Africans and African Americans

Further Evidence for the Racial Polarization of American Politics

/24 Comments/in , , , , /by

Recent election trends clearly indicate an increasing White disenchantment with the Democrats, especially among the working class. The enraged Whites who are expressing themselves in the tax revolts, tea parties, and town hall meetings of 2009 are middle- and lower-middle class.  Ronald Brownstein points out that their incomes have been stagnating or declining for years, even during periods of economic expansion of the Bush years. Bush did nothing for the White working class, but still only 40% voted for Obama.

The Democratic vote among Whites in 2010 will probably be quite a bit lower than in the next election. In Massachusetts there was a huge shift from 2008 to 2010: In the 2008 presidential election, working class Whites voted overwhelmingly for Obama: 75% for incomes between $30-50K; 65% for incomes between $50-75K. But Brownstein notes that 60% voted for Scott Brown.  Moreover,

Much of the Democrats’ distress among blue-collar whites results from long-term changes that have re-sorted the electorate more along the lines of cultural values than of economic interests. These working-class voters, mostly conservative on cultural and foreign-policy issues, have moved toward the GOP …. But the disaffection from Democrats among blue-collar whites is especially severe now. That is probably because their financial pain has intensified. (The unemployment rate among this group, at 10.4 percent, is well over twice the level for college-educated whites.) Polls suggest that these voters have focused their discontent more at government than at business.

One can’t help thinking that “cultural values” is a code word for implicit Whiteness. No matter what they say to the pollsters, it’s hard to believe that concerns about foreign policy or gay marriage really trump economic issues in a group that has been the most negatively affected by all the economic shifts of recent decades, including mass immigration. Indeed, the shift is apparent in all White groups: “In opinion polls, college-educated white men, always a tough group for the party, are hardening in opposition; college-educated white women, Democrats’ best constituency among whites, are softening in support.”

It’s often said of Jews that they earn like Episcopalians and vote like Puerto Ricans. Now, as ethnic interests become central even for Whites, economic interests are an increasingly poor predictor for everyone. Working class Whites vote Republican just like the Episcopalians— their cultural values are to vote along with people like themselves. Similarly, non-Whites vote Democrat whether they are successful Asians and Jews or Blacks and Latinos at the bottom of the economic ladder. Their cultural values are to vote against the Republicans at least because they see the Republicans as the party of Whites.  These trends have been apparent for some time, but there seems to be increasing polarization now.

Quite a few people anticipated that an Obama presidency would produce an upsurge of White identity — that an Obama Administration would be a clear harbinger of the non-White future of America. They were right. Many Whites got caught up in the emotion of the election — the feeling of moral righteousness of putting America’s racial past behind us. But the party is over and the Obama administration is in shambles. I can’t imagine that anything like amnesty for illegal immigrants would be possible now.

If, as seems likely, the Republicans get 70% or more of the White vote in the 2010 elections, the media is going to have to confront the racial polarization of American politics. It’s definitely not the multicultural future envisioned by the activists on the multicultural left and the mainstream media for the last 40 years. If there is a racially lopsided vote, we’ll hear a lot of talk about racist Whites. But at some point, thoughtful people will realize that it is entirely legitimate for Whites to want to retain control of their country, and explicit expressions of White identity and interests will begin to be heard whether the media wants to hear them or not. And that’s all to the good.

Bookmark and Share

Christopher Donovan: Smith v. Berghuis: The Black Defendant's Right to a Not Guilty Verdict

/9 Comments/in , , /by

Christopher Donovan: On Wednesday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Smith v. Berghuis, quite possibly the most absurd lawsuit of the year.  Needless to say, the claim was racial discrimination. 

Equally needless to say, he’s got supporters in the media and among whites.

Diapolis Smith, a Black man, shot and killed Christopher Rumbley during a bar fight in Grand Rapids, Michigan in 1991.  He was convicted of second-degree murder.  On appeal, he claimed that he was denied a fair trial because the jury pool had too few Blacks. 

Get this:  The percentage of Blacks in the community was 7 percent.  For Smith’s jury pool, it was 6 percent. 

How this laughably trivial complaint makes it to the Supreme Court is a testament to the insanity of the multiracial society.  The slightest claim of racial discrimination — provided it’s lodged by a non-white — throws our whole administrative apparatus into a tailspin. 

Caselaw does say, however, that a criminal defendant is entitled to a jury pulled from a fair cross-section of the community.  This has been interpreted to mean that “identifiable groups” cannot be excluded. 

So, how were Blacks “excluded” from Smith’s jury pool?   A big sign declaring “no Blacks”?  An evil White racist jury administrator who tossed every other Black person? 

Not quite. 

Blacks, evidence showed, were more likely to be excused because they asked to be excused, often for child-care or transporation reasons. 

Or, they were kept off because of their felony records. 

In other words, the slightly lower number of Blacks was because of their own behavior, not because of any exclusionary intent.  And imagine if the court refused to excuse Blacks who complained that they couldn’t serve because of a lack of money — another lawsuit would have resulted.  Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

But all of this is only one level of insanity — a level that assumes the “cross section of the community” demand is a legitimate one to begin with. 

The supporters of Black murderer Smith, interestingly, don’t seem to doubt the existence or importance of race, despite the constant left-wing assertion that “race does not exist” or is “only a social construct.”  As always, this argument only applies when it benefits non-Whites.  Just ask Sonia Sotomayor, who whipped hostile questions Michigan’s way — but of course found no fault with New Haven, Connecticut’s exclusion of White firefighters.  

Dig a little deeper, and you see that what Smith is really claiming is the right to be tried by fellow Blacks, not Whites.  Or at least as many Blacks as he can get on his jury. 

Dig deeper still, and you see that what he’s claiming is a right to be found “not guilty” — because he presumes that his racial brothers and sisters will side with him, the evidence be damned.  There’s simply no other reason for Blacks to demand that they be tried by fellow Blacks. 

Nevertheless, I am beginning to suspect that the dreaded “all-White jury” doesn’t sometimes acquit Black defendants for fear of being seen as “racist.”  If anyone’s got evidence of this, let me know.  

Despite the insanity of Smith v. Berghuis, I see almost no critical media coverage of this suit.  Look at the “friend of the court” briefs, and you’ll see plenty — filed for Smith.  One lonely brief takes Michigan’s side. 

It all makes me want to stand on a mountain and scream, “Can’t anyone see what’s going on here?” 

If it’s the case that Blacks are wrongly accused and convicted — or cannot be fairly judged but by fellow Blacks — then I have a solution:  racial separation.  Could it be any crazier than the status quo?

Bookmark and Share

James Murray: NAACP official legitimizes killing White police

/9 Comments/in /by

James Murray: Seattle NAACP leader James Bible has demanded a role in selecting the new police chief (and justified Black terrorist attacks on police) because the Seattle Police department is a racist force of “occupiers.” Bible made this statement during a press conference in Seattle on Thursday (1/21/10), and it was broadcast on KIRO-TV during the 5:00 Evening News segment. The same report was rebroadcast during the KIRO-TV 6:00 pm news segment but with the statement about the police as a force of “occupiers” deleted. The same clip appears on Fox Q-13 at 9:00, again with the “occupiers” clip omitted. 

Bible made it clear that resistance to the police “occupiers” is legitimate. It is always legitimate to fight White racism, it seems. 

Among the radical Black and other supremacists, the new idiom for the United States is “Occupied America.” In minority supremacist magazines in Seattle like ColorsNW (“The Northwest’s premier diversity resource”) (which turns up in BING but not GOOGLE), the “Occupied America” ideology is advanced by a mixture of Mexican supremacists, Black supremacists, Asian supremacists, and Muslim supremacists, (including Muslims like Majid Al-Masaari, son of the CDLR (i.e., “Committee for the Defense of the Legitimate Rights in the Kingdom”) director Mohammed Al-Masaari who was Osama Bin laden’s personal representative until 9/11, and who was in charge of medical records security at the University of Washington Medical Center until he was deported, if he ever was deported). 

So when Black Supremacists kill five police officers in Seattle and Tacoma (see here and here) we have local NAACP and National Action Network leaders asserting the legitimacy of the attacks, asserting the precise moral equivalency of the Black racist murderers and their all-White police victims, and then demanding to pick the new police chief. 

I suppose it is now racist to oppose the Black supremacist murders of White police. But I refuse to accept these murders are, as the NAACP claims, legitimate self-defense against the “Occupiers.”

Bookmark and Share

Christopher Donovan: If You Look Over to Your Right, You'll See a Dying Country

/3 Comments/in /by

Christopher Donovan: Who says you can’t make some money from the multiracial decay of California?

Only miles from the scenic vistas and celebrity mansions that draw sightseers from around the globe – but a world away from the glitz and glamour – a bus tour is rolling through the dark side of the city’s gang turf.

Passengers paying $65 a head Saturday signed waivers acknowledging they could be crime victims and put their fate in the hands of tattooed ex-gang members who say they have negotiated a cease-fire among rivals in the most violent gangland in America. …

“We ain’t going on no tour saying, ‘Look at them Crips, look at them Bloods, look at them crack heads,'” said Frederick “Scorpio” Smith, an ex-Crip helping narrate, who helped broker the cease-fire among the Grape Street Crips, 18th Street, F13 and the East Coast Crips.

Out of sensitivity to residents, passengers are banned from shooting photographs or video from the bus. The only place that is allowed is near the end of the trip, when they can step off the bus and film an outdoor area where graffiti is allowed. …

Gang crime has fallen in recent years, but groups continue to grow and gain influence. Over the past quarter century, officials in Los Angeles County have spent $25 billion fighting gangs only to see the number of gangsters double to as many as 90,000 and a six-fold increase in the number of gangs.

Bookmark and Share

How Should a White Female Evaluate Potential Rape Threats?

/9 Comments/in , /by

Reginald Thompson: If a White female encounters a White man and a Black man in the same day, the Black male is at least 9 Times More Likely to Rape her.

Obviously, if a woman is wary of being raped she’ll assess a Man in his twenties as a greater potential threat than an old man or a little boy. Also, it is thought by many women that certain traits in the appearance of a Man, such as a scuzzy hairstyle and clothing, tends to correlate with an increased likelihood of him being a rapist. But what about the most obvious and unmistakable of appearance traits, whether a man is White or Black? Would it make sense for White females to assess the threat of rape as being significantly greater from the average Black male she encounters?

The answer from the Statistical Data is a very clear yes.

Looking at the 2005 FBI Uniform Crime Report we find that though Blacks are only 12.4% of the US Population, they commit 33.6% of the rapes of White females.

This means that even if we assume totally random racial assortment, where a White female is just as likely to encounter the average Black male as she is to encounter the average White male, we would still have to conclude that a Black male is 2.7 times more likely to rape a White female than the average male she encounters.

But here’s the thing: There’s clearly not random racial assortment in America, so the increased rape risk to a White female for every Black male she encounters is even greater than that.

Probably the closest thing we can find to a meaningful estimate of what percentage of the Males encountered by a White female are Black is to look at how Black a neighborhood the average White lives in.

I found some data taken from the 2000 Census saying the average White lives in a neighborhood that is 6.7% Black.

There are two problems with using this as the baseline for the Percentage of Rapes of White females committed by Blacks though:

1. It is only data for Metropolitan Counties, and leaves out Rural Counties that have fewer Blacks.

2. It fails to take into account the effects of intra-neighborhood racial assortment resulting from implicit Whiteness.  For example, it could be there’s a neighborhood that’s 50% White and 50% Black, but where the Whites primarily go to the restaurant that serves food White people like, while the Blacks go to the restaurant that serves food Black people like. This sort of thing will create a situation where even in a 50% Black neighborhood, the White females living there will have much less than 50% of the males they encounter be Black.

So bear very closely in mind that using 6.7% as the proportion of Black people met by White females is likely a strong overestimation, and therefore that the figures below underestimate the degree of increased rape risk a White female incurs when she encounters a Black male.

White Males   Black Males

Percent of Encounters          80.2%             6.7%

Percent of Rapes                   44.5%              33.6%

Impact Value                          .55                    5.01

This means that while the average Black male encountered by a White female is 5.01 Times more likely to rape her than the average male, the average White male she encounters is almost half as likely to rape her as the average male. It also implies that if a White female encounters a White and Black male, the Black is 9.1 times more likely to rape her than the White.

It is all too clear from this data that Black rapists are deliberately targeting White females.  This could be because of racial hatred for Whites, and possibly also because they perceive White females as being more sexually desirable than women of their own race.

Strong evidence in favor of the racial animus explanation playing a crucial role here can be found in the fact that when a Black man marries a White woman, he is 82% more likely to Murder her than if he was married to a Black women.

In conclusion, White women have every right to be “paranoid” about Black men. It’s the White women who aren’t afraid of Black men that have something wrong with them.

Reginald Thompson is the Pen Name of an Advisor to an International Software Company. He lives on the American East Coast and is proprietor/manager of a recently created Blog called Statsaholic.

Bookmark and Share

Christopher Donovan: In Berekely, Ca., Robbing Whites to Pay Non-Whites

/13 Comments/in , , /by

Christopher Donovan: Occasionally, injustices confronting whites are too diffuse to be seen clearly.  We fight wars on behalf of Jewish causes, but it’s rarely discussed.  We pay a heavy tax burden for the non-whites in our midst, but the cause and effect takes a few mental steps to track.

Recently in Berkeley, California, however, the issue was put squarely for all to see.  The science labs at a school — which were patronized mostly by Whites —  were voted to be scrapped to provide more resources for “struggling” black and Hispanic students.  In other words, a direct wealth transfer from whites to non-Whites, in such a tight proximity that it may as well have been a street mugging.

We are not “enriched” by living with non-Whites.  We are impoverished.  Even parents in the lefty mecca of Berkeley are starting to notice.

Christopher Donovan: New York City Begins (More Precipitous) Slide Detroit-ward

/20 Comments/in , , /by

Christopher Donovan:  I learned a lot in my seven years of living in New York City.  It’s got allure for a reason.  For bright lights, big adventure and sheer cliffs of challenge, New York is unmatched.

It is also, for a White person, no place to make a home.  New York City is essentially a boiling cauldron of competing racial and ethnic groups, all of which scrap and tear for a share of the spoils.  The job of the mayor, his chief lawyer once told me, is to figure out “which ethnic group is mad at him that day and how to make them happy again”, or words to that effect.  The effect is an atmosphere thick with barely suppressed tension.  Every human interaction is fraught, suspicious, and pregnant with explosion.  It’s all very bad for the blood pressure.

From the mayor (and that chief lawyer I mentioned) on down, New York is Jewish territory.  A few white ethnic groups have some presence, chief among them Irish and Italian (though always as those specific ethnicities, and never just “white”).  Blacks and the Hispanic groups loom large.  But it has been a long, long time since WASPs like John Lindsay held sway (and power for him meant sucking up to minorities).

If, like me, your heritage is “undifferentiated, but mostly Anglo-Saxon, White”, you are operating in New York without an ethnic safety net.  You might find a niche, like Taki, provided you’re mind-bogglingly rich.  But even talented ad execs or white-shoe law firm partners are ultimately toiling in the vinyards of a city they’ll never be completely at home in and can barely afford.

The numbers are now official.  Whites are a minority in New York as both citizens and voters.  None of it points in a good direction for whites living there.

Bookmark and Share