exposed, residents and community leaders say, is not between blacks and Latinos, or blacks and whites. It’s a fresh gash in the festering rancor between the community’s blacks and its police…..But community members say that the ire over Martin’s death has not been directed at Latinos.”

There’s also a Spanish-language version of the Harrison article, entitled Caso Trayvon Martin:¿Afroamericanos vs. hispanos? (“Trayvon Martin Case: African-Americans vs. Hispanics?” AOL Latino, March 24, 2012). It’s just a translation of the same article with its feel-good treatment of Hispanic-Black relations.

However, when you scroll down to the comments section, all in Spanish, it’s another story entirely. Grassroots Hispanics aren’t buying all this happy talk.

Here are a few excerpts that I have translated:

  • Sandra: “Of course there is racism between Hispanics and blacks. Blacks have never liked us because we work more and better than them. And let’s be honest, we don’t like them either….”
  • Rocam: “Last January a young Honduran was shot to death…in Miami, by Afroamericans. This happens frequently….They rob you and kill you for one dollar. Nobody weeps, nobody protests when many die daily at the hands of the Afroamericans. It seems like only they have a license to kill. Who knows if Obama…makes a presidential decree, granting them the power of life and death over the rest of the society. …
  • David “… we all know that the majority of the crimes committed in this country are committed by blacks. At least here in Florida, in these past few months there has been an escalation of crimes and murders…committed by young blacks of 16, 17 and 18 years old like this one (Trayvon). They haven’t arrived to adulthood and they are already career criminals. …Of all the armed robberies that happen here almost daily, the vast majority are committed by blacks always against whites and Hispanics. …

And so it goes. There is plenty of evidence that, at the grassroots level, Hispanics understand the reality of black crime—a subject which our leaders (of both parties) fear to deal with or even mention.

As Brenda Walker has pointed out, this is not always a one-way street. She has reported ethnic cleansing of American blacks by Hispanic gangs in California.

Despite what the Civil Rights Establishment may tell us, there is a great deal of friction between blacks and Hispanics. As the demographics change, this is liable to get worse.

Indeed, in late 2007 a New American Media poll revealed that of the three principal minorities—blacks, Hispanics and Asian-Americans—each group trusted white Americans more than they did the other minority groups. [US minorities don’t trust each other (AFP) December 12, 2007]

So how does that bode for a future in which, if present trends continue, whites become a minority?

For that matter, Hispanics (defined as broadly as possible by the Census as a result of political pressure) have already passed blacks as the largest minority. Theoretically, if immigration policy continues on its current mad course, the U.S. could be on track to becoming a majority Hispanic country.

Black Americans are going to rue that day. They will have lost their special position in American society as the “favored minority”. Hispanics simply don’t walk around with a guilt complex about black people the way white Americans do.

So what does the Zimmerman lynch frenzy tell us?

  • Hispanics—make that “Hispanics”—simply lack solidarity. As a political force, they exist only in the dreams of ambitious ethnic entrepreneurs and the nightmares of persecuted Census bureaucrats. Mexicans don’t care about Puerto Ricans, Cubans care only about Cubans, and nobody at all cares about Peruvians who, unfortunately for George Zimmerman, have not invaded in sufficient numbers to constitute a lobby (yet).
  • Professional Hispanics—the LULACS and La Razas—are wholly-owned subsidiaries of the American Left. That’s who pays them, and they’re not going to bite the mano that feeds them by disrupting the Left coalition. Of course, pretty much the same can be said for feminists (why didn’t they welcome Sara Palin?) and African Americans (why don’t they resist their people’s displacement though immigration?)
  • “Hispanics” (as Steve Sailer has repeatedly said) simply don’t care that much about politics.

Sailer has also repeatedly pointed out that the long-predicted Hispanicization of American politics and culture seems to be a suspiciously long time showing up.

The lynching of poor George Zimmerman proves the point: Hispanic power, to adapt Chairman Mao, is a paper tiger.

American citizen Allan Wall (email him) moved back to the U.S.A. after many years residing in Mexico. In 2005, Allan served a tour of duty in Iraq with the Texas Army National Guard. His VDARE.COM articles are archived here; his Mexidata.info articles are archived here; his News With Views columns are archived here; and his website is here.

Sarkozy: Too Many Foreigners

Sarkozy: Too Many Foreigners

The BBC reports that Nicolas Sarkozy was filmed in a televised debate stating that France has too many foreigners and that the system for integrating them is not working.

And the stunning declarations did not end there. Apparently, Sarkozy’s solution to the problem is equally radical: he has promised that if he is elected next month he will cut the number of new arrivals in half.

Right. So on the one hand there are too many foreigners, but on the other the solution is to bring more in.

This reminds me of the logic Western democratic politicians have employed in their efforts to understand the still unfolding economic crisis—a logic that sees the incurring of more debt as the solution to a problem that was caused by too much debt.

And of course this emerges in the context of an election campaign afflicted by voter apathy, where opinion polls give Sarkozy’s socialist opponent a clear lead.

Consider also that Sarkozy has been president of France for five years, and that before that he was—twice—Minister of Interior. If he now thinks France has too many foreigners, what is he telling us about his record of achievements in political office?

Sarkozy was one of three European politicians who some time ago declaimed that multiculturalism had failed.

David Cameron was another of them, Cameron being also a conservative politician who promised his voters drastically to cut the number of new arrivals in the United Kingdom.

Cameron’s record so far: net immigration at record high since he took office two years ago, and a call for ‘muscular’ liberalism.

Detroit’s Received More Than a Trillion in Aid Since the Inception of Black-Rule in 1973

Detroit Mayor David Bing to ask for $150 million in aid; Detroit’s Received More Than a Trillion in Aid Since the Inception of Black-Rule in 1973

http://stuffblackpeopledontlike.blogspot.com/

 

“Detroit, the place where capitalism failed.”
63 Alfred Street: Built by white people 130 plus years ago

This quote comes from the book 63 Alfred Street: Where Capitalism Failed by John Kossik, which blames the failures on Detroit for the inability of capitalism to work in a city where the immutable laws of the Visible Black of Economics have been at work for decades.

Kossik focuses his thesis on the tragic ruins of a Venetian Gothic mansion, built more than 130 years ago when white people were more than 99 percent of population there.
Capitalism didn’t fail Detroit, for it is capitalism that has allowed the lily-white suburbs to thrive, courtesy of the ingenuity of the people living there to innovate and produce something of wealth and value. Their labor is rewarded; in Detroit, the exact opposite is on display, courtesy of the Black population (89 percent of the city) found there.
Though it is not formal yet, Detroit’s beleaguered mayor is going to do what the first Black mayor of Detroit – Coleman Young – did so well: beg, plead, and pray for federal grants, federal aid, and or a loan to help keep the city moving forward. The Detroit News reported:

Mayor Dave Bing is seeking $125 million to $150 million in a short-term loan from the state to help fix the city’s fiscal crisis, Bing’s office confirmed Thursday night.

Bing’s request follows his State of the City speech Wednesday night where he vowed to keep an emergency manager out of the city and called for “tangible support” from the state, including financial and operational support.

 To stave off the collapse of the city – the Detroit School System has already been taken over by the state, a system that spends $15,000+ per pupil but produces the lowest big city standardized test scores in all of America and a population that is nearly 50 percent illiterate – and the implementation of an emergency manager to assume control of the city’s finances, Mayor Bing is resorting to playing the role Coleman Young made famous: Demand more money, and have absolute no return on investment to show for the federal aid, federal grant, or money borrowed to help Detroit move forward.
Same building today: Neglected under Black-rule in Detroit

Wilbur Rich’s book Coleman Young and Detroit Politics: From Social Activist to Power Broker was basically a running apology for the mismanagement of federal aid that Young was able to convince the government to keep sending Detroit’s way.

Between 2009 – 2011 alone, Detroit Public Schools snagged $200 million in federal stimulus money (the largest amount given to any school system in the state of Michigan). The test scores and graduation rate produced by these Black scholars (96 percent of the K-12 student body in Detroit is Black) didn’t magically go up, though the drop-out rate did. Worse, Wayne County – home to Detroit – received a total of $2.4 billion in stimulus dollars between that same time.
Where did that money go?

The same place that the $11 million grant to help low-income job seekers enrich their wardrobes with appropriate attire for interviews (of which only two people were helped). The same place where the $50 million that is sent each year by the federal government for Head Start went:

Following complaints that the Detroit Human Services Department fostered an environment of nepotism, reckless spending and corruption to the detriment of the early childhood education program Head Start, the federal government plans to stop sending $50 million a year to the city to fund the program, the Free Press learned Thursday.

Head Start has been declared a failure, by the way. Meaning that the $50 million given to Detroit each year for more than 30 years has been a monumental waste of taxpayer money.
In July of 2011, the Detroit Free Press reported on another city department mismanaging $75 million in federal funds:

The FBI is investigating the city’s Human Services Department over misspent tax dollars and its handling of $100 million in federal grants.There’s been a continuing police investigation into how the city’s Department of Health and Wellness Promotion has handled about $75 million in state and federal funds. And Detroit Mayor Dave Bing fired the department’s director, Yvonne Anthony, in May.

More than 25 of Bing’s top appointees have left the city in the last two years, and Bing has pleaded with Detroit’s corporate community to be more active in helping to revitalize the city.

Federal grants are needed to keep the police on the streets, even though they’ve stopped responding to 911 calls; federal grants are needed to keep firefighters employed. Indeed, federal grants to the tune of millions of dollars are even needed to keep neighborhoods stabilized, though no evidence for stability exists.
There is no tax-base in Detroit anymore. The wealth producers (i.e. white people) fled when the threat of criminality – almost entirely by Black people – became too great in the late 1960s.  Those Black people who are in the middle-to-upper-middle class in Detroit are there because of intense affirmative action in the city’s government (and in the distribution of contracts to private contractors).
Fitting that Lyndon B. Johnson designated Detroit a “Model City” in the early 1960s, where hundreds of millions of dollars were poured into The Motor City to help alleviate poverty and help the growing Black population get off their knees and onto their feet.
By helping them on their knees with hundreds of millions of aid, Detroit’s progressive white Mayor Jerry Cavanagh could only watch in horror as Black people engaged in the most destructive riot in American history, burning significant parts of the city, helping convince hundreds of thousands of white people to move into the suburbs immediately.  The New York Times reported in 1997, 30 years after those devastating riots that Detroit never recovered from, that the misery of Black-rule in Detroit was still better than what they had rioted against:

There were nearly four dozen riots and more than 100 smaller cases of civil unrest in the United States in 1967, but Detroit’s riots were the deadliest. A Presidential commission later attributed most of the 43 deaths to police officers and National Guardsmen who, in the commission’s view, had gone out of control.The long-simmering anger of black residents at an abusive, mostly white police force erupted here in the early morning hours of July 23, 1967, and lasted five days. The flash point was a raid by white police officers on an after-hours drinking and gambling club at the corner of 12th and Clairmount Streets, in a heavily black neighborhood. By the time the smoke cleared almost a week later, 683 buildings across the city had been damaged or destroyed and tanks had rolled through the streets. But the riots exacerbated demographic shifts that had begun a decade before in many big cities. Around 1940, many Southern blacks, like various immigrant groups before them, moved to Detroit for the work in the automobile factories. The city’s population at the time of the riots was one-third black, and by 1990 that percentage had grown to 76 percent.Even before the riots, many middle-class Detroit residents, particularly whites, had begun moving to the newly built suburbs, commuting to work on the broad highways being built. But the riots turned the steady stream of people moving to the suburbs into a torrent. Businesses followed their customers. Thousands of houses were abandoned as the city’s population plunged to 992,000 from 1.6 million at the time of the riots. Even today, some black residents refer to the upheaval here 30 years ago as a rebellion against racist white authority rather than a riot. The site where the troubles began, 12th Street, was renamed Rosa Parks Boulevard in 1976, after the civil rights heroine from Montgomery, Ala., who refused to give up her bus seat to a white man and who later moved to Detroit.

What happened in Detroit is a strangely mirrors what happened in South Africa. The Great Migration of Blacks from the South in the early decades of the 20th century eventually overwhelmed the white population of Detroit. Black people had nothing to do with building Detroit; but they have had everything to do with destroying it.
Same goes with South Africa.
Since 1973, when the city was roughly 50 percent white and 50 percent Black (and boasting a population almost double– of which 89 percent are Black today – the 770,000 it is today), the various – all have been Black – mayors of Detroit have had to rely on grants, borrowing funds, and federal aid to keep the city going.
Fitting that the white residents of Detroit in 1973 – before packing their bags and heading to the suburbs to thrive – tried to save the city via the ballot box. Charles M. Carey’s African-America Political Leaders tells us this about the year Young was first elected:

In 1973 Young declared his candidacy for mayor of Detroit. His opponent was John F. Nichols, the white commissioner of the police who was running on a “law and order” platform. Young stole his thunder by promising to get rid of all kinds of crime, including police brutality. The polls indicated that more than 90 percent of whites favored Nichols, while more than 90 percent of the blacks favored Young. Since African Americans barely outnumbered white in Detroit, Young won by a few thousand votes.

Young didn’t get rid of crime, with Detroit instantly becoming one of the most dangerous cities in the world, known as the “Murder Capital” of America in the 1970s. Today, the police don’t even report – nor respond to 911 calls – the crime rate.
The floodgates for hiring Black people to get back at whitey began, with Young hiring more Black officers, firefighters, and municipal clerks. No longer could city employees live in the suburbs, they were forced to live in the city.
According to The Quotations of Coleman A. Young, this employment of affirmative action hiring policies had a purpose, with the newly elected Young saying:

 “Some people say affirmative action is discrimination in reverse. You’re damned right. The only way to handle discrimination is to reverse it.”

The past is never past. The lesson of Detroit is the lesson for America; once in power, the presumed inequities of the past will be rectified. In the case of The Motor City, the lingering – dwindling – white population was severely discriminated against, and yet they were asked to pay the bill for their own dispossession.
They deserve no pity. The citizens of Detroit deserve no mercy.
The state of Michigan has created 16 “Michigan Renaissance Zones” in Detroit, which are virtually free of any taxation. The whole concept of “enterprise zones” is that instantly – without government intrusion through taxes – capitalism should flourish.
But capitalism hasn’t flourished. It would not be far fetched to state that trillions of taxpayer money (via federal loans, grants, and stimulus aid) over a span of fifty-sixty years has poured into Detroit. Whether it was to fight poverty, improve the test scores and graduation of primarily Black students, fight crime, maintain infrastructure, stimulate economic growth, or just pay city bills, the aid has been a waste.
Elliot Washington in 2008 wrote these words about Detroit, with have no basis in reality:

Since the early 1930s and FDR, Detroit has had a tragic love affair with liberalism, the consequences of which have to a degree been comparable to the sieges by the cruel superpowers of antiquity – Egypt, Babylon, Assyria, Persia, Greece, Rome, the Huns, the Mongols. True, in Detroit there are no siege works here, no boiling oil, flaming arrows, catapults or battering rams, yet the barbarian hoards are not only at the gates, but are within the city gates, and these people, infected by a stubborn liberal mindset, are surely killing this town.

The white citizens of Detroit left, after being electorally defeated in a true racial election in 1973. This was after most had left because of the Black riot in 1967 and the high rates of Black crime that white citizens encountered in Detroit.

They built flourishing suburbs wherever they went, leaving behind a city they built to be ruled by Coleman Young and his Black friends.
Liberalism didn’t destroy Detroit anymore than capitalism did. It has been the ingenuity of others and the wealth they have created, which has been taxed by a government dedicated to the advancement of Black-Run America (BRA), and sent as federal aid and federal grants that have kept the city of Detroit going to this day.
In the Batman story No Man’s Land, Gotham City is hit with a massive earthquake that destroys the city. The cost of rebuilding is so great, the United States government decides to blow up every bridge out of Gotham and build a wall around the city, with 24/7 armed guards keeping everyone in the city (via huge walls) and preventing anyone from entering.  Even members of the clergy and philanthropic organizations are barred from entering.
This could be one of the solutions to the Detroit problem.
Or, like the plan in Robocop, a private company could bailout the city, privatizing all of the agencies (police, fire department, waste, public transit, etc.) there in the process.
Knowing that neither of these two options would ever be implemented, it must be stated that Detroit must never be bailed out again.
Taxpayer money shouldn’t continue to support a city built on reversing the perceived racism of the past, blaming whitey for every problem that Black people encounter along the way.
It’s time Black people take responsibility for their actions. In this case, we are talking about the demise of one of the great American cities. Scratch that, one of the great cities of the world.
Black people forced white people out of Detroit, who in turn rebuilt the city in their image in the surrounding lily-white suburbs.
Commerce, innovation, and economic activity flourish there.
Detroit? Regression to the mean.
The Visible Black Hand of Economics on display for the world to see. Pumped with a continuous infusion of federal grants and federal aid (your taxpayer money that could have gone to space exploration or cancer research), Detroit has continued to deteriorate under Black rule.
Mayor Bing must be told “no” when he formally requests the $150 million in aid. For the sake of all Americans – Black and white, Hispanic and Asian – the citizens of Detroit must be told why the answer is “no” as well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbsgLcV4o1k&feature=player_embedded