“Sticking it to The Man”: Black Crime and Its Supporters

My previous two columns showed how network TV series populate a parallel universe in their depiction of crime. As opposed to the real world, in TV-Land, almost all violent crime is carried out by white men, while blacks are either the victims of white racism, or heroic defenders of law and order. It remains to examine how things came to such a pass.

With the rise of the system of apartheid that I call Jim Snow, a funny thing happened, that the mainstream media has refused to report on. In an age of equal or even superior opportunity for blacks, instead of encouraging black boys to grow up straight, take advantage of widespread opportunities, and make successful lives for themselves, ever greater numbers of black parents and authority figures have encouraged black children — especially boys — to engage in violent, criminal behavior. This insane conduct on the part of black adults — who cut off black children's noses, to spite whites' faces — has been due to their boundless hatred for whites, and the surge of self-esteem they receive, every time they succeed in encouraging a young black to "stick it to the man." Millions of black adults have found such self-indulgence more important than facing the fact that they are pushing ever more young black men down the path to prison. Perhaps black adults feel that if they push hard enough, no blacks will be incarcerated, no matter what crimes they commit.

Black criminals also enjoy powerful support from influential, white leftwing and humanitarian groups who have long used blacks as a wedge with which to drive through their socialist goals. Oddly, though, white leftists have gone beyond the embrace of socialism to ape the anti-white racism of their black clients. I believe that there is also a class warfare element to such groups' support of black crime. These people's affluence affords them a layer of protection, in the form of security guards, taxi cabs, and work that keeps them far from dangerous neighborhoods, and which is an important status symbol to them. Meanwhile, they celebrate crime against whites who lack such privileges; when the whites complain about violent, black criminals, the leftists and humanitiarians denounce them as "racists" who deserve their fate.

The result of such race-baiting is that, according to the leftwing Washington, D.C. Sentencing Project, between 1989 and 1994, the percentage of black men between the ages of 20 and 29 either incarcerated, on probation, or on parole, rose over 30 percent. In 1989, astoundingly, almost one in four black men from that age group were under supervision by criminal justice authorities. In 1995, the Sentencing Project reported that "Nearly one in three (32.2%) African American males in the age group 20-29 — 827,440 — is under criminal justice supervision on any given day — in prison or jail, on probation or parole." (This organization's numbers are generally accepted across the political spectrum.)

Supporters of black criminals, such as the Sentencing Project, typically argue that the drug laws have a "disproportionate impact" on black men, especially in the case of crack cocaine, and that the men in question are "non-violent" offenders. Such arguments ignore the support that the War on Drugs has received from black leaders and ordinary folks alike — blacks are, by and large, the least liberty-oriented group in America — and perpetuate the myth of the peaceful, urban drug dealer. Groups such as the Sentencing Project also employ an apartheidist criterion of lawmaking, whereby laws should be enacted, in order to shield favored groups from prosecution. They are hostile to the great progress represented by the principle, enshrined in the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, whereby all citizens are equal before the law.

Supporters of black criminals are also hostile to the lessons of history. In earlier phases of American history, groups of whites were heavily involved in crime. These groups included immigrant Irishmen, Eastern-European Jews, and Italians, or their American-born children. In previous generations, however, powerful, organized humanitarians did not arise to argue that the problem was not with the criminals, but with laws that persecuted members of "minority" groups. And so, those miscreants who did not die at the hands of their enemies or their intended "victims," ended their days on the gallows, in the electric chair, or in prison. Subsequent generations drew the proper lessons, and found legal ways to earn a living.

Few Americans today are aware, for instance, that during the first half of the twentieth century, the most cutthroat urban mobsters were to a large degree Jews whose families had come from Eastern Europe. Some of the most colorful portions of Howard M. Sachar's masterful book, A History of the Jews in America, are devoted to murderous Jewish sociopaths such as "Dutch Schultz" (Arthur Flegenheimer), Jacob "Gurrah" Shapiro, Louis "Lepke" Buchalter, Abe "Kid Twist" Reles, "Big Maxie" Greenberg, Benjamin "Bugsy" Siegel, Moses Annenberg (the father of the late TV Guide founder, Walter Annenberg), "Longy" Zwillman, "Legs" Diamond, et al.

By contrast, when American gentiles think of Jews, they are more likely to think of the schlemiel characters made famous by Allen Konigsberg (Woody Allen), than of bloodthirsty gangsters. What a difference apartheid makes.

In contrast to the racial profiling myth, which claims that innocent young black men are targeted by racist, white policemen, today law enforcement officers are more likely to avoid confrontations with black suspects like the plague. And great numbers of crimes committed by urban black criminals not involving guns or drugs are "disappeared" by the authorities. If the supporters of black criminals studied history, they would know that in the days when black men really were targeted by racist, white law enforcement officials and violent, private, white supremacist groups such as the Ku Klux Klan (whose respective memberships often overlapped), the black crime rate was a fraction what it is today.

To comment on this article or express your opinion directly to the author, you are invited to e-mail Nicholas at adddda@earthlink.net .

...every time they succeed in encouraging a young black to "stick it to the man." Millions of black adults have found such self-indulgence more important than facing the fact that they are pushing ever more young black men down the path to prison. Perhaps black adults feel that if they push hard enough, no blacks will be incarcerated, no matter what crimes they commit.

I don't buy this, not even slightly. The author is making a rather serious accusation, indicting millions of black parents of criminal misconduct without raising a single piece of damning evidence for the assertion - save the fact of a high black crime rate itself, with no explanation of a chain of causation or criminal mens rei.

This, boys and girls, is bullshit. Who does this guy write for? The Arm, Sword, Word of Lord deckapes?

You pinged M.H. King, rdb3, et al., as if you expected them to come and beat up on the writer. If you'd paid attention, you'd know that M.H. King had already pinged his entire black conservative list. And if you're going to be a pretentious blowhard ("mens rei") at least get it right. It's "mens rea," genius. But then, if you had a lick of sense, you wouldn't throw around such terms in the first place.

This, boys and girls, is bullshit. Who does this guy write for? The Arm, Sword, Word of Lord deckapes?

I guess it was too much trouble for you to check the top of the post, Lazybones, to see who publishes the writer. You were too busy with your "lawyer's" pig Latin.

Life must be nice in the suburbs. But here in NYC, I've personally experienced many incidents in which black children as young as eight years of age assaulted or harassed me, with the full encouragement of black adults.

Enjoy your ignorance, self-righteousness, and pretentions, because they're all you've got.

"""...every time they succeed in encouraging a young black to "stick it to the man." Millions of black adults have found such self-indulgence more important than facing the fact that they are pushing ever more young black men down the path to prison. Perhaps black adults feel that if they push hard enough, no blacks will be incarcerated, no matter what crimes they commit."""
""I don't buy this, not even slightly. The author is making a rather serious accusation, indicting millions of black parents of criminal misconduct without raising a single piece of damning evidence for the assertion - save the fact of a high black crime rate itself, with no explanation of a chain of causation or criminal mens rei.""

"You pinged M.H. King, rdb3, et al., as if you expected them to come and beat up on the writer. If you'd paid attention, you'd know that M.H. King had already pinged his entire black conservative list. And if you're going to be a pretentious blowhard ("mens rei") at least get it right. It's "mens rea," genius. But then, if you had a lick of sense, you wouldn't throw around such terms in the first place."

""This, boys and girls, is bullshit. Who does this guy write for? The Arm, Sword, Word of Lord deckapes?""

"I guess it was too much trouble for you to check the top of the post, Lazybones, to see who publishes the writer. You were too busy with your "lawyer's" pig Latin.

Life must be nice in the suburbs. But here in NYC, I've personally experienced many incidents in which black children as young as eight years of age assaulted or harassed me, with the full encouragement of black adults.

Enjoy your ignorance, self-righteousness, and pretentions, because they're all you've got."

Actually, what I have is peace, reason, and a respect for the truth.
And the glee of having hit a nerve so well.
I enjoy them all thoroughly, and have done so when living in New York City, New Orleans, Philadelphia, Chicago, and Atlanta, as well as the sticks where I currently reside.
Suburbs are for pansies. You should consider moving there.
I pinged the others in the hopes of engaging in a rational analysis of the author's comments and -perhaps- the flaws in character which led you to post them here.
Your answer does not touch on the former, but provides ample evidence of the latter.
I believe your hood is too small for your fat head.

This insane conduct on the part of black adults — who cut off black children's noses, to spite whites' faces — has been due to their boundless hatred for whites, and the surge of self-esteem they receive, every time they succeed in encouraging a young black to "stick it to the man." Millions of black adults have found such self-indulgence more important than facing the fact that they are pushing ever more young black men down the path to prison. Perhaps black adults feel that if they push hard enough, no blacks will be incarcerated, no matter what crimes they commit.

The author is painting with a somewhat broad brush here but nonetheless there are too many within the Black community who spend too much time excusing/condoning Black crime. It's too bad that past and present inequities within the criminal justice system are used to justify such attitudes.

My antidote is this, and I pass it on freely to fellow Blacks: "If you know the system sucks don't do things that allow it to suck you in."

(Happy New Year and thanks for the ping)

Pat makes some good points but he has too much invested in Richard Nixon's reputation. John O'Sullivan had a column in the Chicago Sun-Times on Dec. 24, 2002, which was even better at what took place behind the scenes. The key portion reads as follows:

...the truth of how the GOP brought the South into the modern world of racial equality.

For the Jim Crow South was created by Democrats and ruthlessly sustained by them until the 1948 convention. From 1948 to 1968 the Democrats were split on racial politics. For instance, the 1964 Civil Rights Act was passed with Republican votes and opposed mainly by southern Democrats. From 1968 onward, the national Democratic Party embraced the reverse: Jim Crow politics of racial preferences.

That broke Democrats into two. National Democratic candidates wanted to impose reverse discrimination on the nation, including the South, which would have meant near civil war and the revival of a more serious version of the Ku Klux Klan. Local Democrats, led by George Wallace, wanted to resist even "color blind" civil rights, which would have meant near civil war and a second "Reconstruction."

Into this political gap stepped the Republicans, some former Democrats such as Lott, to persuade a sullen and resentful region to accept a steady movement toward color-blind racial equality. In order to soothe the South into accepting the 1964 Civil Rights Act, such politicians had to treat their constituents not as bigots but as essentially good people open to change. They had to make occasional gestures of solidarity with the southern tradition by, for instance, praising Jefferson Davis or defending the Confederate flag. And they had to make speeches to bodies like the Citizens' Councils.

But what did these speeches say? Nine times out of 10, especially behind closed doors, they went like this: "Look, boys, I know you all are decent folks. But we gotta admit that we treated the Negroes badly, and there have to be changes. Some of those changes I don't like any more than you. Others--let's admit it--are long overdue. And all of them will help us attract new industries and make everybody better off. To make this work, though, we need responsible leadership. And that sure as hell doesn't mean the northern Democrats."

This kind of politics is messy, uninspiring and not particularly noble. It explains why a master of them, like Lott, strikes Charles Krauthammer, Andrew Sullivan, the National Review, and the high-minded philosophers of the Blogosphere as shifty, insincere and opportunist. But that is how democratic politics works when the voters are attached to institutions and traditions that have to be reformed half out of existence.

O'Sullivan's article is entitled "Insiders know Lott got raw deal" (www.suntimes.com/output/osullivan/cst-edt-osul24.html). It was posted earlier on FR as the double-feature to a particularly nasty column by Jesse Jackson ("Ouster just an effort to hide GOP's agenda")(www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/811824.posts)

"You pinged M.H. King, rdb3, et al., as if you expected them to come and beat up on the writer. If you'd paid attention, you'd know that M.H. King had already pinged his entire black conservative list. And if you're going to be a pretentious blowhard ("mens rei") at least get it right. It's "mens rea," genius. But then, if you had a lick of sense, you wouldn't throw around such terms in the first place."

I pinged the others in the hopes of engaging in a rational analysis of the author's comments and -perhaps- the flaws in character which led you to post them here.

P.S. The hell, you did. That's just a pretentious way for you to say that you're a liar AND a coward.

My antidote is this, and I pass it on freely to fellow Blacks: "If you know the system sucks don't do things that allow it to suck you in."

(Happy New Year and thanks for the ping)

Sure thing. Happy New Year to you, too, and thanks for your observations.

When I was about 17, a white kid who lived down the hall from me, complained "Nassau's eggs suck." he was referring to the Nassau County Jail. I told him, "If you don't like the eggs, don't get in trouble." Unfortunately, he wasn't really complaining; his point was to brag that he had been inside.

I've worked very hard for my entire adult life, so that I would never have to taste jailhouse eggs. That has included eating crow from some bad cops as recently as eight years or nine ago. (Actually, I could kick myself for not having made a formal complaint at the time.)

Two or three years ago, there was a debate on the letters page of the New York Daily News ("The People's Voice"). Some black correspondents were complaining about the idea of having to submit, and follow orders, when stopped by police. At least one white correspondent (who, to judge form his letter, was at least in his 40s), responded that his and many other parents taught young men to do just that in years gone by.

We have to re-invent the wheel.

truth, huh?
okay, buckwheat, let's look at the "truth"

The author asserts that "several million" black parents actively encourage their own children to commit criminal and violent actions.
Very well.
"Several" is a vague term with no precise denotation. It does have a fairly well established connotation. "Several" is generally accepted as being more than "a couple" (2) and more than "a few" (3 or 4) and more than "a handful" (5), but fewer than "a dozen" (12). From this, it can be fairly argued that the author uses "several" to mean "some number between 6 and 11." That is, he is suggesting that somewhere between six and eleven million black parents are egaged in criminal conspiracy and misconduct.

Next up, let's look at demographics: The current population of the US is approximately 280 million, of which approximately 12% are black. This means that the total black population is approximately 33.6 million people. Out of that number, we must get the approximate number of black PARENTS. I do not have anything approaching hard numbers for this, but given low black life-expectancy and high average rate of reproduction, I would say that only HALF of the total fit the bill. So... what have we now? About 17 million people? Ballpark figure?
I would go further and remove from the roster those blacks who are old enough to clearly remember that an actively hostile white population is a very bad thing, reducing the total yet again by perhaps five million, but for this exercise I shall leave them in.

So, again, back to the author's comments.
The author is suggesting, with his vague words and broad brush, that somewhere between one-third and five-eighths of the black parents in this country are, in conscious malice, deliberately and actively training their own children to be antiwhite criminals.

Again, I say: I don't buy this.
Again, I say: This is bullshit.

And you support it.
What does that say about you?

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.