Africans and African Americans

A Story of White Privilege: Coming of Age in Washington Heights

September 26, 2025/15 Comments/in Africans and African Americans, Featured Articles/by Richard Faussette

I grew up in Washington Heights, just north of Harlem, in New York City. When I was in my first year of parochial school, 1958, most of my classmates in my class picture were White. By the time I’d completed my eighth year of parochial school, most of my classmates in the class picture were Hispanic: Cubans and Puerto Ricans. One was Black. There were very few Dominicans in the neighborhood at that time. The few Dominicans in the neighborhood were clustered on 172^nd Street between Amsterdam Avenue and Audubon Avenue, and in a row of wood cottages on 182^nd Street and Audubon Avenue. Dominicans, poor, aggressive and undereducated when they arrived, would later make Washington Heights, what had been an idyllic neighborhood surrounded by forests and rivers, the crack capitol of the world which was easy enough as I-95 a major artery on the East coast, ran from New Jersey over the George Washington Bridge, right through the Heights and then through the Bronx, on its way to New England. By the late ‘60s, early ‘70s, a great proportion of the White families like mine had already moved to the suburbs. I thought the people who left wanted their own houses and front lawns and back yards, but school integration had begun, and Blacks were being bussed to the public schools in Washington Heights from Harlem. I would learn later that White people were running away. In my eighth year of parochial school, 1965, I applied for and was admitted to the high schools of my choice. Unfortunately, the era of rock and roll had begun. After graduation, I attended my last year of parochial school’s summer day camp. I was asked to sing ‘Hang on Sloopy’ over a big Shure microphone to an auditorium full of young boys and girls accompanied by a drummer and a guitarist.

I was making a big mistake. When the song was over, the girls began screaming and my teenage hormones went wild. I begged for a guitar and eventually got one and spent the summer learning to play the guitar while neglecting my Latin declensions. I was expelled from the prep school after my freshman year and my school changed from an exclusive day prep school my father had spent good money to send me to, to New York City’s public George Washington High School, with the dubious distinction of being the first public high school in the city where a student was murdered. It was not long before I was beaten. I had failed to move out of the way of a Black boy a head a half taller than I was. I was almost knocked unconscious but managed to get up. The Black boy towered over me and I screamed at him, but I did not fight back. He was just too big, and I was still unsteady on my feet. After I was punched, all the teachers closed and locked the doors of their classrooms. I will never forget two Greek boys helping me to the bathroom where I cleaned out my nose and washed my face. My nose was badly broken. I was called to the dean’s office. The dean was a Goldberg (or Goldstein, or a close variant) who told me that if I insisted on a written complaint it would have to go on my record. He said I had a “chip on my shoulder” because I didn’t get out of the Black boy’s way fast enough. There was a White cop in the room. He was there to protect the students. He said nothing. There was no mention of my broken nose. There was no indication from the dean or the cop that the Black boy would be disciplined or even inconvenienced.

Before I continue: I recently discovered that a nephew of mine, victim of his parents’ bitter divorce, was beginning to have behavioral problems at a public school in mid-Manhattan. He was acting like a Black kid and had begun to wear a hood over his face. He had been disciplined for punching another kid in the face, but the other kid had first ripped my nephew’s glasses off his face and crushed them under his sneakers. My nephew said something I latched onto right away. He said: “I got a ‘4.2’ for punching the kid who broke my glasses, but a Black kid only got a ‘2’ for pissing in a urinal in the bathroom and pulling a kid over to the urinal and holding his face down in the piss. Was that fair?” he asked. “No,” I told him, but I thought it was very calculating on the part of the disciplinarian and I thought back to my experience at GW, where Black on White violence was legitimized and ignored by the dean and the cop who was there to prevent it.

Now, to return to my story. I went to my next class and a group of Black boys saw my nose and said, “You the guy?” Then they sat on the top of their desks and started laughing and giving one another high fives. The teacher said nothing. No one in the class moved except the Black boys. The teacher waited for them to quiet down before continuing the class. When I got home, I had hardly sat down when there was a knock on the door. It was a police detective dressed in plain clothes. He wanted to talk to me at the 34th precinct. I must have been a strange sight standing there with a bloody handkerchief over my nose and two darkening eye sockets. I remember thinking — this cop thinks he’s just hit the jackpot — and I was taken to the precinct in the back of his car.

When we got there, I was put in a cage across from the detective’s desk. After shuffling some papers, he got up and showed me a Scouting magazine in a clear plastic bag. The magazine had an address label with my name and address on it. He told me that a detective had been critically wounded by a Black man in a basement on 176th Street and Audubon Avenue. After shooting the detective, the Black man had jumped through a basement window to escape. During the investigation, this detective found my magazine in the alley under the broken window. They also had the son of the building’s superintendent John D. in a cage in the other room. The detective told us that he wanted to know if we had anything to do with the Black man, if we knew who he was. He was willing to overlook anything wrong we had done but he wanted the information on the Black man. I had no idea what the detective was talking about, but I did know that I had given a stack of Scouting magazines to my younger brother who still went to the parochial school on 175th Street. Later it was discovered that my brother had distributed the magazines to boys at school. One of the kids lived on the 5th floor of John Ds building above that broken window and had thrown the magazine out of his window and into the alley where the detective found it. My father showed up and after a conversation with the detectives I couldn’t hear, he took me and John D. home. My father seemed to know all the officers. He’d lived in the neighborhood all his life. He grew up at 530 West 166th Street around the corner from the Audubon Ballroom where the Black revolutionary leader Malcom X was shot and killed in 1965. When we got home from the police station, he looked at my swollen nose and Black eyes, put his hand on my shoulder and said: “Now you’re learning.”

One afternoon, my family was gathered at my uncle Neil’s house on 176^th Street between Wadsworth Avenue and St. Nick, two blocks west of John Ds house where the cop had been shot in the basement. I walked into the kitchen where the men were sitting. My uncle Chubby (Milton Schneider) was there, and my uncle Neil (Logan) was there, and my father “Dickie” was there. I walked in whistling the tune “Mr. Bo Jango” which was big on the charts at the time. The men looked at me and began to laugh. My father said, “Don’t you have anything else to whistle?” Then uncle Chubby who had driven a bus on the M5 route which traversed the east side from Washington Heights to lower Manhattan and went through Harlem, said to me, “Mr. Bo Jangles got on my bus and wouldn’t pay the nickel fare. When I reminded him to pay the fare, the sonofabitch tried to slit my throat” and they just looked at me. My jaw dropped; my whistling was over.

Later, a few of the women and young girls came in from the living room and clustered around my father to hear him sing. He had been in the Marble Collegiate choir as a boy and sweetly sang Ave Maria for them.

The following year, my uncle Chubby whose throat Bo Jangles had tried to slit, was in the hospital with his third heart attack. During the night he pulled all the tubes out of his tired body and died.

Not long after that, my uncle Neil who lived those two blocks west of John Ds on 176th Street was attacked in the vestibule of his building, steps from his front door. A Black man stabbed him 16 or 17 times, then robbed him, and left him for dead, but he survived. He walked with a cane after that. When I was 20, my father had to expel a trio of underage Black teenagers from the bar on the northeast corner of 180^th Street and Audubon Avenue where he bartended on weekends. They said they would be back. He stayed in the bar all night long with “Twig” the owner, a middle-aged man who walked with a limp. My father was 42 years old. He was protecting the bar and his friend Twig, waiting to see if the Black teenagers returned. I was in a tent near a hiking trail in the woods of Harriman State Park 60 miles north of the city. When the Black boys came back Saturday morning with a pistol, my father went outside to greet them, and they told him to get on his knees. He told them: “You wanna’ shoot, shoot.” So, they shot him, and he turned and walked back into the bar and collapsed on the pool table. It took him 3 days to die. I’ve since heard that Nicky Barnes, a notorious Harlem drug dealer had been giving guns to underage Black boys because when they murdered someone they were tried as juveniles, saving their older brothers many years of jail time.

My brother and sister and I used to get a birthday telegram every year when we were kids. It was from a Black man, a homosexual my father knew who had moved to California. The Black man would return to New York on business occasionally and call my father. They would drink together. He even took my father to 181^st Street and bought him clothes once. I never met him, but I know my father, who rarely talked about himself, probably saved his life.

I remember my father in Mennona’s Tavern on 170^th street and Amsterdam Avenue talking to an elderly Black woman in a navy dress, White hat, White gloves, and a string of pearls around her neck on a Sunday afternoon. They were engaged in lively conversation laughing and sipping from beer glasses.

I remember “Figgy” Figueroa, a big Cuban Black man who always wore a traditional Cuban shirt. He had a gold tooth. He was a pharmacist, owner of Bavero’s Pharmacy on St. Nicholas Avenue and 177^th Street. He sponsored the Tu Sabes, a baseball team in the Puerto Rican American Baseball League. My father was their star pitcher. Figgy would massage his arm before and after their games with liniment because my father pitched his heart out, every game. My uncle Eddie Pyke, who lived on Dyckman Street in Inwood, was their right fielder. He would routinely catch high fly balls holding his glove behind his back. Larry Lavin of 175^th Street, was their gifted shortstop; three White men, with the palest most beautiful blue eyes, like the sky, who were happy to play serious baseball with their Puerto Rican and Cuban friends. Three or four Puerto Rican women would always be standing with their fingers through the links of the chain link fence between home plate and first base jumping up and down screaming, “Deeckie, Deeckie, Deeckie!” every time my father pitched the ball.

I remember passing the Audubon Bar where my father was shot years later and finding him in the midst of a crowd of New Jersey kids, who would drive over the George Washington Bridge to drink because the minimum age in New Jersey was 21 and the minimum age in New York was 18. He was firmly holding a brawny teenager, a “jock” in a high school football jacket, against a car. Other boys stood around them. My father and the jock were red-faced and sweaty, and my father’s face was bleeding. My father was holding tight to the Jersey kid who struggled to get free to hit him, but my father was talking to him as gently as he sang Ave Maria in my aunt Virginia’s kitchen. He kept repeating, “You can’t beat up your sister. She’s your sister. You can’t. You can’t.” The jock’s sister stood off to the side, in a knot of her girlfriends. The Jersey kid’s sister had run away from home to live a lesbian lifestyle which was not accepted at the time, but my father thought it was more unacceptable for her brother to lay a hand on her, and he pressed the angry boy until he was subdued, and they went back into the bar to talk.

When I went to visit my father at Jewish Memorial Hospital, which was a third-rate hospital off Broadway, at the bottom of its long descent into Inwood, I asked him, “Where were the cops, dad?” He weakly whispered, “The cops are paid not to come.” I’ll never, ever forget the last thing he said to me. He said, “Nice guys finish last.” It didn’t occur to me until years later, why the cops might have taken my father to the old Jewish Memorial Hospital (eventually closed) instead of Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center, where they normally took their own and where Malcolm X was taken when he was shot. They might have been afraid my father would rat on them because of the money they took from Twig, and they wanted him to die, but I’ll never know. I only know my father would never rat.

After my father’s death in Jewish Memorial Hospital and bearing the burden of his disappointment with me for being expelled from prep school, I needed redemption. He had always said, I would be a writer. I set out to do my father’s will. I wrote every chance I got. I wrote a journal. I wrote letters for people. I wrote copy for the local church, and press releases for a local community group, and finally, after many years of writing at every opportunity, I got a break from Samuel T. Francis in 2003. Sam Francis was possibly the greatest political scientist in the United States at the time. He had advised Pat Buchanan, who was running for president in 1996, that he should champion the immigration issue. Pat Buchanan didn’t listen to him and lost in the primaries. Donald J. Trump championed the immigration issue in 2016 and won the presidential election, and the Marxists have stepped up their revolutionary timetable because President Trump has threatened to make America great again and America’s greatness is not in their plans. Sam Francis solicited my literary defense of Christianity for the last book he edited, Race and the American Prospect. He died suddenly in 2005, a year before the book was released. He was kind to me, and a great editor. I am privileged to have met him and worked with him.

With their control of the public-school system and their indoctrination of our children, denizens of the Left are, by design, drafting poorly educated, poorly disciplined feral Blacks to serve as cadres in their Marxist insurrection. The propaganda from Hollywood, academia, the press, and the courts portrays White Americans as racists while steadfastly refusing to report the extent of Black on White crime. It is only with the ubiquitous cell phone that we now get a glimpse of the extent of the violence perpetrated by Black people on one another and on White people, but increasingly, mesmerized by the Marxist propaganda cabled to the TVs in their living rooms, rising Black anger is settling on White people. While Black on White violence is deliberately under reported by the media, White on Black violence is magnified a thousand times.

Until we realize that the media lies and propaganda do not constitute free speech and act on our realization, until we hold the media responsible for driving the Marxist revolution, until we wrest Hollywood, the public school system, the Ivy League universities, and the courts from their grasp, the Left will continue to educate the masses to hate us. That hate is driving their revolution.

The Occidental Quarterly published my essay ‘Niche Theory, Population Transfer and the Origin of the anti-Semitic Cycle’ in 2007. In that essay, I predicted the riots.

Consider for a moment the campaign of demonization of the European American Christian majority and its culture that we see in the media, academia, and legislated from the bench. What if this campaign mirroring the public vilification employed by ardent and merciless communist regimes is completely successful here in North America, not now perhaps, but in a generation or two, something for our grandchildren to inherit? Imagine an economic downturn of Blackouts, food shortages, and riots in which all law enforcement niches are filled by media-molded unassimilated immigrants and indigenous psychologically prepared minorities: law enforcement personnel conditioned to believe that the people they’re sworn to protect are noxious bigots who deserve the violence they suffer.

I was wrong. It didn’t take a generation or two. It’s happening now, in front of our eyes, on the TV we watch in the comfort of our living rooms, sheltered in place from a pandemic. Clueless White and Black people are finally marching together, but they are marching with Marxist anarchists, who ply their murderous trade anonymously among the ranks of the peaceful demonstrators. Valiant policemen are shot in the head because the provocateurs know they wear bulletproof vests; our own ignorant masses, stimulated by the Left, seem to be bent on the destruction of the greatest country in the free world. I watch as White people and Black people, useful innocents once perhaps, but useful idiots now, participate in the destruction of the only real utopia the world may ever know, oblivious of their march toward the gulags and the mass exterminations of the Marxist nightmare that claimed a hundred million lives in the 20th century because evidence of the scourge has been erased from the school curriculums.

Feel free to distribute my recollections to your family and friends so they know what White privilege looks like and will recognize it when they see it.

Word count 3,279

The Moral Case for Using the Word ‘Nigger’

September 23, 2025/18 Comments/in Africans and African Americans, Featured Articles/by Spencer J. Quinn

2314 Words

Prior to the brutal murder of Iryna Zarutska by a Black man on August 22nd, 2025, there was much talk about “black fatigue.” According to the Urban Dictionary, “black fatigue” refers to the “deep mental exhaustion from being forced to care about Black people and their actions 24/7”[1]—an understandable state of mind for Whites confronted by the appalling reality and universality of Black crime. Since Iryna’s murder however, that fatigue has turned to disgust and contempt. Given not only the atrocious murder itself, but also the anti-Whiteism of the killer who twice claimed he “got the white girl,” the indifference of the handful of Blacks who witnessed the crime on that Charlotte train (sort of like the Kitty Genovese story, but real), the brazen irresponsibility of the Black magistrate who released the killer back in January for a mere promise to meet his court date, and the sheer callousness of many American Blacks who reacted to the murder with little more than a shrug, how could it not?

According to National-Conservative, in 2023 and 2024 Blacks murdered 1,136 Whites in America, while Whites returned the favor only 200 times. Are Whites just not supposed to notice this?

The rampant criminality among Blacks is bad enough. What raises them to the level of an existential threat to the West is how they coalesce into an identity group, which not only fiercely protects its interests but also seeks to strip power away from other groups (namely, Whites) that care to implement higher standards of law and order—standards which, let’s face it, a significant proportion of Blacks simply cannot abide. And 9 out of 10 non-criminal Blacks get sucked into this vortex. This is where the “slowly I began to hate them” moment begins. You may have a Black neighbor or colleague who’s perfectly nice, and they may even be honest enough to feel some Black fatigue themselves; but they stick with their identity group at the ballot box and they do precious little to police their own. Thus, they offer no real resistance to the forward march of Black power against Whites.

One way Blacks remain on the offensive in this power struggle is to establish uneven codes of speech. For instance, they can speak of a racial “us” and a racial “them,” while Whites cannot. They can use past injustices to justify present misbehavior, while Whites cannot. Also, they can use the word “nigger” and its variations, while Whites cannot.

This last stipulation crystalized for me a few months ago when I was seated at an outdoor table at an amusement park. Four or five young Blacks sat at the table adjacent, and very soon every other word out of their mouths was nigga this and nigga that. It was gratuitous and obnoxious. And because there were no other tables available, I had to listen to it, as did several other Whites seated nearby. It then occurred to me that these Black kids were being loud and proud with this supposedly hateful slur for no reason other than to flex their power. They wanted to rub our noses in the fact that they can say it and we could not. I believe it was the late great Z-Man who referred to this word as “the word of power,” and he was right.

So does this mean that Whites will begin to halt the odious political progress of Blacks when enough of them can utter this word with impunity? Perhaps. It’s gotten to the point in my personal life where I refuse to trust a White person unless he can either say the word “nigger” or tolerate someone who does. And that got me thinking—is there a moral argument for the appropriate use of the word “nigger?” This is, of course, assuming that there is no moral argument behind the indiscriminate use of a racial slur—except as a necessary evil. For example, calling half a million Indian H-1B workers “jeets” when a clear majority of them may well be honest, peaceful individuals is evil, but it’s a lesser evil than the H-1B Visa program itself which, through its use and abuse, is chipping away at the White majority and White political power in America. Thus the lesser evil is justified. The problem with this argument is that it can easily be adopted by anyone, including Blacks. Observe:

Sure, shanking random White girls in the neck on public transportation is evil, but it is the lesser evil to White supremacy, which oppresses Black people everywhere. So this Zarutska bitch is not worth crying over. And if you do cry over her, then you’re a White supremacist who wants to keep Blacks down and contribute to the greater evil.

This epitomizes how Blacks use the necessary evil argument to shrug their shoulders over poor Iryna Zarutska and the thousands upon thousands of other White victims of Black crime. So while I, as a White person, appreciate the necessary evil argument when it protects or advances my interests (which, as Ricardo Duchesne has shown, closely aligns with humanity’s), its inherent moral flexibility makes it difficult—although not impossible—to prove in a formal setting.

Instead of proving that indiscriminately using the word “nigger” is a necessary evil, I would rather attempt to prove that appropriately using the word is a positive good. In other words, it is immoral not to use or tolerate the word under appropriate circumstances. One could take the tack that using it in order to turn a double standard into a single standard is reason enough. So would using it to help diminish Black political power, which obviously has bad effects. Okay. But what about after this double standard or Black power has been crushed? Would saying “nigger” then no longer be a positive good? I am interested in whether saying “nigger” appropriately is always good, everywhere, regardless of double standards or power structures.

I believe it is.

Here are my axioms:

Sub-Saharan Africans have a unique genetic makeup in that 2 to 19 percent of their DNA comes as a result of interbreeding with primitive archaic hominid species hundreds of thousands of years ago.
The general lack of intelligence and impulse control among sub-Saharan Blacks springs from this interbreeding.
On a population level, such genetic defects are impossible to overcome through education, law enforcement, self-discipline, religion, or social engineering.
The word “nigger” is appropriately used only when describing particularly dangerous Blacks who lack enough intelligence and impulse control to become criminally violent.[2]
Violent crime is inherently evil.

I conclude from these axioms that appropriately using the term “nigger” is moral because it is one way to not tolerate and potentially diminish the inherent evil of Black violent crime. If one disagrees with any of these axioms, then the moral imperative behind “nigger” fails, but if one does agree with them, then it must succeed.

Springing from this, my argument is simple: Whites appropriately using the word shames non-criminal Blacks into better controlling their criminal element when it comes to interracial violence. “Nigger” is a nasty word. It is also cruel. When used appropriately it is never good.[3] It is an especially potent epithet because it applies a broad brush to describe behavior that if performed by people of other races would require a finer brush. For example, in 2007 a Korean student shot up Virginia Tech University and murdered 32 people. Using broad-brush language to describe the killer (e.g., calling him a chink or a gook) would be inappropriate since East Asians rarely commit violent crime, let alone shoot up universities. More appropriate would be to label the killer (and only the killer) a deranged psychopath, which is indeed what he was.

On the other hand, using a broad brush to describe Iryna Zarutska’s killer (i.e., calling him a nigger) would be appropriate because the killer’s behavior is typical among Blacks due to their genetics—even though a majority of Blacks are neither criminal nor violent. Because the word itself denotes race, calling him a nigger is effectively calling all Blacks niggers, something that non-criminal Blacks are not going to appreciate. When this happens with enough frequency and nonchalance among Whites, non-criminal Blacks will give up trying to force Whites not to use the word and instead will try to force their own criminal subpopulation to commit fewer violent crimes, thus reducing the evil we established in the final axiom above. For example, if Teresa Stokes, the Black magistrate who set Iryna’s killer free, had any fear at all of a whole nation of Whites shaming her as a nigger, she would have played it safe and kept Iryna’s killer behind bars. But because she had no fear of such a broad-brush treatment (since Whites today lack the nerve to apply it), she let him go, thus perpetuating the evil of Black violent crime.

Another recent example is Raja Jackson, whose horrendous story fell from the news cycle after video of the Zarutska murder was released, and has remained sidelined thanks in no small part to the tragic Charlie Kirk assassination. Raja, the son of retired MMA fighter Quentin “Rampage” Jackson, was taking part in a scripted wrestling event in Los Angeles on August 23rd in which he body slammed wrestler Stuart Smith (AKA Syko Stu) into the canvas and then punched the unconscious Smith nearly twenty times in the head before having to be pried off of him by other wrestlers. Jackson is an MMA fighter like his father, and so knows how to attack a downed opponent with his fists. As a result, Smith was hospitalized for a concussion, a fractured maxilla bone, the loss of several teeth, and trauma to both jaws. The video is horrific. This was clearly attempted murder—all to avenge a perceived slight before the event in which Smith harmlessly smashed a beer can on Jackson’s head in an attempt to sell the show. (He later apologized to Jackson for it.) For some reason it took law enforcement in California nearly a month to arrest Jackson for felony assault.

White people calling Raja Jackson a nigger for his actions would be appropriate not because it would make Jackson less inherently violent (nothing can do that), but because it would make Jackson’s less-violent father less indulgent of his son’s violence. After the assault, Rampage Jackson predictably condemned Raja’s actions and offered prayers and platitudes for the victim. He also stated that his son should do “a little time” and then attend anger management therapy. But when asked about it directly, Rampage denied it was attempted murder. How did he know? Because Raja is his son, that’s how. Perhaps Rampage also wished to downplay his own possible culpability in the crime since he rage-baited his son moments before the attack.

I argue that millions of angry White people publicly calling Raja Jackson a nigger would effectively be calling his father and other Blacks niggers too. This would prompt them to use whatever influence they have to throw the book at Raja to avoid the opprobrium themselves. The result would be taking a violent thug off the streets for a long time and sparing future victims of violence. In other words, widespread appropriate use of the word “nigger” will force a fundamental attitude shift among at least some non-criminal Blacks towards the good. It will reduce the evil of Black-on-White violent crime, and is therefore moral.

Of course, this is not a perfect solution and won’t necessarily have a dramatic impact. There are better and more direct solutions to Black-on-White crime, such as police racial profiling, segregation, apartheid, or (most preferably) complete separation. But these solutions require greater effort and come at greater risk. Normalizing the word “nigger” among Whites requires less effort and entails less risk, so of course it will have less impact. But an impact it will still have, and likely will be the starting point for the more consequential solutions listed above. Most importantly, however, I am not arguing the efficacy of the appropriate use of the term “nigger” but rather its morality. Using it appropriately is moral. The small extent to which it will reduce the evil of Black-on-White crime makes it so.

* * *

[1] “Black fatigue” has a double meaning, and originally stems from the title of a 2020 book called Black Fatigue: How Racism Erodes the Mind, Body, and Spirit by Mary-Frances Winters. According to a separate entry at the Urban Dictionary, “Black fatigue” originally referred to how Blacks feel “the physical, mental, and emotional exhaustion, trauma, and consequences of systemic racism.” In this essay, of course, we focus on the second definition of this term, not the first.

[2] Arguments can be made for using the word “nigger” to describe Blacks who exemplify other negative stereotypes of their race, such as laziness, stupidity, and corruption. But these arguments are more difficult to prove and are thus excluded from this brief essay. With video evidence of Black violence being so pervasive today, keeping to the strict definition of appropriateness outlined above is sufficient to prove the moral necessity of using the word “nigger.”

[3] Yes, “nigga” and words like it can be used as terms of endearment, but not universally. Blacks who accept other Blacks using the word will balk when a White (or non-Black) uses it in the exact same way—even if the endearment is sincere. A memorable scene from the 1998 Jackie Chan and Chris Tucker movie Rush Hour exemplifies this contradiction. Meanwhile, Whites may use the term among other Whites for the sake of humor or rebelliousness, but would never dare utter it publicly—as White country singer Morgan Wallen found out after being secretly recorded using the word in 2021. Thus, “nigga” as endearment is not a serious term with only one strict definition; whereas the hard-R term “nigger” is.

‘Black Fatigue’ is Real

June 2, 2025/7 Comments/in Africans and African Americans, Featured Articles/by Ambrose Kane

Due to the persistent problem of black dysfunction and criminality in America — the kind we witness in various forms each and every day whether it be on social media, nightly news reports or from personal experience — ‘black fatigue’ has reached epic proportions throughout the country.

An increasing number of white Americans, including those of other racial and ethnic groups, have grown weary of the entitlement attitudes, the violent crimes and societal disruption that blacks bring. They used to limit their dysfunction largely to their own communities, but it’s now spread everywhere. Social media platforms such as X, Instagram, Rumble, YouTube, and TikTok document it all.

White Americans, of course, should have been fatigued a long time ago during the Rodney King incident and subsequent L.A. riots of 1992, or the Trayvon Martin fiasco, or the Michael Brown debacle of 2014, or the nationwide Black Lives Matter-George Floyd riots that managed to destroy large sections of numerous American cities at the cost of billions in 2020, divided the entire nation, and led to widespread ‘defund the police’ efforts. But these things take time, and a good many whites are still numbingly tucked away in their multicultural slumber.

Yet, the ripening of America’s fatigue of blacks has, apparently, reached its peak or at least close to it. This is especially evident on social media where criticism of typical black criminality is scorned and harshly condemned, often in explicitly ‘racial’ terms that are sometimes in coded language and other times not.

This was not always the case just a few years back when there were tighter controls over what one could say on the various platforms. But times have changed. It has become so common now to mock blacks openly on social media because people are fed up with their antics and victim mentality. Persistent comments on social media about blacks, such as “Ashamed of nothing, offended by everything, and entitled to everything,” or “The fatigue is real,” or “The 13% commit over 60% of the nation’s violent crime,” or “We don’t have a race problem, we have a problem race” are all indicative that much of the nation no longer believes the lies of black victimhood.

The overt thievery of large groups of young black males and black females who often commit their crimes attired as Ninjas to conceal their identities has caused increasing numbers of people to lose whatever good feelings they might have had of them. Criminal ‘flash mobs’ are almost exclusively committed by young black males, and most jewelry shops and Apple iPhone centers have learned to be wary of blacks in groups. The simple-minded may see it as ‘racial profiling,’ but it’s simply a matter of noticing repeated patterns committed by the same people.

The Dilbert cartoon creator, Scott Adams, rightly described blacks as a “hate group” when one considers all the malice they express against whites, including the crime and violence they routinely perpetrate on others. He admonished whites to just stay away from them: “Based on the current way things are going, the best advice I would give to white people is to get the hell away from black people” . . . “Just get the (expletive) away. Wherever you have to go, just get away. Because there’s no fixing this. This can’t be fixed.”

Mind you, these were the words coming from a man who was once sympathetic to black causes and closely identified with them. But no more. Adams also said, “I’m going to back off from being helpful to black Americans because it doesn’t seem like it pays off . . . The only outcome is that I get called a racist.”

Blacks have no one to blame but themselves for these kinds of reactions. And it’s not a matter of whites being ‘racist’ either, but of them seeing the true nature of blacks which is marked by low intelligence, impulsiveness, menacing, temperamental, aggressive, and possessing strong proclivities toward violent crime and thievery. Is it true of all blacks without exception? Of course not. But there can be little doubt that a sizable population of blacks in any city or community will inevitably bring about enormous levels of street crime, murder, out-of-wedlock births, poverty, and a ‘culture’ that is inherently destructive to the black family. Whites have no need to destroy black communities; blacks freely do it to themselves.

This is why racially discerning whites have long maintained that blacks should not be allowed into white societies, and every effort to bring about an equality between the two races is doomed to failure because we are so very different in terms of our worldviews, our cultures, our morality, our intelligence, and our industriousness. Abraham Lincoln in 1858 expressed the same sentiments in one of his presidential debates with Senator Stephen Douglas:

I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races . . . I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races from living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be a position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.

Thus, when whites many decades earlier erected Jim Crow and Sundown laws, it was for the purpose of preserving the kinds of societies that whites created and of preventing blacks from destroying it. This is because they understood the nature and natural proclivities of black people having interacted with them for a period of almost two centuries prior. When blacks are allowed full legal equality and freedom in white societies, it’s just a matter of time before all of our once grand cities begin to resemble South Side Chicago, Birmingham, Selma, Baltimore, Oakland, and Detroit. This is beyond dispute because it’s not the Amish or German tourists who have made our major cities unsafe, but the presence of blacks and the thug culture that has become part and parcel to who and what they are as a people.

As harsh as it may sound to some ears, blacks culturally erode and inevitable destroy whatever societies are foolish enough to allow them to participate in it unless a firm hand is present to keep them out. But few whites today have the heart to do it having been softened and guilt-ridden by decades of anti-white racial propaganda. This is one of many reasons why America has failed. It has permitted a plague to fester in its midst all while convincing itself that things are not really as bad as they are.

This is, admittedly, hard for modern whites to understand because we’ve all been propagandized with government race dogma that tells us that whites and blacks are really no different from each other. However, a failure to understand that blacks and whites are fundamentally different in so many ways and that we are not compatible has led to a long history of race relations in America marked only by conflict, hatred, fruitless and costly government programs — as well as total chaos. It’s like trying to force a square peg into a round hole, so we have worked feverishly to force blacks and whites to live together, and it always fails no matter what pretty lies we tell ourselves to justify it.

Blacks in the past didn’t even need to live among whites in order to have relatively successful and happy lives. Throughout the 1940s and 1950s when blacks were mostly kept away from white society, there was comparably less out-of-wedlock births, less drug usage and less violent crime within black communities than today. The black family was also largely kept intact, and divorce was not as common. Thus, whites generally had a moral and civilizing influence over blacks that did not require both groups to live among each other. It’s only when the civil rights movement took hold along with the welfare state and feel-good government policies, did we begin to witness the breakup of America’s black families.

Some blacks claim to have the same level of black fatigue that many whites do. Maybe so, but this means relatively little because the number of blacks who speak out against normative black dysfunction is infinitesimally small. Those who do are generally condemned by their fellow blacks as “Uncle Toms,” as trying to appease the white man to gain his favor. This is one of many reasons why blacks are unable to self-correct on any collective level. Individual blacks may be able to civilize themselves and reform their conduct, but it will never happen in any collective sense. Decades of racial coddling and endless liberal excuses for why blacks are unable to achieve parity with whites in so many areas has created a people with appalling levels of self-entitlement and who believe the most irrational things about themselves (‘We was Kangs’).

Black dysfunction will never go away because the nature of blacks will never change, including the low and degrading cultures they create wherever they dwell. This is largely attributable to genetics and deeply engrained behavior. No wonder generational welfare is so rampant among blacks in America — they think nothing is wrong about it and feel entitled to endless government handouts. We need to remember that blacks are the only race of people on the entire planet that need to create inner-city campaigns to urge their young men to stop ‘sagging’ and pull up their pants!

Blacks in America have proven to be so ruinous to good order and civility that they can’t even take cruise ship vacations without engaging in large brawls. Whether it’s a waffle house, a backyard BBQ, a musical concert, a wedding, or even a funeral, blacks always find a way to create a disturbing public scene that does nothing but drive intelligent and decent people away from them.

One of the more recent trends among blacks is to dance and gyrate at their high school and college formal graduations. Nothing about it is subtle or subdued. I’m not against celebrating such events, mind you, but blacks have a way of demeaning themselves and the dignity of public events by their ghetto-ratchet behavior. Videotaped high school prom celebrations among blacks are often show them wearing the most tasteless and gaudy clothing while flashing money before the camera. Blacks see this as an expression of their success and achievements, but in reality, it’s one more garish display of a people who possess little self-awareness and introspection.

A recent incident showing how whites no longer care what blacks think can be seen in the case of a Minnesota mother, Shiloh Hendrix. While at a public playground with her son, a black child had allegedly attempted to steal something from Shiloh’s diaper bag. When she rebuffed the child, using the n-word, a black Somali man (Sharmake Omar) confronted her and began to film her. Shiloh replied by saying “fuck you!” and again used the n-word when she was challenged by the man.

Attempts were made to expose Shiloh and ruin her life as a result of what she said. The local branch of the NAACP (Rochester) has called on the city of Rochester’s Attorney’s Office and the Olmsted County Attorney’s Office to take action against Shiloh Hendrix. This prompted Shiloh to open a fund-raising account. At this time, she has received nearly 9,000 supporters and raised more than $754,000! This is all very encouraging, and she probably would not have received any financial support just a few years earlier. But the presence of ‘black fatigue’ has taken root among whites.

Who cares if Shiloh used the n-word or not, especially when blacks freely use it in almost everything they say! The point is that whites are starting to stand up for themselves and no longer give a rip what blacks think or what whites are allowed to say in their presence. And if the black child at such a young age is starting to take things he shouldn’t, then maybe it’s time to call him out for what he is?

Whatever one may think of Adolf Hitler, he rightly saw through the facade of America and its many lies about ‘racial equality’ and ‘diversity as a strength’:

I don’t see much future for the Americans. . . . [I]t’s a decayed country. And they have their racial problem, and the problem of social inequalities. . . . My feelings against Americanism are feelings of hatred and deep repugnance . . . everything about the behavior of American society reveals that it’s half-Judaised, and the other half negrified. How can one expect a State like that to hold together?” (Adolf Hitler, Hitler’s Secret Conversations: 1941–1944 [Octagon Books, 1972]).

History has not proven him wrong. Only twenty years later, the U.S. began to unravel with its divisive civil rights movement (primarily funded and organized by Jews), affirmative action quotas that directly discriminated against whites, multi-city riots throughout the nation by violent blacks, including the onslaught of an endless third-world invasion across our borders, not to mention the spread of pornography and every stripe of filth that continually bombards our entire citizenry twenty-four hours a day.

Millions of Americans are drug-addicted and dependent on psychotropic pills just to get through the day. Jews largely control our Congress, the legacy media and Hollywood, and our financial institutions, while blacks are continually shoved in our collective faces telling us all how much superior they are and how culturally ‘enriched’ we’ve become as a result. That millions of Americans would think highly of such a criminal goon as George Floyd and that statues honoring him would be erected shows what a laughingstock the U.S. has become.

The great ‘noticing’ about blacks among an increasing number of white Americans is neither ‘racist’ nor unfair. In fact, it’s precisely what Martin Luther King Jr. wanted when he declared in 1963 that he looked forward to a day when blacks would not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the “content of their character.” Today’s ‘black fatigue’ phenomena, then, has nothing to do with judging one’s skin pigmentation and everything to do with judging the character and conduct of far too many blacks.

Thus, MLK Jr. got his wish, but the outcome was something he would have never imagined in his wildest dreams.

Thanks for reading Ambrose Kane! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and please support my work.

Marching Together, Drifting Apart: The Rise and Rupture of the Black-Jewish Alliance

April 30, 2025/4 Comments/in Africans and African Americans, Featured Articles/by Jose Nino

In the last century, the alliance between Black and Jewish communities in the United States represents one of the most consequential cross-racial partnerships in modern American history.

Initially rooted in both groups’ subaltern status, the forging of this coalition brought about landmark Civil Rights victories that paved the way for the undermining of the United States’ White European state-building stock.

Eventually, the Jewish plank of the alliance was able to capture the commanding heights of American politics, finance, and culture. Blacks, on the other hand, have increasingly looked like a golem that organized Jewry activates when it feels its interests are being threatened by the country’s White population.

However, like all golems, Blacks have occasionally turned against their Jewish masters, potentially putting this partnership in jeopardy. From the founding of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) to the rise of Black Lives Matter (BLM), the relationship has been shaped by collaboration but also by ups and downs, as seen with the emergence of the pro-Palestine movement in the wake of the 1967 Six-Day War.

The latest October 7, 2023 attacks on Israel have brought these rifts back into focus, with an increasing number of Black political pundits and organizations expressing sympathy with the plight of Palestinians in Gaza. This fissure has called into question the viability of the Judeo-Negro alliance. To gauge whether this partnership can endure a volatile 21st century, one must first understand its modern evolution.

The Jewish Role in the NAACP and Early Civil Rights

The NAACP is popularly perceived as a Black-only organization, but Jewish individuals played a key role in the foundation and development of this civil rights organization. The NAACP’s founding in 1909 marked a watershed interracial effort to undermine America’s White majority. Jewish activists like Henry Moskowitz, a Romanian Jewish emigré, and Lillian Wald, the daughter of a wealthy German-Jewish family, teamed up with W.E.B. Du Bois and Ida B. Wells to found the NAACP, motivated by the shared belief that anti-Black violence and European antisemitism were interconnected struggles.

Jewish philanthropist Julius Rosenwald, who was president of Sears, Roebuck and Company from 1908 to 1924, played a major role as a financial patron to the NAACP. Rosenwald’s philanthropic support for the NAACP came primarily through the Julius Rosenwald Fund, which he established in 1917. He partnered with the famous Black advocate Booker T. Washington to fund over 5,000 schools for Black students in the Jim Crow South.

The Rosenwald Fund donated $33,500 to the NAACP Legal Defense Fund between 1917 and 1948. The Fund supported early NAACP legal cases that sought to promote forced integration. The Jewish Columbia professor Joel Spingarn (1875–1939), who was one of the first Jewish leaders of the NAACP, joining shortly after its founding, serving as chairman of its board from 1913 to 1919, its treasurer from 1919 to 1930, and as President of the NAACP from 1930 to 1939, tapped into Jewish networks to challenge segregation.

Civil rights lawyer Arthur Spingarn (1878–1971) succeeded his brother as President, serving from 1940 to 1965). Under his tenure, NAACP membership quadrupled, particularly in the South, and his aggressive litigation efforts culminated in the landmark Brown v. Board of Education (1954) Supreme Court ruling that began the desegregation of American educational institutions.

The Civil Rights Movement was marked by disproportionate Jewish participation. Of the non-Black Freedom Summer volunteers in 1964, over 50% were Jewish. In a similar vein, Jewish attorney Jack Greenberg, the son of Jewish immigrants from Poland and Romania, participated in 40 civil rights cases before the Supreme Court.

Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel marched with MLK in Selma. Heschel previously declared that “racism is satanism” at the 1963 National Conference on Religion and Race in Chicago, organized by the National Conference of Christians and Jews (NCCJ). This “Grand Alliance” achieved historic wins once the Civil Rights Revolution was fully consummated. However, these victories masked underlying tensions.

The Emergence of Tensions

These divisions would become manifest once the state of Israel began to flex its muscles militarily in 1967 and when Blacks started pursuing domestic agendas that clashed with broader Jewish interests. The 1967 Six-Day War exposed a notable ideological rift. Black radicals like Stokely Carmichael linked Zionism to colonialism, while Jewish groups defended Israel as a refuge for Holocaust survivors and as a successful movement of national liberation from European antisemitism.

New York City was at the epicenter of this breakdown. In the 1960s, Black and Puerto Rican parents in Ocean Hill-Brownsville, a predominantly non-White Brooklyn neighborhood, organized to address lingering problems in their schools such as overcrowded classrooms and underfunded resources.

In 1967, as part of a city-wide experiment, the Board of Education granted limited autonomy to Ocean Hill-Brownsville under a community-elected governing board. The district’s superintendent, Rhody McCoy, a Black educator, sought to implement reforms, including hiring staff aligned with the community’s goals and other measures moving toward decentralization.

In May 1968, the Ocean Hill-Brownsville governing board transferred 19 teachers and administrators — most of whom were White and Jewish — out of the district, accusing them of undermining reforms. The United Federation of Teachers (UFT), led by Albert Shanker, denounced the transfers as anti-Semitism and a violation of due process and union rights. The UFT, whose membership was majority Jewish, argued the moves were racially motivated and felt as if they were being scapegoated despite previously supporting civil rights causes.

In the end, New York State disbanded the Ocean Hill-Brownsville governing board in 1969, recentralizing power. The experiment’s collapse deterred similar initiatives nationwide. The crisis fractured the Black-Jewish alliance, with many Black activists embracing separatism and Jewish communities prioritizing Israel and institutional liberalism.

The Black-Jewish alliance further frayed in the 1990s. On the evening of August 19, 1991, in the Crown Heights section of Brooklyn, a car from the motorcade of Rabbi and Jewish supremacist Menachem Mendel Schneerson, the leader of the Chabad-Lubavitch Hasidic movement, veered onto the sidewalk after running a red light. The vehicle struck two seven-year-old Guyanese children, killing Gavin Cato and severely injuring his cousin Angela.

What transpired next would ignite three days of violence. As described by the CUNY historical account: “Little is known of what exactly transpired at the scene of the car accident. Rumors were circulating about how the incident was handled by volunteer Jewish ambulance company, Hatzolah. According to several witnesses, medical staff treated the injured Jewish driver prior to attending the children.”

Within hours of the accident, a group of Black youths attacked and fatally stabbed Yankel Rosenbaum, a 29-year-old Orthodox Jewish student from Australia who had no connection to the accident. This was just the beginning of what would become three days of violence.

The riots did not occur in a vacuum but were the product of decades of changing demographic and social dynamics in Crown Heights. At the time of the riots, Crown Heights had transformed into a predominantly Black neighborhood with a significant Hasidic Jewish enclave. This arrangement created friction, with many Black residents believing that Jews were given special treatment by law enforcement following a 1976 police redistricting. Many were also upset by what they saw as the Jewish community leveraging Black political leadership for their own benefit, exploiting a lack of unity among Black leaders to advance Jewish interests.

Black public figures added further fuel to the fire during these riots. The Reverend Al Sharpton played a controversial role during the riots. According to historical accounts, “The riot was further incited by the Reverend Al Sharpton.” On the third day of the riots, a group of Black protesters from an Al Sharpton-organized march strayed from their prearranged route, setting fire to an Israeli flag outside the offices of a local Orthodox Jewish group. Sharpton drew criticism for remarks at Gavin Cato’s eulogy, referring to Jews as “diamond merchants” and likening Crown Heights to apartheid South Africa.

The 1980s and 1990s saw the rise of Louis Farrakhan’s Nation of Islam (NOI), who published works investigating Jewish control of high finance and corporate media. One of their most controversial works was The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, excerpts of which Wellesley College professor Tony Martin assigned in his courses. The book, produced by the NOI’s Historical Research Department, alleged disproportionate Jewish involvement in the transatlantic slave trade. As expected, the book drew backlash from the academic community, but Martin stood by the integrity of the NOI publication’s historical scholarship.

The NOI’s Judeoskeptic influence on Black public figures has been a constant thorn in the side of organized Jewry. Tamika Mallory, a prominent activist and co-founder of the Women’s March, has maintained a longstanding and controversial relationship with the NOI and its leader, Farrakhan.

As a teenager, she attended NOI events, including its annual “Saviour’s Day.” After her son’s father was murdered in 2001, Mallory found support from NOI members, particularly women in the organization, whom she credited with helping her through grief.

Despite being demonized for his commentary about Jewish influence, Mallory has repeatedly defended her ties to Farrakhan. In 2017, she posted a photo with Farrakhan on Instagram, calling him the “GOAT” (Greatest of All Time). (When challenged, she clarified that her praise stemmed from his work in Black communities.) During a 2019 interview on “The View”, she refused to condemn Farrakhan’s negative views about Jews outright, much to the annoyance of the Jewish community. She stated, “I don’t agree with many of Minister Farrakhan’s statements” but emphasized his role in “building unity” in marginalized communities.

Like most Black activists influenced by the NOI, Mallory has had choice words for Israel. During a 2018 trip to Israel and the West Bank with the Center for Constitutional Rights, she described the establishment of Israel a “human rights crime.” These remarks led to her disinvitation from an Australian conference, with organizers citing concerns that her views would “overshadow” the event.

Black academic Mark Lamont Hill also went off script on November 28, 2018, when he delivered a speech at the United Nations during the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People. In his address, Hill expressed support for Palestinian self-determination and equal rights. Hill ended his speech by calling for “a free Palestine from the river to the sea.”

Less than 24 hours after Hill’s UN speech, CNN announced it had severed ties with him. On November 29, 2018, a CNN spokesperson confirmed simply that “Marc Lamont Hill is no longer under contract with CNN.” While CNN did not provide an explicit reason for the termination, the firing came immediately after objections to Hill’s speech from the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and other Jewish organizations.

Black Lives Matter, Israel, and the Latest Fractures

The resurgence of Black Lives Matter in 2020 brought renewed tensions between Jewish and Black organizations. The year following the death of George Floyd, BLM issued a statement declaring solidarity with Palestinians and advocating for an end to “settler colonialism in all forms.” BLM’s detour into anti-Israel advocacy alarmed countless Jewish organizations who initially backed the anti-White groups.

The October 7, 2023 attacks further reinforced Jewish apprehensions about exclusively relying on Blacks as their proxy army against White America. BLM Chicago shared (and later deleted) an image of a paraglider with a Palestinian flag, a reference to Hamas fighters who used paragliders during the assault. Critics interpreted this as celebrating terrorism. BLM Grassroots also issued a statement condemning Israel’s “apartheid system” while asserting Palestinians’ right to resist occupation.

In October 2023, the ADL denounced BLM Grassroots, BLM Chicago, and BLM Los Angeles for social media posts justifying Hamas’ attacks. ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt criticized these chapters for “glorifying Hamas terrorists” and spreading anti-Semitic narratives, calling the rhetoric “sick, twisted, and dehumanizing.” Greenblatt’s message to the Black community was quite clear: there are limits to how far Blacks can go with their political activism.

Other prominent members of the Jewish community did not take kindly to their Black golems not sticking to the program in the wake of October 7. Actress Julianna Margulies, of Azkhenazi extraction, best known for her roles in The Good Wife and ER caused a stir in the November 2023 episode of the podcast The Back Room With Andy Ostroy.

During this interview, she asserted that Black Americans “have been brainwashed to hate Jews.” She also questioned why Blacks weren’t returning the support that Jewish communities had historically given to civil rights causes. Margulies’ remarks were met with significant pushback. On December 2, 2023, Margulies later apologized in a statement to Deadline, expressing horror that her words “offended the Black and LGBTQIA+ communities.”

New Golems Await?

Despite using Blacks as a battering arm against Whites in the United States for well over a century, Jews’ goodwill toward America’s melanin-enhanced population is wearing thin due to the Black community’s unwillingness to support Israel’s genocide in Gaza. This partially explains the latest efforts to defund DEI nationwide by the Trump administration and attempts to defund universities that are insufficiently harsh on pro-Palestinian activists and expel non-citizen pro-Palestinian activists, while maintaining Jews’ privileged status, in addition to Jewish liberals such as billionaire Bill Ackman making a pivot to the Right in an attempt to check growing antisemitism on the Left.

As Blacks increasingly become a liability, organized Jewry may turn to the vast pool of non-White immigrant groups as another vector for subversion. The United States’s growing Indian population and its philosemitic diaspora may do the trick.

One thing is clear though: the Black-Jewish alliance will not have the same vigor it had in the 20th century. New golems will have to be activated for the Jewish community to retain its iron grip over American politics.

Feminists for Femicide: How Leftist Lies Lead Inexorably to Dead White Women

December 28, 2024/12 Comments/in Africans and African Americans, Featured Articles/by Tobias Langdon

Are you a vile hate-thinker? The answer to that surely came if you heard about a recent horrific murder on the New York subway. Someone set fire to the clothing of a sleeping 76-year-old woman and she burned to death as her killer stood and watched. If you heard about the murder, did you immediately think: “The killer is melanin-enriched, not melanin-deficient”? If you did, then you’re a vile hate-thinker.

Diversity Is Death: Guatemalan enricher Sebastian Zapeta at work on the New York subway (image from Twitter)

And you were right to be one, because a dark-skinned Guatemalan called Sebastian Zapeta was clearly identified on CCTV as the culprit and is now in police custody. In Western societies, non-Whites commit a vastly disproportionate share of crime, particularly violent and sexual crime. But it’s precisely when people are right about racial patterns of crime that the left call them haters and try to silence them. As I’ve pointed out before, the supreme commandment of leftism is “Thou shalt not recognize patterns — except when they’re not there.” Leftism demands that we ignore real patterns of non-Whites harming Whites and accept non-existent patterns of Whites harming non-Whites. That’s why Britain has a martyr-cult for a Black youth called Stephen Lawrence, but no martyr-cult for a White woman called Tracey Mertens.

The martyr-cult of Stephen Lawrence

Who was Tracey Mertens? Well, in the eyes of feminists and other leftists, she was a nobody who deserved oblivion, not attention. Stephen Lawrence was entirely different. He was one of thousands of Blacks murdered in Britain, but he had the rare distinction of being murdered by Whites, not by other Blacks. That’s why he now has an extensive and lavishly funded martyr-cult devoted to promoting a gigantic leftist lie: that cruel and vicious Whites are a permanent threat to saintly and suffering non-Whites. Features of the martyr-cult include the following:

∙ Stephen Lawrence Day, an annual memorial for the martyr created by the so-called Conservative prime minister Theresa May and strategically placed on 22nd April, the day before commemoration of England’s national saint St George and Shakespeare’s traditional birthday.

∙ The Stephen Lawrence Research Centre, which works to demonize Whites and sanctify non-Whites at De Montfort University in the ethnically enriched city of Leicester, where Muslims and Hindus are now re-enacting the tribal feuds of their highly corrupt, violent and rape-friendly homelands.

∙ The Stephen Lawrence Memorial Centre, which works to demonize Whites and sanctify non-Whites in ethnically enriched south-east London, where Blacks murder, rape and rob all other races at vast disproportionate rates.

∙ A Damehood for the martyr’s mother Doreen Lawrence, who now sits in the House of Lords lecturing the White British on ethics and policing. Dame Doreen comes from the highly corrupt, violent and rape-friendly island of Jamaica, which has more murders each year than Britain, despite having a much smaller population. If murders committed in Britain by Jamaicans and extra-judicial murders by the Jamaican police were added to the stats for Jamaica, the discrepancy would be even greater.

The Stephen Lawrence Inquiry in 1999, initiated by the half-Jewish Home Secretary Jack Straw and starring the fully Jewish anti-racism activist Dr Richard Stone. The Inquiry condemned the British police as “institutionally racist” and, like the George Floyd hysteria in America, led to reduced policing of Blacks and other non-Whites, followed by an entirely predictable increase in murder and rape by non-Whites.

Mary-Ann Leneghan and Kris Donald, horrifically murdered by non-Whites and therefore entirely unsuitable for martyr-cults

The full direct and indirect costs of the martyr-cult of Stephen Lawrence must be in the billions of pounds by now. But the far more numerous White victims of non-White killers have not been deemed worthy of a fraction of that funding or attention. There are no martyr-cults for the White children Kris Donald and Mary-Ann Leneghan, who were murdered by non-Whites under far worse circumstances than Stephen Lawrence. 15-year-old Kris Donald was kidnapped by Pakistani Muslims, driven for hundreds of miles as he pleaded for his life, then doused in gasoline and burned alive. 16-year-old Mary-Ann Leneghan was raped and tortured for hours by Blacks, told again and again that she was going to die, then stabbed repeatedly before having her throat slit.

Forgotten by feminists

But there’s no martyr-cult for them. And there’s no martyr-cult for the White woman Tracey Mertens, also murdered under far worse circumstances than Stephen Lawrence. But who was Tracey Mertens? A week ago, I would have had no idea myself. However, by coincidence, her horrific murder-by-incineration has been back in the news at the same time as the horrific murder-by-incineration on the New York subway. But the stories have more in common than their simultaneous appearance in the media. As you read about Tracey Mertens’ murder, please note how it was perfect for a feminist martyr-cult. Except for one thing:

Tracey Mertens, burned alive by Blacks, forgotten by feminists (image from BBC)

The daughter of a woman brutally murdered 30 years ago when she was set on fire in a churchyard has said she will never truly rest until the killers are found. Kelly Hill was 11 when her mum Tracey Mertens walked out the door on 23 December 1994 to pick up some documents from their former home in Birmingham. She never saw her again. Tracey was bundled into a car by two men and driven to Eaton, near Congleton in Cheshire, where she was doused in petrol. [The report does not add “and set on fire” — the BBC was reluctant to state the full horror, for reasons that will become obvious.] She died the following day.

“I can’t let go until I know why and what’s happened – and someone gets in court for it,” Mrs Hill said. “It’s just like she’s forgotten about, but I can’t forget.”

Ms Hill, now 41, said she remembered hearing the door of their new house in Rochdale, Greater Manchester, close as her mum left. “I woke up and I ran over to the window and she was just getting in the car,” she said. “I knocked on the window and I waved to her and she waved back. That was the last time I saw her.”

The family, including her brother Daniel, who was 10 at the time, and father Joey, had moved up north that winter. Tracey had gone to pick up the benefits book she had left at her former home in Nechells, Birmingham, when two men turned up at the door. The following details are known because despite the extensive injuries Tracey had suffered, she was able to tell police what happened in the last hours of her life. The men asked “where’s Joey?” before bundling her into a yellow Ford Escort.

She was driven 60 miles to isolated Christ Church, where she was set on fire in the grounds. Tracey described her attackers as two black men with Birmingham accents, but who also spoke Jamaican Patois. Tracey died the following day, on Christmas Eve. (“‘I can’t let go until I know who killed my mum’,” BBC News, 23rd December 2024)

The one thing that prevented Tracey Mertens’ becoming a feminist martyr is the race of her killers. They were Black and their horrific crime revealed the truth about the bestiality of Blackness. That’s why feminists have ignored Tracey Mertens. Her daughter used too many words when she said: “It’s just like she’s forgotten about.” In fact, the White female Tracey Mertens is definitely forgotten, quite unlike the Black male Stephen Lawrence. Yet by every objective criterion her murder in 1994 was far worse than the murder of Stephen Lawrence in 1993. He was stabbed twice after a chance encounter and might easily have survived. She was incinerated with vicious sadism and given no chance of escape or survival. He died quickly and with relatively little suffering. She died slowly and with horrific suffering. She was a mother with young children. He was a teenager with no children. His killers proved themselves a threat only to young men from racial minorities. Her killers proved themselves a threat to both sexes and all races.

Excluding Blacks is good for Whites

And her killers may have burned her alive simply to strike at her husband Joey Mertens. Reading between the lines of that story at the BBC, I conclude that her husband had offended Black gangsters in Birmingham in some way and that the Black gangsters punished him by incinerating his wife. He must have known how vicious and dangerous they were, but he didn’t ensure that his wife was safe from them. That would be another example of how men cause harm to women, but feminists have never given the murder of Tracey Mertens even a fraction of the attention it deserves.

If they had, they would have found another stark contrast with the murder of Stephen Lawrence. On utilitarian grounds, the killers of Stephen Lawrence can be said to have been protecting women rather than harming them. They were seeking to keep Blacks out of a White working-class area of London. Excluding Blacks is good for Whites and particularly for White women. After all, Blacks commit rape at much higher rates and in worse ways. Gang-rape is a Black speciality in Britain. And just look at Britain’s most prolific gerontophile rapist, a Black called Delroy Easton Grant who raped scores or even hundreds of elderly White women in London, destroying the peace of their final years and in some cases undoubtedly bringing about their premature death.

Inverting the truth

Like the unidentified killers of Tracey Mertens, Delroy Easton Grant was from Jamaica, the Caribbean island that has supplied thousands of murderers, rapists, thieves and tax-eaters to Britain since treacherous politicians imposed non-White immigration against the clearly expressed opposition of the White majority. As I’ve often noted before: “Blacks Blight Britain.” But it’s precisely because non-Whites blight Britain that there are no martyr-cults for the White victims Tracey Mertens, Kris Donald and Mary-Ann Leneghan. Their horrific murders revealed the truth about the harm done by non-Whites to Whites and leftists are determined to suppress that truth. Indeed, they are determined to go further: not merely to suppress the truth but to invert it. That’s why they created the martyr-cult of Stephen Lawrence, which is devoted to promoting the gigantic leftist lie that cruel and vicious Whites are an ominous and omnipresent threat to the lives and welfare of gentle, enriching non-Whites.

The murder of Tracey Mertens shatters that gigantic leftist lie, which is why she has no martyr-cult. Like the rape-gangs of Rotherham, her murder proves that feminists have no real concern for the lives and welfare of ordinary women and girls. Instead, like all other mainstream leftists, they are concerned with only one thing: advancing the cause of leftism. They want power and privilege for themselves, and have no qualms about sacrificing ordinary women to gain those all-important things. Non-white immigration causes enormous and growing harm to White women across the West, but non-Whites are footsoldiers in the leftist war on the West, so feminists are fully in support of open borders. In other words, feminism promotes femicide, or the murder of women. At the same time, feminists pretend to oppose femicide. For example, the Black male feminist Keith Fraser has recently issued a stirring “call to action for men and boys”:

Black male feminist Keith Fraser, who postures about ending male violence against women while working to increase it (image from Gov.uk)

Today is White Ribbon Day, an international campaign observed on 25 November each year, calling for the elimination of violence against women and girls.

As the Chair of the Youth Justice Board (YJB) and a former police officer, I’ve had the privilege of working across organisations that help to shape the lives of children and young adults, particularly those caught up in the youth justice system. My personal and professional journey has been driven by a commitment to safety and positive societal change. My time as a police officer meant I have witnessed first-hand the devastating impact of violence against women and girls. This issue is not just something we read about in headlines; it’s a daily reality for countless women. It tears apart individuals, families and communities.

White Ribbon Day offers a powerful opportunity for men and boys to be allies for women and girls. I myself take an active role in promoting gender equality and challenging behaviours and attitudes that perpetuate violence against women and girls, and today I am calling on the youth justice sector to do the same. It is so important to have positive male role models within these spaces and beyond. White Ribbon Day also marks the start of the 16 Days of Activism Against Gender-Based Violence, which runs until Human Rights Day on 10 December. (“White Ribbon Day 2024 — a call to action for men and boys,” The official British government website, November 2024)

In fact, Keith Fraser was issuing a call for posturing about violence against women and girls, not a call to action about the problem. Leftists like him take action only to increase violence against women and girls. Those “16 Days of Activism Against Gender-Based Violence” took place at the same time as some horrific stories about male violence were in the British media. Men were on trial for committing bestial crimes against these women and girls:

∙ Natalie Shotter, a 37-year-old White woman who was orally raped to death while lying unconscious on a bench in a London park

∙ Sara Sharif, a 10-year-old Polish-Pakistani girl who had been viciously beaten and tortured for years before being murdered — her autopsy revealed “10 spinal fractures and further fractures to her right collar bone, both shoulder blades, both arms, both hands, three separate fingers, bones near the wrist in each hand, two ribs and her hyoid bone in the neck”

∙ Elianne Andam, a 15-year-old Black schoolgirl stabbed to death in London after trying to help a female friend retrieve belongings from an ex-boyfriend

∙ Amie Gray, a 34-year-old White woman stabbed to death on a tourist beach as she picnicked with a White female friend, who was also savagely attacked

The racially diverse female victims of bestial male violence and their non-White killers

Every one of those female victims is worthy of a feminist martyr-cult but will never receive one. Why not? It’s very simple: because the male killers are all UUSFLL rather than useful for leftism. That is, the killers are Utterly Un-Suitable For Leftist Lies, because all of them are non-White. Even worse, three of them are Muslims. Natalie Shotter was raped to death by a Black Muslim called Mohamed Iidow (sic). Sara Sharif was beaten and tortured to death by her own father, a Pakistani Muslim called Urfan Sharif. Elianne Andam was stabbed to death by a Black teenager called Hassan Sentamu. Amie Gray was stabbed to death by an “Iraqi-Thai Muslim” called Nasen Saadi, a criminology student who appears to have been motivated by a sexual fetish about the random murder of women. The Guardian reported that “he may have taken sexual pleasure in the killing,” because while “he was being held in the high-security Belmarsh prison in south-east London, awaiting trial, he asked a female officer if the killing was making headlines and then masturbated in front of her.”

An attractive White and two ugly Blacks: Tracey Mertens compared with Stephen Lawrence and George Floyd

But you can be sure that the Guardian and rest of the mainstream British media will soon end any discussion of Nasen Saadi and the other killers. Like many thousands of other violent and depraved criminals across the West, Saadi and Company are UUSFLL — Utterly Un-Suitable For Leftist Lies. That is, they’re non-White and reveal the truth about non-White pathologies, so feminists and other leftists cannot use their depraved crimes to advance the cause of leftism. That’s why their female victims will soon be forgotten, just as Tracey Mertens was before them. And there’s one more key contrast to note between Tracey Mertens and Stephen Lawrence — and between Tracey Mertens and George Floyd, the thuggish Black criminal who inspired a world-wide martyr-cult after his self-inflicted death in 2020. Tracey Mertens was attractive; Lawrence and Floyd were ugly. By basing mendacious martyr-cults on two ugly Blacks, leftists prove that they hate the middle term of Belloc’s Godly triad just as much as they hate the terms that flank it on left and right. This is what the great Catholic writer Hilaire Belloc said in 1936:

[T]here is (as the greatest of the ancient Greeks discovered) a certain indissoluble Trinity of Truth, Beauty and Goodness. You cannot deny or attack one of these three without at the same time denying or attacking both the others. Therefore with the advance of this new and terrible enemy against the Faith and all that civilization which the Faith produces, there is coming not only a contempt for beauty but a hatred of it; and immediately upon the heels of this there appears a contempt and hatred for virtue. (The Great Heresies, chapter 6, “The Modern Phase”)

Belloc was a highly insightful and honest man, so it should come as no surprise that he has long been condemned for “anti-Semitism.” As Andrew Joyce has described in his review of Belloc’s The Jews (1922), Belloc identified and condemned clear patterns of Jewish predation and subversion within White societies. If he were alive today, Belloc would readily understand and explain why the modern West is consumed by a cult of minority-worship that insists Whites can do no right and non-Whites can do no wrong.

Yes, Belloc would have seen and said that minority-worship is yet another example of Jewish subversion. The cult centers on Blacks, who are the most harmful, obnoxious, unintelligent, unattractive and unproductive of all minorities. In other words, they are the group that least resembles Whites. And that’s precisely why the hostile Jewish elite selected Blacks for transformation into the archetypal saintly victims of White oppression. The martyr-cults of Stephen Lawrence and George Floyd don’t merely deny racial reality: they turn the reality on its head and proclaim that sinful Whites harm saintly non-Whites. Like the sadistic murder on the New York subway, the sadistic murder of Tracey Mertens in an English churchyard demolishes those leftist lies. That’s why feminists will ignore the murder in New York just as they’ve ignored the murder in England. Like leftism as a whole, feminism is an ethically and intellectually bankrupt ideology that works to increase femicide and female suffering, not to end them. And like leftism as a whole, femicidal feminism expresses the will of Jews, not of Whites.

Carter Godwin Woodson’s “The Mis-education of the Negro

October 30, 2024/9 Comments/in Africans and African Americans, Featured Articles/by Mark Gullick

CARTER GODWIN WOODSON’S THE MIS-EDUCATION OF THE NEGRO

I am fascinated by chance finds in second-hand bookshops. Favorite books that have shaped my life have often been objets trouvés, washed up by the tide, the same way Nietzsche found Schopenhauer’s The World as Will and Idea in a second-hand bookshop in Leipzig in 1865, when the Lutheran pastor’s son was 21. “Something about the book”, he wrote, “told me to take it home…” Two of my three all-time favorite novels were bought from exactly the same charity shop in the London suburbs within three months of one another for an outlay of a couple of pounds. I consider myself well-read, but I had heard of neither book nor their authors – Mark Z. Danielewski’s House of Leaves and Roberto Bolaño’s 2666 – but they soon became favorites. How’s your luck?

There is little chance of this happening in exile in Costa Rica because there is no such thing as a charity shop or thrift store here. People here are too poor to give things to charity, which is a first-world luxury. They keep things until they break and then they repair them or they have them repaired. Nevertheless, the local town has a sort of pop-up store which features an ongoing rummage sale. I always find something useful for the apartment and dirt-cheap there, and recently I noticed a crate of English-language books which I went through in hope of finding a gem. No such Nietzschean luck, no amor fati for me. All the books were management tomes or computing manuals. Oh, well. But a month later I saw that there were a few new books in the crate, and the one perched on top was practically begging me to buy it. A slim, 70-page hardback volume in perfect condition, the book featured a dapper Black man in suit and tie on its cover, and was entitled The Mis-Education of the Negro (MN), by Carter Godwin Woodson. I paid 500 colones for it, a fraction under a dollar at the time of writing.

I had never heard of Mr. Woodson, but I elected to read the book first before investigating its author online. Rarely have I spent a dollar so fortuitously. Mr. Woodson was a teacher and educator, and was indeed the Black man on the cover. His introductory preface was written in 1933, and concerns Black education in American after the Emancipation and Reconstruction periods which followed the Civil War. It exemplifies two major points about Black education. Firstly, it’s the White man’s job. Secondly, the White man always gets it wrong. It is White mis-education that is the fault, never the negro.

The book’s preface sets out its program:

“Only by careful study of the Negro himself and the life which he has been forced to lead can we arrive at the proper procedure in this crisis”.

Woodson’s grounding premise is that White education given to Negroes simply proliferates a system which led to slavery, lynching, and the demotion of the negro to a position of second-class citizen. And yet there is a curious formula applied by which the negro is to be educated to remain precisely in the position natural to his race. The word “negro”, incidentally, is capitalized throughout the book, in much the same way as ‘Black’ now takes a capital in the Western Anglophone media and ‘white’ does not. Outside of textual quotation, I will give it a lower-case because I am not Black and I do not work for Associated Press, whose diktat led to this curious typographical apartheid. (TOO capitalizes both.)

As an example of the paradox Woodson exemplifies, consider his appraisal of Blacks in the field of business:

“In the schools of business administration Negroes are trained exclusively in the psychology and economics of Wall Street and are, therefore, made to despise the opportunities to run ice wagons, push banana carts, and sell peanuts among their people. Foreigners, who have not studied economics but have studied Negroes, take up this business and grow rich”.

By this token, it is better to teach Blacks how to sell peanuts and bananas to other Blacks rather than attain the skills perfected by those who have attained what is surely an economic gold standard, an ultimate measure of success, by trading on Wall Street. A bespoke education for negroes, which is what Godwin would prefer to simply aping the education given to Whites, contains within itself the low expectations Godwin finds in White educational practices, which teach a Black that “his Black face is a curse and that his struggle to change his condition is the worst sort of lynching”.

This smacks of the hysteria prevalent in Black rhetoric today. “Lynching” is the Black version of the Holocaust, despite the fact that, according to the Tuskegee Institute Archives, between 1882 and 1968, of the 4,743 men who were lynched, 1,297 of them were White. It’s hardly a Holocaust.

The text occasionally foreshadows the current vogue for cultural relativism:

“There can be no reasonable objection to the Negro’s doing what the White man tells him to do, if the White man tells him to what is right; but right is purely relative”. [Italics added].

It should be noted that, while the Left insist on cultural moral relativism, this does not extend retrospectively but only synchronically between cultures. There is no statute of limitations on what university courses in the UK are now calling “the problem of Whiteness”.

Throughout MN, Woodson does not have anywhere near as much ire for the White man as he does for the “educated Negro”;

“The ‘educated Negroes’ have the attitude of contempt toward their own people because in their own as well as in their mixed schools Negroes are taught to admire the Hebrew, the Greek, the Latin and the Teuton and to despise the African”.

What is curious about this is the virulence Woodson displays towards the “educated Negro”, his bête noire throughout MN. Also, it discounts any notion of the cultural attainment of quality, the meritocracy of the intellectual advantage attendant on studying “the Hebrew, the Greek, the Latin and the Teuton”. Whites are not taught to admire this tradition and despise the African. They are taught how to discover for themselves to admire the White tradition and discount the African. Why read the output of failed races when they hadn’t produced any literary works until they encountered White civilization? Stick with your own color, just like Black kids do in every high school and prison canteen in America.

In the end, the one question which will be ever-present in this book remains the same; What if the “inferiority” that Blacks are taught to feel is not the product of oppression, but an expression of a natural order? This is the question Woodson sets out to answer, although I don’t believe he knew that.

There is an inbuilt flaw in Woodson’s general argument. Industrial apprenticeships, for example, do not benefit Black men because they do not have the experience their White counterparts built up before Emancipation. But the author fails to consider the fact that those White apprentices still had to learn the job before they could gain that experience. Why cannot the Black man do the same? There exists in MN a constant undercurrent of cognitive dissonance, a now-familiar distaste Black academics have for Blacks adopting White educational practice while knowing in themselves that Whites are the only serious educators. We see it today in the dismissal of Blacks who push back against the racial politics of the Black caucus, like Thomas Sowell and Candace Owens, who are regularly described as “Oreos”, “Uncle Toms”, “house niggers”, and other childish epithets. And it is still prevalent today in schools at which Black students discourage other Blacks from learning, and thus “acting White”. A good friend of mine in England got out of the teaching profession, and one of the reasons he gave me was the dispiriting sight of Blacks using their college as a cross between a fashion-show catwalk and a gang den, while making sure none of their fellow Black students strayed off the path and tried some larnin’, that White man’s juju.

Towards the end of MN, Woodson contradicts statements made at its beginning, in which he points out what he sees as the pointlessness of a classical education for negroes:

“While such guidance as the Negro needs will concern itself first with material things, however, it must not stop with these as ends in themselves. In the acquisition of these we lay the foundation for the greater things of the spirit. A poor man properly directed can write a more beautiful poem than one who is surfeited”.

No doubt, and Woodson’s sister was a noted poet. But whereas Woodson dismissed a classical education earlier in MN, he now recognizes that such an academic grounding is not simply required to be a classicist, but that the classics themselves instruct the student about life by the extension of their influence on that student’s life. If you read and understand Plato and Suetonius, you will be better equipped mentally for just about anything else.

So, with the book read, it was time for the great reveal; Who was Carter Godwin Woodson? I imagine some readers will be surprised at (and hopefully forgive) my ignorance, because Carter G. Woodson was none other than “the father of Black history”. Born in 1875 in New Canton, Virginia, Woodson’s parents were freed slaves. This was the end of Reconstruction, and the hope was that the Black man and woman could now go it alone after Emancipation, on an equal footing with Whites as citizens, and in receipt of the financial help required to establish themselves in that citizenry. This new environment was one in which young Woodson flourished.

Although his early education was minimal due to the necessity for him to help with his parents’ farm, Woodson was an autodidact from an early age, and his self-education took him into a teaching career. He became principal of Douglass High School, from which he had gained his diploma in 1897. His later education was as cosmopolitan as any found today, and his path to his doctorate took him to Kentucky, the University of Chicago, and the Philippines before attending Harvard and becoming only the second African-American after W. E. B. DuBois to gain a PhD. His later career took him to Africa and Asia before studying at the famed Sorbonne in Paris. He was affiliated with the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, and his inauguration of “Black History Week” in February of 1926 is seen as the precursor to Black History Month (BHM). February is the month the USA “celebrates” BHM, although the UK (along with Ireland and The Netherlands) marks this month in October, in the first week of which I chanced across Woodson’s book.

Blacks as a mainstay of the teaching profession is now a (rare) substantive part of the Harris/Walz official policy as they pledge to: “Support education training, and mentorship programs that lead to good-paying jobs for Black men, including Pathways [sic] to becoming teachers”.

Incidentally, Harris also wishes to legalize marijuana, a clear sop to Blacks who feel it necessary to avoid school “because I got high”.

Black men, of course, already have the same pathways to becoming teachers that every other person in the US has, but Blacks always seem to need additional help from the White man.

This is a fascinating book, and available on Amazon for a pittance. Carter G. Woodson benefited from the very system he himself criticized from the inside. Championed by both the Transatlantic Black caucus and their Leftist friends, he could not have criticized White educational practice without himself having been fortunate enough to benefit from that same practice. In the end, although this is a worthwhile book and a fascinating glimpse at history, it’s the same story of the eternal and paradoxically dependent Black attitude towards Whitey; Can’t live with him, can’t live without him.

Mo with the Flow: How Third-World Migration is a War-Crime against the White West

October 11, 2024/17 Comments/in Africans and African Americans, Featured Articles/by Tobias Langdon

I’ve never knowingly heard a moment of his music. And I’ll do my best to ensure that I never will. But the Chicago rapper Chief Keef (born 1995) has still supplied me with an excellent symbol of the noxious nature of Blackness. What is that symbol? The cover of his first album:

Chief Keef’s Finally Rich (2012)

It’s a good cover in a bad way, entirely appropriate for the cretinous and corrupting genre of rap. Keef looks both dirty and dangerous, both menacing and malevolent. But I think there’s something in the photo that’s working at a subconscious level to maximize the menace and the malevolence. What is it? It’s the smoke spilling from Keef’s mouth. And why is the smoke important? Because it’s chaotic. I mean that mathematically, not just metaphorically. Smoke is an example of the mathematical phenomenon of chaos. The movements of smoke are notoriously difficult for scientists to model and predict. Smoke is a kind of miniature meteorological phenomenon and, like the weather as a whole, it’s very sensitive to tiny changes in the variables that govern its behavior. As the story goes: a butterfly flapping its wings in Brazil can cause a tornado in Texas. Smoke displays the butterfly effect in miniature. That’s why tendrils of smoke are so fascinating to watch. They’re sinuous and strange, swirling and shifting and serpentining, impossible to predict from moment to moment.

The criminal chaos of Blackness

Like smoke, Black behavior is chaotic. And I think that’s why the smoke on the cover of Chief Keef’s Finally Rich is so powerful, subconsciously reinforcing the message of menace and malevolence. And of mindlessness. The smoke is an active, exterior symbol of the evolved Black psychology inside Keef’s dreadlock-draped head. Keef is captured in a moment of stillness, but you can ask the same question of him as you can of the smoke spilling from his mouth. What is going to happen next? You can’t predict what the smoke is going to do and you can’t predict what Keef is going to do. In an instant, he could be active and on his feet, dishing out violence, dealing death or committing rape. Like smoke, Blacks are volatile and chaotic, shifting suddenly and sharply from one pattern of behavior to another.

But smoke isn’t always chaotic. In apparently still air, it swirls and shifts, but it will respond instantly to a sufficiently strong air-current and move in one distinct direction. That’s another way smoke is like Black behavior. Black crimes are often very easy to solve because Blacks react suddenly and impulsively to opportunity. They evolved in the rich but unpredictable environment of Africa, needing to react fast to sudden changes. So they go with the flow in the new environment of a Western city, drifting like smoke and then acting with distinct purpose as an opportunity for personal advantage arises. If a valuable item is momentarily unguarded, a Black will steal it without thought of the future consequences.

Natalie Shotter, the innocent White victim of our Semitic and Semito-sycophantic elite (photo from the Daily Mail)

That also applies to Black sex-crimes. I thought of Chief Keef’s smoke when I read about a fatal rape committed in London in 2021. The alleged rapist is called Mohamed Iidow (sic). I haven’t found a definite photo of him, but he has a Somali surname and is therefore presumably Black. He certainly behaved like a Black, drifting like smoke as he waited for an opportunity to rape a vulnerable woman. Here’s how he is alleged to have been a Mo going with the flow:

Woman died of heart attack after being repeatedly raped by stranger on park bench, court hears

A woman died from a heart attack after she was raped by a stranger while unconscious on a park bench, a court has been told.

Warning: This article contains details readers may find distressing

Natalie Shotter, 37, had been on a night out before she was sexually assaulted and killed on a park bench in Southall Park, west London, jurors heard. Mohamed Iidow, 35, is on trial accused of rape and manslaughter. He has denied both charges. Ms Shotter died of a heart attack caused by Iidow raping her “again and again”, prosecutor Alison Morgan KC told jurors. The court was shown CCTV footage of Ms Shotter sitting on a bench with a different man when, the prosecution says, Iidow walked past and looked at them.

He then left the park and drove away, before returning later, jurors heard. The prosecutor said Ms Shotter was lying down and showing “no clear movement” for around 30 minutes before the defendant approached her “nonchalantly”. During the alleged attack, the victim was “deeply unconscious”, she said. Ms Morgan continued: “What was the defendant doing there, what was he seeking to do, walking up and down the paths in the middle of the night and thinking about what his objectives must have been — seeking out a vulnerable woman to rape.”

Jurors were shown CCTV which, the prosecution said, showed the defendant moving Ms Shotter’s body into different positions as he raped her. Ms Morgan told jurors: “She was not dead at the time when the defendant was orally raping her, it will be a matter for you to consider — that this defendant went to the park for a reason.

“He would not have sought to have sex with a dead body for over 15 minutes, he was having sex with someone he knew was alive but was deeply unconscious and therefore he was raping her.” Ms Shotter’s body was found in Southall Park by a passer-by in the early morning of July 17 2021, the court previously heard. Swabs taken from Ms Shotter’s mouth area matched DNA samples taken from the defendant, the court heard. (“Woman died of heart attack after being repeatedly raped by stranger on park bench, court hears,” Yahoo News, 4th October 2024)

There’s a very important adverb in that story: “nonchalantly.” The rapist captured on CCTV was not feeling stress or apprehension as he prepared to commit a bestial crime. That’s characteristic of a psychopath and psychopathy is more common among Blacks. But committing rape in public and being captured on CCTV is characteristic of a stupid psychopath. Low intelligence is also more common among Blacks. The average IQ in Somalia is estimated to be about 68. Even when they aren’t committing rape, murder and other crimes, Somalis are very bad for Western nations like Britain.

“Exceptional leave to remain”

So why are there so many Somalis in Britain? We can thank a Jewish immigration minister called Barbara Roche, who told the Guardian in 2001 that she “entered politics — she still emphasises this today — to combat anti-semitism and xenophobia in general.” As part of her combat, Roche opened Britain’s borders to the Third World during the Blair government. As the Daily Mail noted in 2016, among the Third-World newcomers were “more than 200,000” Somalis: “Since most were untrained and would be dependent on welfare, the Home Office could have refused them entry.” But Roche struck a blow against xenophobia and “granted [them] ‘exceptional leave to remain’.”

In other words, Barbara Roche committed an enormous crime against the White natives of Britain. I hope that she and other ministers in Tony Blair’s government will go on trial one day. But the crime of allowing non-White immigration from the Third World wasn’t just committed by Tony Blair’s government. Every government since the Second World War has been culpable. Yes, the floodgates opened under Blair, but the Conservative governments that followed did not try to close them. Quite the contrary: the already disastrously high levels of Third-World immigration increased under the Tories.

Semito-sycophancy in action: Kemi Badenoch performs the goy-grovel at Holocaust Central, Yad Vashem in Israel (image from Jewish News)

Are you surprised to hear that the Black female politician Kemi Badenoch (born 1980) supported that increase when she served in the pseudo-Conservative government? Indeed, she wanted it to get even bigger. Badenoch has married a White and has a Scottish surname (pronounced BADE-noch, with “ch” as in Bach), but she is in fact a Nigerian who was born in London. She now seems poised to become the next leader of the Conservative party, because she’s very popular among the ordinary Conservative members who will choose between her and Robert Jenrick. Ordinary Tories stupidly see Badenoch as a Black version of Margaret Thatcher. But she has got this far only by proving herself to the most important and powerful group in British politics. Like all ambitious politicians in all Western nations, Badenoch knows that Semito-sycophancy — sucking up to to Jews — will guarantee lavish funding and friendly media coverage. But it won’t guarantee that Badenoch becomes Tory leader, because Robert Jenrick, her last remaining challenger in the leadership election, has also been a dedicated Semito-sycophant.

Indeed, Jenrick is married to a Jew, just like the current Labour prime minister, Keir Starmer (and Kamala Harris, Democrat candidate for U.S. president). Jenrick is claiming that the Conservatives need to get tough on immigration if they want to win elections again. But even if the Tories do get tough, they won’t get tough enough. Immigration doesn’t need to be reduced: it needs to be reversed. Jenrick won’t do that and Badenoch certainly won’t. But sooner or later remigration will happen. Then the trial of criminals and traitors like Tony Blair, Barbara Roche, David Cameron and Boris Johnson can begin.

Waging war on the White West

Natalie Shotter, the White woman raped to death in 2021, isn’t famous like Blair, Johnson and Cameron. But I think that she should be central to the trial all the same. Her death-by-rape was both bestial and bustable. That is, it was a horrible crime that seems to have been very easy to solve. The criminal was captured on CCTV and left his DNA in the victim’s mouth. If Mohamed Iidow is found guilty and is indeed a Somali, then the crime will prove yet another example of a very simple equation: Bestial + Bustable = Black. That is, the worse the crime and the easier it is to solve, the likelier it is that the criminal is Black.

It isn’t difficult to understand that equation. Even a slippery lawyer like Blair isn’t going to be able to blow smoke about it. He and Roche knew what they were doing when they exposed the ordinary Whites of Britain to the criminal chaos of Blackness. That’s why they deserve an intra-judicial version of what was extra-judicially inflicted on Natalie Shotter. In other words, they deserve death. Roche got to the top because she was Semitic. Blair, Johnson and Cameron got to the top because they were Semito-sycophantic (and also part-Semitic in the case of Johnson and Cameron). All of them waged war on the White West. And all of them need to answer for their crimes.