Feeds:
Posts
Comments

It looks like Obama, Holder, CNN and all the rest of the leftist hivemind have succeeded beyond their wildest dreams. They painted two ordinary incidents of policing–Mike Brown’s justified shooting death and Eric Garner’s eggshell skull death after he resisted police after breaking the law–as proof of some malignant, widespread institutional racism.  In other words, they maligned every police officer in the country.  Well, since racism is for the left the greatest sin ever, they have contributed to the atmosphere in which an angry black man gunned down two random police officers in NYC last night.  After all, if they are racist, they basically deserve it right!  (Notably, the two officers killed were Chinese and Hispanic.)

This is the atmosphere that prevailed, incidentally, in the late 60s and throughout the 70s, the age of Weatherman Underground bombings, the widespread reference to cops as “Pigs,” and the Zebra Killing Era in San Francisco.  In other words, the age that brought Nixon’s Silent Majority to the polls and that led the abandonment of the Democratic Party by the white working class.  Then, as now, the simmering discontent and use of violence was employed or exploited by more peaceful, respectable leftists, as a form of veiled threat.  We’ve all heard of threats of a “long, hot summer” from Sharpton and his clones before.

I have to think, as in the 60s, the left and its black power constituency is about to overplay its hand.  Most of us, while we have had a few unpleasant encounters with the cops, know they’re doing a dangerous and necessary job. We also know that there is much highly visible misbehavior by young ghetto blacks, which brings a rain of law enforcement pain upon perpetrators.  This is why all these phrases like “good schools” and concepts like “not going to a movie theater anymore” are widespread among the middle class of all races. We know what’s going on, and while CNN can move the dial a bit, the internet, various facebook memes, and blogs provide a useful counter-narrative that is rooted in suppressed facts and direct experience. People today can watch ordinary cops’ dealings with citizens on the reality show Cops, as well as crazy videos of ghetto nonsense on YouTube.  The facts, including the politically incorrect one, are out there, and this particular atrocity should, one hopes, provoke a serious backlash.

It should be obvious how the “militarized policing” talk favored by the left and polite right missed the significance of these events entirely.  It’s a story about minority misbehavior and alienation, fomented by a hostile media, political, and academic class, not bad policing.  And that story is a lot more uncomfortable to discuss, particularly among whites, whose self-identity includes being the most fair-minded, least tribal, and least racist people in the history of mankind. But you can push people around too far.

It’s fitting the perpetrator may have had some connection to a gang called the Black Guerilla Family, because this act, as well as so many similar atrocities–Wichita, the “knockout game,” Knoxville, etc.–has the marks of an undeclared but simmering race war, but a one way war, of blacks against every other race.  Non-Blacks are stunned, disorganized, worried about naming this for what it is.  Like every insurgency, there’s a great many bystanders and folks avoiding allegiance, both black and white, many of the former because of their greater commitment to being middle class and following majority mores. And there are also the noncombatant supporters and use of political theater as an auxiliary. There’s the attempt to paint this as ordinary crime, as Don Rumsfeld did in the earliest days of the Iraq Insurgency. But something’s going on here, and it’s not good, and it is altogether one sided . . . for now.

Uber Uber Alles

I’m a fan of Uber.  My experience so far is that it offers a more swift, more efficient, more clean, more safe, and more civilized service than any recent experience I have had in a regular taxicab. There is also a media hate campaign against Uber.  It is understandable cab drivers don’t like it, as it operates in the regulatory shadows and has fewer burdens of licensed cab companies.  But the solution is not to kill uber, but perhaps to deregulate the industry as a whole.

There is also a vague feeling that uber may be very dangerous.  For example, in India and now in the US, there have been isolated reports of uber drivers sexually assaulting female customers.  This is dreadful, of course, but there is something inherently dangerous with getting in a car with a stranger.

Uber, in contrast to cabs, however, always creates an electronic record of customer and driver.  A wayward Uber driver is almost certain to be apprehended.  It’s like the old criminal law analogy of the “policeman at the elbow.”  The relevant comparison is not zero assaults versus the small number of uber drivers who have abused their access. Rather, we must look to the background level of violence perpetrated by (and against) cab drivers.  There have, in fact, been a number of far less publicized crimes–murders, even–that are logically far more likely in cabs due to the lack of any record of driver-passenger interaction and, to be frank, the lower social class and cultural backwardness of many of the almost-all-Third-World-immigrant drivers.

Wouldn’t it be something–something fanciful, that is–if the media looked at the trend of Third World immigrant crime with the same alacrity and search for patterns with which they evaluate Uber.

Castro’s Victory

While I think much of our cold war policy deserved a serious revamping after 1991–including, for example, our generous foreign aid to Israel and the continued stationing of troops in Germany–in general, the remaining Communist regimes should have remained “outlaw nations,” kept in their place by US trade policies.  Instead, starting in the early 90s, we have traded with China most of all in the empty hope that this would get China to liberalize; instead, all it has done is impoverish our other, freer trading partners, hurt our domestic manufacturers, and given them the cash to build a first class navy.

I think America should not trade and should otherwise isolate rogue, illberal nations like China, Cuba, Vietnam, Venezuela etc.  I mean our leadership class loses it over the mild kleptocratic and human rights issues in Russia today, even though it’s undeniable Cuba is a prison nation that is many times less free, sponsored terrorism and terrorists and never distanced itself from that, spied on US, has a gross human rights record, sponsors anti-American regimes like Ortega’s Nicaragua and Chavez’s Venezuela, etc.  In other words, it is a de facto enemy of the United States and its own people.
We should only trade with such nations when they make specific commitments under penalty of sanctions to improve their behavior internally and externally.  Instead, we have arbitrarily traded with some and not others and done so in this case with the most mild forms of concession by the Cuban regime.
I basically think we should isolate and impoverish unfree nations and only trade with them when they make specific commitments under penalty of sanctions to improve their behavior internally and externally.  We should be less concerned with democracy than with the rule of law and friendliness to the United States and the international system.  Here, instead, we have empowered and increased the prestige of one of the most backwards, leftist, basket case nations in the world.  Obama will find some support not only on the left but among the “Chamber of Commerce” wing of the Republican Party.  But he will also, as with his equally unforgivable abandonment of Mubarak in Egypt, shown that the United States is an unreliable, diffident partner, as likely to appease its enemies as it is to abandon its friends.  And finally, he has shown that America’s realism in his case is only in the service of the most narrowly defined concept of American interests, as if we do not have some interest in isolating regimes that are actively hostile to our entire national worldview.

Mass Hysteria

It seems feminists on college campuses, who hate frat boys and jocks because they represent everything about the power structure of college life they despise, have gained some traction with their “narrative” of widespread rape on campus.  It’s hard to know how often this happens, but it seems based on the types of stories and people involved, this more often involves redefining awkward encounters, as well as, delusional attempts at revenge, as much as it coincides with an actual crime.  What is missing from this narrative is that real rape does happen, and it happens by the cohort that commits other violent crimes:  low IQ men from the ‘hood.  We’ve seen a UVA student recently kidnapped and killed by one such monster.  But instead of worrying about this, which would threaten the entire victimology superstructure, where anti-racism figures prominently, instead, bogeymen of a white frat boy campus rape epidemic has been invented.  And when these  “bad guys” do not materialize often enough, then they must be invented, as in the recent Rolling Stone expose of an alleged UVA fraternity gang rape, now exposed as a big fat lie.

The story was never very plausible.  The characters involved were a little too close to type, and some of the facts simply did not make sense.  More important, the author, blinded by ideology, never even bothered to do the most basic investigating, which would have shown there was no party on the evening in question, no fraternity rushing in the fall, and numerous other discrepancies.  Here, as in Ferguson, it seems that people’s knowledge of how the world works is not based on direct experience, but on various stories and movies, which are themselves a type of propaganda, the product of liberal writers’ imaginations, and many of these stories, such as the endless parade of upper class white murderers on Law and Order, do not correlate even within an order of magnitude with what we know about crime from scientifically gathered statistics.  The truth is most crime and criminals, unlike the debonair geniuses in movies, are incredibly vulgar, predictable, repetitive, and depressing in their regularity.

When we look at this issue, we instead see another important problem exposed:  false accusations.  There are a variety of reasons, including fast-forwarding to the varsity league of victimhood and a desire for revenge, that make certain damaged personalities make terrible things up for attention and sympathy.  When you’re talking about a “he said, she said” situation, it’s very hard to adjudicate the facts without knowing more, and there is a strong incentive to make things up.  Contrary to the conventional wisdom that women lying about rape is uncommon, it is well known in the family courts and among rape investigators that there is in fact a very high rate of false accusations, perhaps as high as 40%.

The current milieu in college and among young adults is undoubtedly damaging to men and women alike, as well as anyone who is concerned about our common welfare.  Instead of the old regimes of marriage, or at the very least stable dating, we instead have a Darwinian struggle of “hooking up,” where 10-20% of the men amass nearly all of the women, who themselves have more hurt feelings from this utter lack of stability and commitment and frequent insults in the form of “trading up.”  And other men too, invisible to the culture, are cut off from this festival, and they are the ones least likely to rape because of their lack of aggression is often the cause of their lack of success with women.  They are increasingly embittered by their exclusion from the good times that the minority of men are having.

That said, it is a far cry from recognizing serious flaws in this state of affairs a couple of generations following the sexual revolution, to imagining that rapes are being perpetrated by jocks and frat boys en masse.  As with the media obsession with police shootings–a tiny fraction of homicides, almost all of which are justified–the real problem of real criminals is being lied about by omission and an obsessive focus on the usual hate objects of the left. And it is time conservatives, chagrined by the state of affairs in college, do not cooperate with feminists who do not have the best interests of society at heart and who have no real interest in restoring sexual morality, which they deem an inherently oppressive structure.  The feminist left are interested in destroying these men, because they are symbolic of everything they hate about America:  its traditions and its people and its leaders, who historically have been white, male, and privileged.

Bush and Obama

They both pledged on some level to unite the country.  Bush by restoring dignity to the office.  Obama by his mere presence as a transcendent figure and because of his deep, personal understanding of minorities and their frustrations.  Well, here we are.  So much for hope and change!

In context of this Ferguson craziness, Kakistocracy Blog (Rule of the Worst) made an interesting point in the very different way the whites and non-whites discuss their group and their expectations relative to others:

Blacks, and as a general rule other non-whites, seek to enforce standards of behavior on out-groups. Their logic apparently being that if brother attacks brother it’s a family issue. But if outsider attacks brother, it’s war. This explains the sheer nonchalance toward black/black violence. It’s their issue, and others needn’t worry about it. This in stark contrast to when a white fells a black, where we see violent repercussions and literal para-military posturing. Blacks have standards and expectations for the behavior of others more so than themselves. And are furious when these are breached.

Whites have evolved an entirely different norming scheme: they patrol in-group behavior, and establish standards for it exclusively. For white liberals this means NO RACISM. This being a non-negotiable expectation for conservative peers (their in-group whether or not they care to admit it). In contrast they do not similarly discipline out groups, viewing them as wholly outside their purview. If brother attacks brother it’s critical business for everyone; but if outsider attacks brother it’s a random act of youth robbery gone wrong. This distinct compartmentalization is what induces cries of hypocrisy from quarters such as these, though is shrugged-off by liberals as wholly outside-of-scope. They enforce in-group behavior only and become goggle-eyed at infractions.

Similarly, white conservatives still largely reserve their heaviest rhetorical ordnance for the liberals who they view as having breached their own evolving in-group standards. Increasingly this standard includes survival as a people and, by necessity, the enforcement of expectations on out-groups. This driving a further wedge with their SJW peers

Taken in total, I find these distinct schemes to be quite infelicitous. To occupy the overlapping space of scrutiny rather than gambol in the open represents a cramp in any man’s style. Though one that will ultimately be sorted out. In the meantime though, enjoy the show tonight.

It’s on!

 

Some Militarized Cops Oppressing Students By Saving Them From a Maniac Shooter

Ain’t no one whining about “militarized policing” when relatively small town FSU cops show up with AR-15s to take out the piece of crap who shot up the library last night.  I’m glad none of the students were killed; sadly three were injured, one critically. This is a reminder that police need the gear and training to get the job done, and when they have it, it saves lives

I have to say, the whinging, some among people on the right, about “militarized policing” is the lamest, made-up issue of all time and a serious “changing of the subject” that has occurred, chiefly with regard to the Ferguson riots.  The latter is a story not about militarized policing, but that inner city blacks riot for infractions real and imaginary from time to time and have been doing so regularly since the mid-1960s.  Indeed, they are often egged on to do so by their “leadership,” but instead we’re all talking about police armored vehicles, as if the most natural thing on Earth is to riot when you see cops in a scary looking vehicle.  The latter is a symptom of the former, not its cause.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 44 other followers