I don’t think they’ve thought this thing all the way through.
Low intelligence, poor impulse control, defective future orientation, emotionalism, difficulty with abstractions. So say psychologists who study racial differences. The literature is voluminous, though suppressed. (The predictable assertion that these scientists, nearly all white, are racist is belied by their consistent finding that Ashkenazi Jews are at the top in intelligence, followed by East Asians, then whites. Racists do not establish the inferiority of their own race.)
These traits, plus poor understanding of the world beyond their visual field, and difficulty with abstract reasoning perfectly explain the senseless murders, the periodic yet unceasing riots and burning of cities, usually of their own neighborhoods and stores. Watts in 1965, much of the country in 1968, LA in1992, more recently Baltimore, Ferguson, Minneapolis. They explain the young black woman on network television sobbing that she is afraid to leave her house because the police might kill her, the black man roaring that he is tired, tired, tired of the police hunting down blacks to kill them. The absurdity of the first claim, the fact that blacks kill far more of each other than whites do, do not occur to an emotional, poorly informed and innumerate people.
Many students of black behavior have concluded that it is innate—genetic, as we say. This thought is of course verboten, an ender of careers, so many who know of it remain very quiet, as do the millions who have long suspected it. Liberals also seem to suspect it as otherwise they would say “Let’s study the matter carefully and find out.” Fairly obviously they fear what they might find, so instead they shy away from the questions in something resembling terror. In human affairs, questions avoided are questions likely to have the wrong answers.
If blacks as a race (there always being degrees and exceptions) cannot fit into a modern society, as seems to be the case, what now? It will be pointed out that blacks are decent people when not enraged or impulsive, that they are emotionally warmer than whites, immensely talented in music and acting, that they are human beings and should not be forced by circumstance to live in grim ghettos, that some are highly intelligent. All true. It can also be pointed out that many of my age grew up listening to the Platters, James Brown, the Supremes, to bebop and doowop and later Coltrane and Davis and so on at endless length, and that is somehow disagreeably ungrateful to think of their race as incompatible with mainline civilization. True…uncomfortably true.
But the killings, the crime, the arson never stop.
Whatever the answer might be, what we are doing now isn’t it.
Probably the single worst thing that could ever happen to them would be for them to get what they claim to want.
(Via WRSA)
- Entries
“…their consistent finding that Ashkenazi Jews are at the top in intelligence…”
Which is based upon BS. Their is no evidence this is true.
“followed by East Asians”
Ever wonder how many Asians were tested, and how they are selected?
If I test whites from UNC I’ll get a very high white IQ. So can I then claim we whites are a lot smarter than blacks, Asians, and Jews? That those results represent the white race?
“scientists”
There are very few left.
Anyone who has been to the PRC realizes there are plenty of dumb Chinese people.
The ones we see here are either the cream of the crop or the Princelings of the Politburo. The latter are often dumb as rocks but their Dad’s give big to the Uni so they get A’s.
I still can’t understand how all these Countries full of smarter than America People don’t have one fifth the amount of achievement we do.
Or maybe I do…
“But the killings, the crime, the arson never stop.”
Perhaps it’s because the party in control wants it that way? Just a thought.
13%??? Let’s look at the *REAL* numbers, shall we?
Negros are less than 13% of the national population.
Negro men are half that number (6.5%). Negro men between the ages of 15-45 are half again that number (3.25%).
So that’s a measly 3.25% that’s causing all the mayhem.
3.25%
Ponder that for a bit.
They may be savages, but they have the willingness to fight. The rest of the country does not. Hence – they are winning.
Three percent can be more than enough, if there is sufficient official and unofficial support. Those committing the violence are not punished or held to account, while anyone defending themselves is charged with a crime and persecuted by the full power of the state plus the media. That evens the odds by a whole lot.
What percentage of Americans fought in the Revolutionary war?
Often stated as 3%.*
*I take issue with that number however. It’s not universally held and I think it much higher, more like 10%, which when accounting for the number of available men of fighting age is not very low.
A large fraction of the non-black-man part of the country hates the United States, American ideas, Americans, white culture, whites, and themselves, and therefore provides cover for the 3.25% which is “willing to fight”.
A large fraction of the non-America-hating population might well be willing to fight the 3.25% but are less willing to kill police who come to arrest them for self-defense.
[A moment later] Yah, what HazHap said. (That is, what he wrote while I was distracted with -shudder- work stuff, the big cheater.)
Yep, the support from the white marxists is what enables the looters. Take that away, shoot a few rioters and looters and they’ll fade away quickly.
I think someone figured out they could downvote more than once anonymously.
There, three upvotes for that astute observation 🙂
Mousing over the Downvote Icon and saw it says “Hated It!” and I just got a mental picture of the two “film reviewers” from the In Living Color comedy show from a while back.
LOL, I thought it might be a person of the Jewish faith that believed they have a high IQ…
These days it’s easy to offend some people, so it could be a whole host of issues.
As in, some people don’t like the truth…
So, decent people about, oh, 13% of the time?
It is the culture, not the skin color, which causes the problem. Clarence Thomas seems to be a decent person. Crayon Martin was not. The real problem is that when the crowd gets large enough with a certain skin color, then the culture self-selects!
The Madness of Crowds has been studied.
From lynchings in the South to today’s riots, from Clint Eastwood and Hang ‘Em High to To Kill a Mocking bird.
From the French Revolution to Kristalnacht, crowds alter the moral snse of those who are in them.
THis can be pleasant like when a Rock Band is hitting it in concert or a Swing Club had Benny Good man and his band getting people up to dance.
The Madness of Crowds.
Good point Kenny. Crowds always change things.
It’s mighty White of you to give Clarence Thomas some credit for that.
NABALT.
The Culture goes back farther than I do. The Culture goes back farther than my Dad did. The Culture may go back farther than my Granddad did.
The cultural trappings change, but the Culture remains the same.
When a certain people continue to have a majority culture that’s prone to violence, crime, shiftlessness, and self destructive behavior, at some point you run up against the probability that the culture may just be endemic to the color.
Or, if you really want to insist on it: it’s not the culture, it’s the Africa, man.
I don’t know IB, white and red people murdered 100miliion in the last hundred years (russians and chinese) without batting an eye. I think that tally of murder puts the murder/violence by Africans to shame.
Seems it’s more a problem of humans than the color of the humans.
In Africa much of the regimes doing mass killings are operating in the Name of Marx too.
They just throw some Ethnic or Race issue in there.
But yeah, Killing in the Name is something all Races will undertake under certain conditions. Somehow Marxism/Fascism/Socialism is one of the best petri dishes to grow those depraved conditions. Go Figure…