Showing posts with label blacks. Show all posts
Showing posts with label blacks. Show all posts

Tuesday, May 31, 2011

Another Raceless Criminal

In Rock Hill, a city near Charlotte, a woman wore a bikini that featured the design a Confederate flag to an apartment swimming pool with some friends.  The Charlotte Observer says that a group of "people" came up, surrounded them, and called them racists.  When one of the woman's friends stood up, a "suspect" pointed a gun at him before fleeing.

The Charlotte Observer doesn't give the race (or any other description) of the suspect, but his race was probably the same as most of the people who went wilding over Memorial Day weekend (including in Charlotte, where one man was killed and 70 people arrested after a gang melee).

The readers of the Observer's website aren't as clueless as the commissars of political correctness.  The article has a postscript:
Editor's note: Comments have been disabled because of repeated violations of site policies. Please refrain from profanity, obscenity, racist remarks, spam, name-calling or attacking others for their views.

In other words, someone mentioned that the gunman was black, which prompted a discussion of blacks and crime in the comments, leading the horrified liberal editors to shut down the comments to prevent the spread of politically incorrect ideas.

(h/t Rebellion)

Wednesday, July 21, 2010

White Music

I hate most modern music.  It consists of ghetto blacks and negrified whites talking about committing perverted sex acts, going to "da club," and abusing creative drugs.  When I'm in the car I listen to the local rock station, but their music is too white trash for me and ultimately much rock music is black music.  When I'm at home, I listen to folk rock and metal.  I especially like symphonic metal.  It's quite refreshing compared to the jetsam radio stations toss out.

Unfortunately, most whites would rather give their money to blacks, wiggers, and Jews rather than their own people and they would rather listen to a Negro guttersnipe chant about "supersoak(ing) dat ho" than songs rich in their own history.

Below are some of the songs and bands that I am fond of.  They are mostly by European bands, since apparently that's how far you have to go to avoid ghetto black influence.


Unless you are a linguist you won't understand the lyrics - this band often sings in Gaulish.  Eluveitie is a Swiss folk metal band that plays with not only modern instruments, but also traditional Celtic instruments.



Here's another song from Eluveitie, albeit in English.  This has the screaming vocals common in death metal.  But you can also hear the traditional instruments pretty well.



If you don't like the primeval vocals, here's an instrumental version of one of their songs.



Here's a Swedish folk metal band called Asynja. Their songs are usually about Norse mythology.



They also have explicitly white nationalist songs, such as this one.



Here's one by the Swedish band Ultima Thule. It's an interesting rendition of the Civil War song, When Johnny Comes Marching Home.



Speaking of When Johnny Comes Marching Home, here's an instrumental version. Of course, since there are no lyrics it could also be For Bales.



I'm generally not a fan of country music, but I'll make an exception for Johnny Cash. Here's him singing Ghost Riders in the Sky.



Here's a rock version of it by the Outlaws.



Moving back to metal, this is from the gothic metal band Sirenia.



Some symphonic metal from the Finnish band Nightwish.



Here's another song by the same band.



Yet another. The female vocals are nice to listen to once you get tired of listening to death metal screams.



Here's their cover of The Phantom of the Opera.



This is a song about Valkyries by the Finnish band Amberian Dawn.


The songs above are examples of what happens when music is created by those on the right half of the bell curve rather than by the flotsam of society.

Sunday, July 18, 2010

The Tea Party Movement is Worthless

After the NAACP condemned "elements" of the Tea Party movement as racist, a Tea Party activist named Mark Williams wrote a hilarious letter mocking the NAACP and black political views in general (read the text here). Predictably, the Tea Party leaders are upset about this and expelled his group from the National Tea Party Federation.

Despite his expulsion, liberals and blacks will continue to call the Tea Party racist. Anyone who disagrees with blacks and wants to take their goodies away will be labeled a racist. They do so because they understand that whites are afraid of being called a racist and will do everything they can to avoid being called one.

Until the Tea Party movement becomes unfazed when it is called racist, it will accomplish nothing. A Tea Party movement that panders to blacks makes about as much sense as a Sinn Fein that wants to establish the Anglican church or a Geert Wilders who supports Islamic immigration.

Tuesday, May 11, 2010

Screw Single Mothers

It's time for another post in which I bash a feminist who whines about the plight of "poor" single women who spawn bastard children and then expect society to pick up the tab. I found this article, "Single mothers need pathway out of poverty," via Feministing. It was published on Mother's Day by Majorie R. Sims on The Grio, a black website apparently affiliated with MSNBC.

As we celebrate mothers across the nation this week, I'm reminded of a segment of mothers who likely will face more challenges than cheers this Mother's Day.

In the U.S., the number of children in single-mother families has risen dramatically over the past four decades, with nearly one-fourth (24 percent) of the 75 million children under age 18 living in a single-mother family. Race also plays a defining role in the poverty rate, with two-thirds (66 percent) of low-income African American children living in single-mother families, compared to just over a third (35 percent) of low income white children living in single-mother households. This growing number of single-mother families has a significant impact on their children.

The reason why single mother families have been increasing in number is because in the 1960s, feminists and public policy decided that fathers were optional and that one woman could provide for and raise children just as well as a father and mother. And this sure will have a significant impact on their children - they will be more likely to commit crime and have bastards of their own.

According to a recent report issued by the Population Reference Bureau (PRB), children of mother-headed families are more likely to live in poverty, with 42 percent of all low-income children living in single-mother families, compared to 32 percent of children in non single-mother families. For children under the age of 8, results are even more striking, with more than three-quarters (77 percent) of young children in single-mother families falling in the poor or low-income range. In addition, children of mother-headed families are more likely to drop out of high school and less likely to have health insurance.

If families led by single mothers are so awful, then instead of promoting single motherhood, the government should cut its wealth redistribution programs, thus ending the subsidies for this.

These single mothers face their own challenges, with data showing they tend to be less educated, less likely to have a job or full-time employment and considerably less likely to have a management position or professional occupation. In fact, the largest proportion of working, low-income mothers work in services, with 41 percent of low-income single mothers working in services compared to only 17 percent of higher-income single moms.

A recent report from Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research shows that single-parent families believe their economic stability, role as parents and financial providers, and sense of well-being are all negatively impacted by the challenges inherent in single parenthood. At the same time, single parents remain hopeful and express deep commitment to their families and believe in their ability to provide a strong home life and future for their children despite the obstacles.

So in other words, they knew they couldn't support a family by themselves, yet they attempted to do so anyways and are failing. Good. Perhaps if enough of them fail, they young women will realize that trying to raise a family as a single mother is a bad idea.

Ideally, we need to improve the economic conditions of families who live at 200 percent of poverty and below, or with an annual income of $44,100 or less for a family of four. To help these women-headed families establish financial economic security, there are a few components critical to success. Gender-focused strategies can work well to provide skills, careers, financial education and new models of support to create pathways out of poverty. A greater understanding of the relationship between gender and poverty and an investment in projects that take on a gender-specific focus will help us meet the needs of these families.

Why should "we" do anything? It is not "our" (read: taxpayers') job to improve the conditions of these so-called families. And understanding the relationship between gender and poverty is pretty simple: when young, uneducated single women spawn bastards, the family will probably be poor due to the expenses of taking care of children.

Secondly, connecting vulnerable families to existing services and benefits - like financial education and high-quality, affordable early learning and childcare options--can help propel them forward on the path.

Third, single mothers need career ladders and quality job opportunities. We can make this happen by connecting them with community colleges, increasing the number of quality family-supporting jobs in lower-income communities and ensuring they have access to education and training that will lead to career advancement and entrepreneurship opportunities.

In the first part of the article, Sims writes about the problems with single motherhood. Now, she writes about how "we" (read: middle and upper-class white people who pay taxes) can improve the status of these single mothers' families. If we improve the status of single mothers' families to that of two-parent families, then there will be little incentive for many women to get married, which would increase single motherhood and lead to even more of the problems Sims described earlier, particularly the propensity for single mothers' bastards to commit crime and spawn more bastards (hooray for positive feedback loops!).

Also, the fact is that many single mothers simply would not benefit from more education. The fact is, higher education, even after decades of dumbing-down, still requires an above average IQ. Single mothers tend to come from populations with low average IQs, such as blacks, mestizos, and white trash, so forcing them through school would not allow them to climb the career ladder. Not to mention the fact that the dumb sluts got pregnant while they were young and poor in the first place is evidence that they are not very smart, so it makes no sense to waste money on morons to go to school when are smart people who could use money for college (funded through private scholarships, rather than government grants, of course).

We cannot merely focus on moving women-headed families above the poverty line. Rather we should consider ways to help them transform their lives from just surviving to actually thriving, with an increase in the number of women holding quality jobs; more low-income families with bank accounts, savings and increased financial knowledge; and ultimately, significantly fewer single-mother families living at or below 200 percent of the poverty line. Let's honor these mothers with fresh thinking, innovative models and policy decisions that will actually change the trajectory of their lives and those of their children.
In the end it is revealed: this push for helping single mothers is just another way for liberals to expand the welfare state and the reach of government. Pretty much everything liberals advocate ultimately leads to those goals.

Also this week, Melissa McEwan, the disgustingly fat feminist who runs Shakespeare's Sister in between runs to her local all-you-can-eat pizza buffet, wrote an article with a similar theme on Alternet, attacking a conservative who wrote an article attacking single-mother families in the underclass and advocating instead that the government increase social services. Kievsky at Occidental Dissent wrote a decent rebuttal.

Liberals probably really care about single mothers as much as I do (which is not at all), they just use them to expand government by replacing fathers with welfare.

Sunday, May 2, 2010

In Defense of Stephanie Grace (Or Business As Usual in the Modern University) - UPDATED

Pictured: Stephanie Grace

UPDATE:
Yelena Shagall has been revealed as the leak source. She appears to be a conservative or Beltway libertarian. For much more information on her, please see the end of the post.

When I first read about the Stephanie Grace controversy a few days ago, I didn't bother to write about it because there didn't seem to be any point. White people get attacked for being "racist" all the time. The only difference was that this person was a young female student rather than an older white man with a PhD. I figured that someone in the HBDer/paleocon/alt right blogosphere more eloquent than myself would write everything there is to say about it. Surprisingly, no one has, so combined with the fact that the liberal attack on Grace has taken on an enormous intensity, I figured I would give the story a shot.

Upon Googling "stephanie grace harvard," I was greeted with headlines screaming about how this young college student had sent a racist e-mail. This sounds serious. Did she advocate lynching? Did she recruit people to join the Ku Klux Klan or the National Socialist Movement? Did she refer to blacks as "cockroaches" and advocate killing them all? Did she advocate the forced repatriation of blacks back to Africa?

Well, no. It turns out she broke the Commandment of Liberalism: Thou shalt not dishonor a Negro. Six months ago this Harvard law student had engaged in a conversation about race at a private dinner party. Following the party she sent an e-mail to participants clarifying her views in which she stated "I absolutely do not rule out the possibility that African Americans are, on average, genetically predisposed to be less intelligent."

Eventually, she got into a fight with a person she had sent it to, a certain Yelena Shagall, who then leaked it to the Black Affirmative Action Recipients Association Law Students Association. From there it got spread accross the Internet, apparently first to Above the Law.

Let me reiterate. A student attending a PRIVATE dinner is being crucified over a single PRIVATE e-mail she sent SIX MONTHS AGO in which she described the POSSIBILITY of racial differences in intelligence. Yet, liberal blogs responded to the e-mail with a fury matched only by that of a crowd of blacks who have just learned that KFC has just run out of chicken in the middle of the lunch rush.

The first blog I read about this story on was Feministe, where Jill Filipovic (a female attorney who writes about how evil the rich are on her blog, while at the same time posts literally thousands of pictures on her Flickr account of her travels all over the world, meaning she is either very upper-middle class or rich herself) noted that the racism was "self-evident" and proceeded to write about how law schools are basically racist themselves and they should focus more on "social justice" and "racism." Apparently, in her view universities don't waste enough hours and gigadollars to propogandize multiculturalism. It's obvious Jill has never taken a sociology, history, or English class at a modern American university.

She updated her post and laughably attempted to tackle the subject of race and intelligence. This gem is an example of her thoughts on the topic: "Intelligence, too, is impossible to separate from environment and socialization, again making it impossible for anyone to say with absolute certainty that there is absolutely no biological or genetic difference at all ever between racial and ethnic groups." Well, the fact is, even when blacks grow up away from the ghetto, they still have low IQs relative to whites of their social class. The Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study and plenty of other studies have demonstrated this.

The next paragraph down, she claims "I take people who argue that maybe there are race-based genetic differences that determine intelligence about as seriously as I take people who argue that maybe God did create the earth in 7 days with all humans and animals in the exact same form as we find them today." HBDers will of course see the irony in that statement. Liberals claim to support evolution, but they really do not. They believe that it ended the moment the first human crossed the Sinai. They are the ones who are like creationists, not the people who believe evolution continues to this day.

Various other liberal websites picked up on the story. Gawker reported in its typical method of gossipy, contentless-writing. The harpies of Jezebel published their own smear piece. Note that neither of them bothered to refute her statement regarding the possibility of black intellectual inferiority. Maybe they did some research in order to disprove her views and they discovered that research on race and intelligence has proven her to be correct, so instead, they just smeared her as a racist. The reaction from these two websites is understandable. Jezebel and Gawker have always struck me as the type of websites frequented by people residing on the left half of the bell curve who only care about gossip and headlines rather than substance.

Eventually, the Harvard Law School Dean, Martha Minow, learned of it and naturally condemned it and gave the typical liberal discourse on diversity and equality, once again without actually bothering to refute anything Grace wrote. It seems to me that the dean of a major university should have better ways to spend her time than by making statements regarding private e-mails of students, but enforcing liberalism is far more important than education in modern American universities.

A couple mainstream conservative blogs covered this story, too. Ann Althouse, a law professor and antagonist of Feministe and Feministing, didn't even bother to defend her views. Instead she attacked Minow for her hypocrisy regarding the diversity of ideas, being too cowardly to actually discuss the possibility that blacks are less intelligent than whites.

Unfortunately, like James Watson and most other people who bring up the idea of HBD in public, she ended up revealing herself to be a coward by grovelling before political correctness. According to the Boston Globe, she sent the Black Law Students Association an apology containing the following: “I am deeply sorry for the pain caused by my e-mail. I never intended to cause any harm, and I am heartbroken and devastated by the harm that has ensued. I would give anything to take it back.’’ Then Grace distanced herself from her previous comments by writing "I emphatically do not believe that African-Americans are genetically inferior in any way. I understand why my words expressing even a doubt in that regard were and are offensive."

Despite her pathetic, sniveling apology, liberals want her to loose her clerkship with a United States Circuit Court Judge. Liberals always demand apologies from the politically incorrect, but they never end there. As the sagas of Trent Lott, Don Imus, Larry Summers, and James Watson attest, whenever liberals receive an apology from someone who offends Negroes, they then seek to destroy that person. In her original e-mail's conclusion, she asked its recipients to not "pull a Larry Summers on [her]," so it is obvious she knows how the liberal smear machine works. Instead of giving them what they wanted, she should have stood her ground and defended her views. She wouldn't have been any worse off. Maybe she even would have provoked one of those "dialogues about race" liberals are always clamoring for.

Since she won't defend her own views, I will. The fact is, Stephanie Grace was right.

It is "self-evident," as Jill of Feministe would say, that blacks are intellectually inferior to virtually every other race (save Australoids). Virtually every measurement of intelligence, from the various IQ tests, to SATs, to simple high school graduation rates has demonstrated that there is an intellectual gap between whites (and Asians) and blacks. Since the 1960s, billions of dollars have been spent to close this "achievement gap," with very little change in black performance compared to that of whites. The chasm is still gaping.

Even disregarding all of the statistics from decades of testing, historical and contemporary events demonstrate that is undeniable that any country or region inhabited primarily by blacks is a cesspool of violence, crime, poverty, corruption, and virtually every other ailment of humanity. Even when blacks inherit a prosperous land, they ruin it. Zimbabwe, the Breadbasket of Africa when it was called Rhodesia, abandoned its currency last year due to hyperinflation. South Africa developed nuclear weapons under Afrikaner rule, but now they have trouble merely keeping the power on. Detroit was a prosperous city in the 1950s, but forty years after white flight the wilderness is reclaiming much of it. If blacks were, as liberals claim, intellectually equal to whites, then they should have had no problem maintaining these white civilizations. Instead, they trashed them.

Compare Europe's black colonies with its Asian ones. Hong Kong, Singapore, and Macau were European-ruled for a long time. The modern cities were essentially built by the Europeans. Yet, when they were decolonized, instead of running them into the ground, the Asians who took over maintained them as modern cities. Coincidentally, East Asians have a higher average IQ than blacks (and whites, for that matter).

Additionally, its worth noting that Grace doesn't fully endorse the idea of racial differences in intelligence. She just thinks that it is possible. I wonder how liberals and blacks would respond if a true believer in human biodiversity such as Richard Lynn or Jared Taylor were to speak at Harvard Law?

This whole story is utterly ridiculous. The fact that this received national attention demonstrates yet again how pathetic and delicate liberals and blacks are. A student at a private university sent one private e-mail six months ago. Big. Fucking. Deal. These liberal crybabies need to grow the fuck up and stop turning every slight against blacks into a national controversy.

I think the reason why they did so in this case has to do with the fact that it was young woman at Harvard who wrote this. Note that Feministe, Gawker, and Jezebel were basically the ones who covered the story first. All three are havens for educated, liberal feminists. And the only thing educated, liberal feminists hate more than white men are conservative women.

Regardless of the reason for the controversy, the lunacy of the modern university has been revealed once again, just as it was in 2005 with Larry Summers and again in 2009 with Henry Gates. Had Grace defended herself, we might have had a minor improvement in its situation. Instead, she struck the colors, as most whites do against blacks, granting liberals and blacks yet another victory in their war against White America.

The full text of her e-mail follows:

.. . .. I just hate leaving things where I feel I misstated my position.

I absolutely do not rule out the possibility that African Americans are, on average, genetically predisposed to be less intelligent. I could also obviously be convinced that by controlling for the right variables, we would see that they are, in fact, as intelligent as white people under the same circumstances. The fact is, some things are genetic. African Americans tend to have darker skin. Irish people are more likely to have red hair. (Now on to the more controversial:) Women tend to perform less well in math due at least in part to prenatal levels of testosterone, which also account for variations in mathematics performance within genders. This suggests to me that some part of intelligence is genetic, just like identical twins raised apart tend to have very similar IQs and just like I think my babies will be geniuses and beautiful individuals whether I raise them or give them to an orphanage in Nigeria. I don't think it is that controversial of an opinion to say I think it is at least possible that African Americans are less intelligent on a genetic level, and I didn't mean to shy away from that opinion at dinner.

I also don't think that there are no cultural differences or that cultural differences are not likely the most important sources of disparate test scores (statistically, the measurable ones like income do account for some raw differences). I would just like some scientific data to disprove the genetic position, and it is often hard given difficult to quantify cultural aspects. One example (courtesy of Randall Kennedy) is that some people, based on crime statistics, might think African Americans are genetically more likely to be violent, since income and other statistics cannot close the racial gap. In the slavery era, however, the stereotype was of a docile, childlike, African American, and they were, in fact, responsible for very little violence (which was why the handful of rebellions seriously shook white people up). Obviously group wide rates of violence could not fluctuate so dramatically in ten generations if the cause was genetic, and so although there are no quantifiable data currently available to "explain" away the racial discrepancy in violent crimes, it must be some nongenetic cultural shift. Of course, there are pro-genetic counterarguments, but if we assume we can control for all variables in the given time periods, the form of the argument is compelling.

In conclusion, I think it is bad science to disagree with a conclusion in your heart, and then try (unsuccessfully, so far at least) to find data that will confirm what you want to be true. Everyone wants someone to take 100 white infants and 100 African American ones and raise them in Disney utopia and prove once and for all that we are all equal on every dimension, or at least the really important ones like intelligence. I am merely not 100% convinced that this is the case.

Please don't pull a Larry Summers on me.''

UPDATE:

I managed to find the name of the leaker via a comment on a posting of OneSTDV and confirmed it with other sources. Her name is Yelena Shagall. She is a Belarusian-born Jew from Skokie, IL.

Her Facebook page indicates she is a graduate of the University of Illinois at Chicago (class of 2006), where she majored in political science and mathematics (winning an award in that department), and is a Harvard graduate student in the class of 2010 currently living in Cambridge, MA. Her Facebook profile pic (above) is the typical slutty picture that a lot of college girls seem to put up on Facebook, replete with pseudo-gang signs.

She is a right-leaning individual having ties to numerous conservative organizations. She has ties to various Beltway libertarian groups, too. At UIC she dabbled in Objectivism, was involved with the College Republicans (she was UIC's CR vice president in 2003), and attended Cato University in summer 2004. She had a column in the Chicago Flame through which she expressed viewpoints that were a mixture of snarky collegiate neoconservatism and economic libertarianism (the combination of viewpoints that get libertarians seen as just Republicans who like to party), including the typical female conservative criticism of feminism (where they bash feminism while reaping all of its benefits to women). She wrote at least two articles regarding race, though neither of them express support for HBD. Her libertarian views are pretty much a joke, though, as she supported the war in Iraq and when Bush won in 2004, remarked that "it's going to be OK."

At Harvard Law, she was an officer of its Federalist Society in 2008. More interesting is the fact that she worked with the Institute for Justice, a Beltway "libertarian" law firm, as a "summer clerk or intern" in 2008. She is the woman in the green suit jacket in the picture below. (As an aside, why is it that young women are incapable of dressing professionally? The men in the picture are wearing full suits, but the women are wearing short sleeved shirts and one has a skirt with bare legs. They look pretty unprofessional contrasted with the men.)



She appears to be a Zionist, having led a counter-protest at UIC against a pro-Palestinian protest.

Her e-mail address is
Yelena.Shagall@gmail.com

Yelena, welcome to the Internet.

Sunday, April 18, 2010

Why Was the Plaza Safe This Weekend?

Last Sunday I wrote about the black wilding on Kansas City's Country Club Plaza last Saturday. While the MSM, police, and politicians were too cowardly to mention the fact that the "distrubances" were caused by large numbers of black "youths," they did understand that if the wildings occurred again, the Plaza would be doomed. The police were out in large numbers (including mounted officers and a sort of mobile command center) and would ticket parents whose children violated the curfew, Mayor Mark Funkhouser and the KCPD chief spent the evening on the Plaza with their families, and a group of 60 black men led by Alvin Brooks (the man who Funkhouser defeated to be elected mayor) wandered the Plaza to ensure that if large numbers of "youths" showed up, they would not cause any problems. Naturally, the Plaza was safe last night.

This incident is an example of why I am critical of libertarians who complain about "the police state." The fact is, if you want to maintain law and order in an area populated by NAMs, particularly blacks, you must have a police state.

The Kansas City Star notes "Hordes of dressy prom-goers ruled the entertainment area instead of the groups of unruly youths who swarmed the streets the previous Saturday night." Of course, they leave out the essential difference between the "prom goers" and the "unruly youths" - the fact that most of these prom-goers were white suburbanites, while these unruly youths were entirely black. The cowardice of the MSM is disgusting.

The plaza was safe this weekend because the "youths" who strolled it were white, not black, and because the police and community activists patrolled the Plaza to prevent blacks from wilding again. I'm sure Kansas City's liberal media will attempt to come up with plenty of alternative explanations, though. It should be fun to laugh at them.

Sunday, April 11, 2010

Blacks Ruin Everything

"Kansas City Police were busy on Saturday night after massive crowds took over the Plaza. Some people compared the wild scene to rioting in downtown L.A."
Whenever large numbers of young blacks gather together, whether it is in South Africa, New Orleans, Congo, Chicago, or Paris, chaos, destruction, and violence are sure to follow due to their low average IQ and different social order. Whether it is a rap "concert," basketball game, track-and-field event, a movie, or just a Saturday night in a shopping district, anything that attracts blacks will attract trouble.

In Kansas City, Missouri, the Country Club Plaza is an upscale outdoor shopping center encompassing a few city blocks. It has a number of restaurants and stores, all of which are relatively pricey and attract large numbers of suburban whites, usually from Johnson County, Kansas. Unfortunately, it is on the northern end of an oasis in a typical urban wasteland. If you go to the west you will find the bar district of Westport (which is relatively safe because it attracts mostly whites), if you go south you will find expensive homes and yuppie neighborhoods. If you go southeast you will find the University of Missouri-Kansas City and Rockhurst University. However, to the north and east are black ghettos.

Due to private security and police, the Plaza had managed to remain relatively safe from black wildings that have plauged so many other locales around the United States. Until now.

On Saturday night, hundreds of Negro "youths" went rampaging like a bachelor herd of wildebeests. Between 500 and 1000 Negroes swarmed the Plaza, damaging property, attacking actual shoppers, harassing motorists by banging on windows and jumping in front of cars, firing off guns or fireworks, breaking store windows, robbing people, seriously injuring at least one person, and fighting amongst themselves. The police had to block of roads and unleash pepper spray on these clowders of chaos. Naturally, the liberal media referred to the Negroes as "youths" without detailing their race, but non-establishment sources revealed that they were black (as most people who read the MSM stories probably suspected).

Many whites in the Kansas City metropolitan area are leary of the Plaza as a result of this and if another wilding occurs, the Plaza will die. It might even die as a result of this one. The fact that it occurred on a prom night when many suburban white kids were eating at the Plaza restaurants will make the damage much worse - many suburban parents will avoid the Plaza and ban their children from going there after this. Suburban whites in general will soon realize that the Plaza is no longer safe and will retreat to their suburban entertainment centers, leaving the Plaza to rot just as Bannister Mall did years ago for the same reason. Naturally, Negro leaders will whine about how racist whites are because they don't want to share the Plaza with blacks, just as they did when Bannister Mall failed. Of course, if the Plaza was saved by allowing the police and security to kick out miscreants or prevent them from entering, the Negroes would object to that as racist, too.

Segregation is reviled by most people today, but was segregation really bad compared to the black kleptocracy that we have now? The fact is, segregation existed (and not only in the South) prior to the 1960s because whites understood the fact that crime, chaos, and violence follow blacks. A wilding like this would never have happened in Kansas City in the 1960s and before - during the MLK riots, for example, suburban police blocked off entrances to the suburbs and prevented blacks from entering. Back then it was understood who the troublemakers were and how to stop them.

Businesses should be allowed to ban Negro youths and the police should not be restrained from blocking them from entering white areas to prevent wildings like this from occurring. Some may say that this would be a "police state" and no one can suggest this and still call himself a libertarian. The problem is, libertarianism works if there is a population of people who respect others' rights to life, liberty, and property. Blacks, however, do not. Libertarianism will not work in places with large black populations where the "youths" spend their time ruining everyone else's lives.

(Heh. I bet this post will cause me to be delinked from a few blogs. Also, if anyone objects to me using the word "Negro" in this post, go complain to the United Negro College Fund while you're at it.)

Saturday, April 10, 2010

Tea Partiers and the Half of Americans Who Don't Pay Taxes

At Feministe, Jill Filipovic remarks on the fact that nearly half of US households pay no federal income tax, as if taxes really aren't that bad because many people don't even pay them and so maybe "anti-tax conservatives" and Tea Partiers should just shut up and go home.

The fact is, many of the Tea Partiers are well aware of this fact and are angry about it (conservative anti-tax organizations have been reporting it for years). They are upset that the money they work hard for is redistributed to "poor" people through the many government welfare programs (it's funny how these "poor" people who can somehow afford alcohol, cigarettes, drugs, electronics, "urban" clothing, and expensive rims, but that's a topic for another post). If you go to a Tea Party protest you will find that the people are working-class, middle-class, upper-middle-class, and even some wealthy people. Virtually all of them are white. And not only do they have to live in expensive neighborhoods and commute long distances to avoid NAMs, but they have to subsidize NAMs' (and lumpen whites') lifestyles, as they are the ones paying the taxes. The Tea Partiers are too afraid to say it, but most of them are probably aware of the racial composition of their group versus that of the people whose existence they pay for.

Each year when they put away money to pay for their young child's future college education, they pay for part of others' in the form of Pell Grants. When they work every day to feed their families, they pay for fat ghetto queens and their broods to consume junk food with food stamps. When they work to pay the mortgages on their houses in nice, expensive white flight suburbs, they pay for Mexican immigrants to pour into the apartments of those neighborhoods with Section 8. When they spend thousands of dollars each year for daycare due to requiring two incomes to support the high cost of a modern suburban lifestyle, they pay for ghetto sluts to nest their myriad children in virtually free child care. While they work because they were raised to believe that's what adults do, they pay for the lumpen to be motivated to do so with tax credits and refunds such as the "Making Work Pay" credit and the EITC (which, by the way, basically cancels out the FICA taxes that the lumpen pay).

Yes, I realize my language in the last paragraph was probably inflammatory, racist, classist, and insensitive. But I don't care. If anyone doubts me, then drive through a white suburb during the day where you will find everyone either at school or studying for it, staying at home with children, working at local businesses, or out of the area due to a long commute. Then drive through a black inner city and look at all of the people driving around playing loud rap music, sitting around drinking, and standing around on street corners doing nothing.

It's ironic that blacks continue to whine about slavery that ended 145 years ago, since in the present-day whites have to work from January 1 to April 9 to pay for them to live.

Friday, April 2, 2010

Guam Might Tip Over into the Ocean

According to Hank Johnson, a black congressman from Georgia, this might happen if the military stations more Marines on the small US island. Fortunately, the admiral he is questioning does "not anticipate that."

It's sickening that people this stupid regulate everything about Americans' lives - from our healthcare down to the lightbulbs we use. At least in Plato's Republic they were ruled by philosopher kings.

Wednesday, March 24, 2010

The Arians of Alternative Right

I had thought that the Arians had vanished in the middle of the 1st millennium, but evidentally they have reappeared at Alternative Right.

Over at Hip Hop Republican (don't laugh, please, I'm trying to be serious here), a rather large black woman named Cleo E. Brown, who holds "a Master's Degree in Contemporary African-American History" has written a "rebuttal" to Alternative Right entitled "No Auschwitz in the USA!" It is full the usual stuff we've come to expect from black writers, albeit this one labels herself a Republican rather than a Democrat. She writes about how she didn't receive a doctorate in the early 1990s, just a master's degree, because of racism and sexism, but lost when she filed a complaint. In the end her "rebuttal" turns into a massive reductio ad Hitlerum. So this is what conservatives mean when they talk about black outreach? How joyous. Now we get to have Republican black race hustlers, too!

The crowning jewel of her piece is the very last sentence: "And, unfortunately, Alternative Right is obsessed with the idea of Arian Superiority." Now, I realize that everyone makes spelling mistakes and typos, but it's pretty sad that someone with a master's degree can't tell the difference between the followers of Arius and the peoples originating from the Pontic steppe.

Sunday, March 21, 2010

Wal-Mart "Hate Crime" Perpetrator Arrested

And it turned out to be a 16-year old boy. I don't believe the police. It must have been the KKK or Republicans! Everyone knows that 16-year old boys don't go out and commit stupid pranks. /sarcasm

This whole mess is ridiculous. I wonder how many thousands of dollars were wasted by Wal-Mart and several police departments were wasted just to track down some teenage kid who did a dumb prank that harmed no persons or property. Now, he's being charged with "bias intimidation and harassment" and could be sentenced to up to a year in juvenile detention if convicted. So he could get a year in jail for offending a bunch of blacks. Where are the liberals decrying the harshness of America's criminal justice system now?

If a black kid had told all white people to leave Target (there's not enough white people at Wal-Mart to make a prank there worthwhile), it is safe to say there would not have been an investigation and there would be be no hate crimes charges.


I previously blogged about the prank here.

Wednesday, March 17, 2010

Turning Harmless Pranks into Crimes

It seems that in a New Jersey Wal-Mart, someone used the store's public address system to broadcast: "Attention Wal-Mart customers: All black people leave the store now." Wal-Mart officials are trying to figure out who did it, which is understandable. However, it is not just Wal-Mart investigating:
Washington Township police, with the assistance of the Gloucester County Prosecutor's Office, are investigating the episode as a possible bias crime, said Bernie Weisenfeld, spokesman for the prosecutor's office.


In a saner era, Wal-Mart would find a way to secure its PA system and if the found the perpetrator, they would either discipline them (if an employee) or ban them from returning to the store (if a customer). Now, doing a prank in Wal-Mart is a hate crime if you happen to offend blacks.

Blacks need to grow the fuck up.

The fact is, Wal-Mart is the target of many, many pranks. Youtube has myriad videos (quite literally) of people carrying out every imaginable prank inside Wal-Marts. Outside of YouTube there are thousands of pages about Wal-Mart pranks, such as this one where an ex-employee messes with Wal-Mart on Black Friday. There are plenty of YouTube videos and webpags with pranks that people have done using the Wal-Mart PA system and/or phones. That's what this probably was about. Just some bored guy who wanted to have some fun at Wal-Mart.

Of course, if he gets caught, he can expect to have the book thrown at him. Earlier this month, two Mizzou students scattered cotton balls on the lawn of Mizzou's Black Culture Center as a prank. Instead of the incident being treated like pranks used to be, the two were arrested for the felony of second-degree tampering and the incident was treated as a hate crime.

What's ironic about these situations is that the same blacks and liberals who call for the prosecution of juvenile - but harmless - pranks are the same ones who protested in the thousands when a gang of black thugs brutally beat up a white boy at a high school and were charged with attempted murder. Liberal hypocrisy is in action once more.

Saturday, March 13, 2010

Pro-Life Race Hustlers

Happy Pi Day. I haven't posted anything since Wednesday, so today I will be posting two or three entries.

I've argued that the Religious Right has a lot in common with progressives. They were essentially the same movement in the early 1900s and late 1800s. This is especially apparent with the issue of abortion. Pro-lifers often focus on the fact that "abortion harms women" or that "abortion exploits women." The laws they pass target abortionists, not the women who get abortions. This is essentially the feminist worldview - women can't be held responsible for their actions.

Now they've decided to play the race card. For weeks now, there has been controversy over pro-life billboards in Georgia stating "Black children are an endangered species." Now Republicans in Georgia are working to pass a law that would ban abortions based on race or gender. What a waste of time. The courts would probably just strike it down as unconstitutional.

Catherine Davis, director of minority outreach for Georgia Right to Life, the group behind the billboard campaign, told FoxNews.com that she supports the legislation that she says will address an issue that has "such a disproportionate impact on the black community rather than every other community in Georgia, as well as the nation."


So the pro-lifers are relying on disparate impact - the same theory that has led to dumbed-down schools, public safety departments staffed by unqualified people, and the destruction of effective policing.

Aside from looking stupid, if conservatives begin using the idea of disparate impact, it could harm many of their political arguments. Conservatives (even mainstream ones) often criticize the fact that liberals use disparate impact theory to argue that schools and the police are racist, arguing that equal opportunity is not equal outcome. If conservatives use disparate impact in the issue of abortion, liberals could argue that conservatives are hypocrites on this issue (which would be true).

Davis noted that in 2008, blacks made up 30 percent of the population in Georgia but more than 57 percent of the abortions.

"Those numbers are so horrific," she said. "There has to be something else contributing to this number."


Yeah, it can't be the fact that black women tend to be poor, less educated (or uneducated), and have premarital sex more than white women. It has to be white racism. I'm used to this kind of ignorance coming from liberal racial egalitarians, but not from alleged conservatives. This story is starting to remind me of the story about how in the 1980s a rumor sprung up among blacks that the KKK owned KFC and put a chemical in chicken to sterilize black men. Her fear also seems rooted in the black distrust of doctors as a result of the Tuskegee syphilis study, which ended forty years ago.

"I believe it's deliberate," she said, citing Oregon as one example where most abortion clinics are located in black neighborhoods despite an overwhelming white population in the state.

But Ross dismissed that out of hand.

"I can't find facts to fit their conspiracy theory," she said, arguing that abortion clinics are located where there are clients.


It's kind of sad that liberals, who are known for their economic illiteracy, have a better understanding of how businesses operate than conservative pro-lifers. If black women are more likely to have abortions then white women, then it follows that more abortion clinics will be located near black neighborhoods than white.

"Because of health disparities, less access to birth control, less access to sex education," [Ross] said. "We have a higher rate of childhood sexual abuse. … And so when you have those types of disparities, you'll have unintended consequences.


Once again, the liberal is making more sense than the conservative.

Davis, who is black, said she just wants to see an end to what she called a racially motivated practice.

"If they will stop targeting my people, I will fade softly into the background," she said.


Here the fully story comes out. This "abortion is racist" campaign is being spearheaded by a black woman. So essentially Georgia Right to Life has been hijacked by a Michael Steele wannabe. Although I'm sure Georgia RTL wouldn't consider it a hijacking. They are undoubtably overjoyed about the fact that their campaign is now "diverse."

This is the result of years of conservative outreach to blacks: instead of there being only left-wing race hustlers, now there are conservative race-hustlers. Of course, I'm sure the Republican Party is overjoyed. Don't forget that the Bush administration was full of this mentality. For example, Condolzeea Rice once compared the Iraq War to the civil rights marches in Alabama, with the implication that critics of the Iraq War were racists.

I have no problem with people who support their racial or ethnic interests, but only if they do so with well-thought arguments. Davis is just a third-rate race hustler powered by black distrust of the healthcare system who is using the idea of disparate impact to make ludicrous claims.

It's bad enough when liberals play the race card, but when conservatives do it they just look like condescending, pandering hypocrites.

Saturday, March 6, 2010

"It's safer than the United States."

One idea I've found commonly espoused on websites and TV shows related to travel and geography is that many countries in the world are safer to travel to than the United States. I've heard or read most European countries, Canada, Australia, Japan, China, Turkey, Israel, Syria, Iran, and even Mexico described as such. Many liberals have picked up on this and use these countries as evidence as to why America needs gun control or better social services.

Of course, the real reason why those countries are safer to travel in than the United States is that none of those countries have large urban black populations. When people travel they often visit cities, which in America are filled with blacks. If you go to Tokyo you will find Japanese; if you go to Aleppo you will find Arabs; if you go to Berlin you will find Germans. If you go to a large American city, you will find nice, white enclaves with shopping districts, museums, parks, and tourist attractions surrounded by black ghettos. Note that you'll never hear anyone talking about a non-Arab African country as being safer to travel to than the United States.

As with most things in modern America, the key to understanding why it is less safe to travel in America than it is in many other countries is race.

Monday, March 1, 2010

Martin Luther King Sainthood


I don't think my motherboard has a slot for DERAM...


Every January we are treated to the spectacle of white Americans of every political alignment, social class, and geographic region trying to outdo each other in praising "Dr." Martin Luther King, Jr. I put "Dr." in quotation marks because Martin Luther King plagiarized his doctoral dissertation. In addition to being a plagiarist, MLK was also a communist and an adulterer, although you'll never hear this from the lamestream conservatives telling you MLK was a conservative due to his "content of their character" remark.

I wonder why Martin Luther King has not been canonized yet. It would make sense in this Age of Obama. The only question is: which church will be the first to do so?