Burn, Ferguson, Burn
Random Thoughts on a Confluence of Putrescenses
August 15, 2014
Methinks there cometh three horsemen of a sorry apocalypse: First, blacks are again rioting, looting, and burning. Second, the media are as usual lying, interpreting, concealing. Third, swatted-out heavies of a bush-league police force knock reporters around, arresting them for nothing, and refusing to reveal their identities. We are seeing the birth of a nation.
What actually happened in Ferguson? God only knows. Of course we are hearing from talking heads with bargain-basement IQs that a policeman, from racial motives, shot an unarmed black kid because he refused to stop walking in the street. Did it happen? Possibly. I wasn’t there. But the story smells.
Reflect: Every white cop short of the orbit of Neptune knows that if he shoots a black, he faces dismemberment in the media, loss of job and pension, probable criminal charges locally by a publicity-seeking prosecutor, a well-funded civil suit that he can’t afford filed by surviving family members, and trumped-up federal civil-rights charges from an attorney general who doesn’t like whites.
All this because he wants to shoot a black kid for jaywalking?
But let us ignore mere totalitarian fascism on the march. To this we are inured. Let us focus instead on the disastrous failure of racial policy. For over half a century we have had many Fergusons, mini-Fergusons, mega-Fergusons (Los Angles, among many others), and the Knockout Game (micro-Fergusons). We will have more, and worse. Racial hostility is not subsiding. The races are not assimilating. If they were going to, they would have. The danger is that one of the serial Fergusons could go parallel.
The country could blow.
The media, Democrats, and race industry stoke the fires by telling blacks that they are victims, and some seem actually to be looking for a fight. Jesse Jackson is quoted as threatening, “There is a Ferguson near you.” True. Wherever blacks and whites come into contact, there is trouble.
With the encouragement of the various Jesses, blacks could make a bad miscalculation. Angry, poorly educated, and living in concentrations that make them seem more numerous than they are, they may miss some important points. They are only thirteen percent of America. Food does not come from Safeway, but from remote farms owned by whites in truck driven by whites. If Jesse and Al and the Black Panthers got their race war, blacks would lose it hugely. The country would not recover.
I doubt that our televised commentators have any idea what they are dealing with. Nor do academics. Whites with university educations, who read five books at once, who have never been in a police car, cannot know who the rioters are, cannot imagine how the world seems to them. Black physicists do not loot shoe stores. Those who do tend strongly to be functionally illiterate. The rest have probably never read a book in their lives. They live in a mental world unknown to most whites. They will never live amicably with white cops.
The feds have turned police into low-brow SS, but racial conflict would exist even if this weren’t true. As long as white policemen work in black neighborhoods, Fergusons will continue.
White cops tend to be from the lower middle class, often former military, with the accompanying values. Theirs is a conventional morality of obedience to the law, birth within wedlock, mowing the lawn, neat clothes, making sure the kids do their homework, orderliness, and avoidance of obscenity in mixed company. They are quietly but intensely contemptuous of the blacks of the deep city, whom they see as slovenly, criminal, shiftless, parasitic, and violent.
Don’t write me email about stereotypes etc. I’m telling you what a great many white policemen (I believe I could safely say nearly all) think. What they think and what they see governs their behavior, not whether you or I agree with it.
Meanwhile the blacks see white policemen as hostile occupiers, much as Parisians in 1943 saw their Wehrmacht masters . White cops seem agents of an alien and hostile race, always pushing them around. Speaking as one who has spent many, many nights patrolling with cops in black regions, I know well why the blacks feel this way:
“Hey, you! Yeah, you, with the beer in your hand. Pour it out. You can’t drink in public. I said pour…it…out.”
The obvious, inexpensive, simple, practical solution would be to have only black police in black neighborhoods, and white in white. This wouldn’t end shootings because it wouldn’t end crime, but it would end the consequent racial riots, looting, and burned cities. I suggested this when I was police writer for the Washington Times, but was told that it ran against the policy of compulsory integration. Black cops didn’t like the idea because it would leave them in the most dangerous jurisdictions.
We need to realize, but will not, that blacks are a separate people, self-aware and cohesive. They have their own dialect, music, and modes of dress, which they value. They name their kids LaToya and Keeshawn instead of Robert and Carol because they want to maintain a distance from whites.
The races spring from utterly different cultures. Compulsory integration is thus a form of social imperialism in which whites try to force blacks to conform to European norms. Blacks have no historical connection at all to Greece, Rome, the Old Testament Hebrews, Christianity, the Middle Ages, the Enlightenment, Industrial Revolution, to Newton, LaGrange, or Galois, to the philosophic tradition of Thales, Aquinas, Schopenhauer, or Hegel. Nor do Eurowhites have roots in Africa. No commonality exists.
We talk multiculturism, but try to imose a monoculture—ours—on blacks. Why? Why in school should we insist that blacks study things of no interest to them? It is reminiscent of policies aimed at stripping American Indians of their languages and traditions.
On the other hand, I as a white man have little enthusiasm for studying Shaka Zulu, the Great Zimbabwe, or African religions. Would not all be happier with their own schools in which they could maintain their own culture?
“Separate but equal” is in bad odor as a governing philosophy. It seems to be the only one that works. If voluntary, wherein lies the evil? Less contact means less conflict.
Is there any evidence that blacks want to associate with whites? Or vice versa? In the universities, do blacks not clamor for black-only dormitories, black-only fraternities, and Black Studies? And what is wrong with this? Why should blacks not associate with whom they choose? And why should not whites?
Almost always, when the races do not have to mingle, they don’t. In Washington, blacks fleeing the crime of the city go to the heavily-black Prince George’s County, whites to Arlington, Fairfax, and Bethesda. Within Arlington, blacks cluster together in mini-barrios. So what? It’s their business.
Note that the togetherheid pushed endlessly on us is almost entirely rhetorical, preached by people who mean that others should practice it. I lived for years in the city with many liberal, racially correct friends. They spent all their time with other whites, and the restaurants and bars they patronized seldom had more than a token black, if that.
Ethnic mixing doesn’t work, gang. Not Moslems and Parisians, Irish Catholics and Protestants, Shias and Sunnis, Indonesians and Chinese, nor even New Yorkers and Alabamans. We think it should work, insist that it will, punish those who observe that it doesn’t. Yet still it doesn’t work. The greater the difference between groups, the less well it works. If we realized this, and let people do as they choose, the country would be much better off.