Monday, December 1, 2014

Race Realism & Quantifiable Superiority


(Another great post © the Full Information Security Project!)

Why do more-closely African-derived peoples ("blacks"), have a track record of lower overall test scores, and higher crime statistics, and stuff like that?
Stories about blacks getting into confrontations with cops, security guards, store owners and others are so common as to be hardly worth mentioning. And yet there is a basic reason for this, which should be understood by all who share any social space with blacks...[Whites] drink or smoke dope inside their homes, rather than on the street, carry knives rather than guns, drive by themselves or with one other guy in a pickup, have wives or girlfriends who help keep them out of trouble, and don’t get confrontational with cops. Blacks do frequently the opposite- drink or smoke dope on the street or in their front yards, carry guns, ride with four guys in an old sedan, and have girlfriends or baby mamas who really don’t care if they are locked up or not.

[Some seem] to ascribe this behavior to ignorance by blacks, but I think there is a totally different cause. For blacks, dominating and acting out in public, social space is an end in itself. It is about power and control for them. And they are very successful at it, because any space where a black person appears will mostly be controlled by that black person- they will intimidate whites and Asians in that space, although maybe not Latinos.
From Blacks and the Domination of Social Space.

So, there's The Bell Curve, along with a well-populated host of other data indicating quantifiable differences in test scores among different races, sexes, et cetera. We'll assume you're aware of that, and what a "mean" is and stuff, but if you're not, ask away. For now, keep in mind some of the generic, currently popular and fairly accurate numbers, putting blacks at a 70 IQ mean, whites at 100. There are some other cute variations in there, like how east Asians and Ashkenazi Jews are at 105, southeast Asians are closer to blacks, and maybe Germanic or Scandinavian peoples are higher than other "whites," blah blah.

IQ-based planning is an interesting subject, because most of the people who really like those numbers, and who advocate for their implications, are decidedly against implementing the necessary conclusions of their own reasoning. For example, the white people who like the idea of being part of a presumed group with a 30-mean advantage over blacks would prefer that blacks be confined and controlled by higher-IQ groups. However, they would not like to be themselves confined and controlled by the People's Republic of China (east Asian), Hillary Clinton (IQ 140), or a council of self-professed "Ashkenazi Jews." They also wouldn't like to discuss more detailed breakdowns of what makes white "white," or why certain white people get to claim to be either white, Hispanic, Ashkenazim, Sephardim, Native American, Inuit, or some variety of Asian. They love throwing around IQ numbers to an extent, citing the infallible supremacy of numbers, but only if they are allowed to arbitrarily make up categories into which the numbers can be divided.

Rather hilariously, the white(ish) "race realists" who advocate for standardized test social-control theories are vastly overpowered in IQ by white liberal academics/politicians who decree race realism as a lie, so such groups are necessarily shooting themselves in the heart every time they advocate a challenge to the high-IQ PC "Cathedral." It's self-contradictory, hypocritical, and representative of myriad other failures when angry low-to-middle-IQ whites dare challenge the likes of Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama (145).

Nonetheless, there remains some level of quantifiable differences in these test results, as to the lower-performing groups specifically, such as blacks. Popular explanations abound:

1. Unfair tests. Goodness knows, as this one will always attest, multiple choice tests are tautological, presumptive, simplistic dross, more suited to the crossword page than to an association with intelligence. However, the lengthy screed of arguments against IQ testing remains almost equally ridiculous. Yes, those kinds of intelligence tests are overblown and wasteful on the whole, but within the fantasy-land of primitive logical structuring, they do reveal something. There are right answers to the questions about numerical relationships and abstract concepts, which answers bear no relationship to cultural prejudice, but are representative of the contemplating mind's understanding and perception of the concepts most of the questions address. The questions themselves are cute little puzzles, fun to play with, and some people can figure out the number/shape/metaphor relationships faster and/or better than others. And that does measure something, and it's something related to intelligence.

The pro-IQ people, being most often comparatively crippled in other areas, respond angrily to suggestions that their beloved riddles aren't about capital-I Intelligence, because they can speak that part of the language, while the anti-IQ people, being somewhat often comparatively crippled in abstract realms, respond angrily to suggestions that their cultural appreciation classes aren't as objectively measurable, or even as universal, as the ability to select units from a set of prepared furtherances of intra-triangular shapeform sequences.

By and large, the pro-IQ people seem to rightly understand the inaccuracy of the cultural diversity whiners, while the latter group, though it delightedly embraces evolution and open-mindedness and genes and science, refuses to consider whether different DNA might produce brains more or less attuned to IQ-type problems.

2. Test taking strategies, too, fail to explain away the gap, because decades of massive institutional prepping for gapless scores have failed to substantively change anything, 20 years after The Bell Curve and another 20 years after the same sort of stuff, that latter stuff being another 20 years after the same sort of stuff. And this is an ongoing process; the racist/race-realist whiners are justified in their complaints that, generations after slavery, generations after Jim Crow, nearly-generations after affirmative actions and quotas, their beloved test results are still bearing out quantifiable racial differences. The initial arguments of anti-correlation people (i.e., the proponents of "there are no genetic differences between people") predicted equal results for blacks and whites as soon as freedom was achieved, and then as soon as civil rights were achieved, and then as soon as some wealth redistribution happened, and this hasn't happened, and it seems like it will never happen, and--presuming tests still show these same sorts of racial divisions in a hundred or two hundred years, which they will--it's not going to happen.

3. Family income and social class and schooling and familial expectations haven't closed the gap either. Here's a cute little picture for the SAT; there are plenty of confirmations of this stuff elsewhere:


4. Institutional oppression goes along with 3. above, and we do see things like black cops killing white teenagers with no one making a fuss, while, y'know, Michael Brown and stuff gets sustained national media attention, although yes, the numbers are different overall which could contribute but it's so rare (like never) that the reaction is the same when the cops murder a white child, since the kid's obviously some stupid redneck and no one marches for the kid and the cop doesn't go before a grand jury let alone a real one. So the bigots do, occasionally, have a point, just like anyone criticizing Earth 2014's mass media is almost always correct.

History is all about dead white men, and attempts to ascribe numerous of the "great western inventions" to blacks usually turn out to be frauds; here's a Snopes on the subject (this one dislikes linking to CIA sites, but in the instant situation, their chart is essentially sound). So why didn't they have better inventions in Africa, yes, I know the Europeans were invading all the time, but the Europeans were invading each other, too, so how come none of the Africans managed to invent a light bulb or a printing press somewhere in between all of that, the way various Europeans sort of did?

(Doesn't stuff like that sometimes make you wonder, even if just for an instant, in the most shaded part of your mind, if there isn't really some difference there? It's not something we want to talk about, I know, it makes you feel wrong in that kind of fuzzy, embarrassing way, and you'd never admit it out loud, but maybe, just maybe, there's some difference there, right?)

Slave Patrols and KKKops are certainly out there, a major force in society, and American black children are more likely to be homeless, going to school hungry, without parents who care or have the time to care about their education or welfare, or to help them with schoolwork, or convey that it's important, and all of that, and that's massive, but this numerical gap in tests exists, even when the black kids are raised in the best suburbs and attend private schools and test-prep classes, it happens consistently. And presuming it does keep happening, what do we do? It's nearly 2015; how long do we go with different numbers on various charts before every explanation breaks down and we're forced to confront that yes, genes may actually have to do with more than melanin?

Dealing with Black Racial Superiority, Section I: Accepting Invasive Methodology

The quantifiable superiority of African peoples takes on many forms, both in areas that Earth 2014ers would call "intellectual" and "physical." While the nomadic farm managers and livestock of some parts of Europe and the Middle East have developed testing apparatuses to verify their own relative strengths, producing a convincing veneer of superiority among host populations, the testing itself has been an immensely wasteful ritual, a narcissistically iatrogenic conjunction of cause and effect that has increased the genetic myopicity of both brood managers and the most compliant, numerous strains of livestock.

The presolar nomadic population of "white" (insert your preferred term/understanding within the quotes) humans now here (Earth 2014) have been developed in accordance with principles of docility, obedience, and labor. "Intelligence Quotient" tests, and other games disseminated in binary or finite-response systems, capitalize on these physical traits, providing simple, verifiable emotional boons to the fragile cross-field mental relationships suffered by many such white populations. Their tests exemplify the things in which they do excel: sitting still; following orders; ritualistic progression; demonstrative mental cycling, and fixed systems.

These tasks, as pejorative as their presentation may make them sound in the previous list, are highly valuable in certain settings. The ability to easily abey one's judgment in favor of obeying a perceived authority figure has its short term values, particularly in primitive coordinated group combat; so too the short term boosts to productivity and development caused by contemplation through "sitting still, quietly," as opposed to more vibrant, erratic, higher-net-gain innovative strategies. In certain situations, this type of doldrums intellectualism may even be the most efficient course of behavior for a civilization, provided its practice is stemmed as soon as the danger has passed.

More wholly valuable in the long term is ritualistic progression--the ability of whites to tenaciously, pedantically, self-interestedly develop narrow avenues of technology through a painfully expensive process of full-spectrum testing, e.g., figuring out which thing to use by having a hundred people try a hundred different things, then promoting the lone survivor to management and worshiping his god. In the presence of danger, or in the absence of creative channeling, this is a useful social ritual, virtually guaranteeing a slow, droll, standing-on-the-shoulders-of-geniuses pace of psialtic ("material") gain. For the disconnected, the crippled, it is really the only way to go. At the expense of billions of lives and more to come, all forms of technology, from ideas to drugs to machines, are tested upon varying stages of subjects, generally with wasteful consequences, often with extremely dangerous ones, and very rarely, with successful ones.

Ritualistic technological progression is an unnatural progress, akin to building wealth through capital gains and interest, which is why it so appeals to elites during their time here; it's also why "The Tortoise and the Hare" is a popular fable, even though hares would and do win any such "races," having covered more ground overall per-unit than tortoises, despite what the moral of the story claims (even though slow and steady is just fine in some situations, so the moral can be useful, but really, you always realized the hare could've won, right?).

(Again, the reference to ritualistic progression--the "take the next step" discernment applicable to the question-begging imperative interrogatives of multiple choice tests--seems pejorative, but keep in mind that there are less successful systems out there than Sol's, so there's no need to exaggerate when discussing Earth 2014's comparative stupidity.)

Demonstrative mental cycling, or proving the proven as a test of mental strength, is the non-barbell-analogous act of taking tests to demonstrate merit. In its current celebrated form, it's mere dross; it's like the white fascination with subjectively-scored sports, from ballet to gymnastics to the 1974 Sex Olympics. It's male-bonding retreats and team-building exercises, in a way, to hold IQ tests where a bunch of people practice answering questions to which the answers are already known, and measuring their intelligence against it. Doing a form rather than fighting someone, if you will. Now, that sort of stuff can be fun, or even beautiful, just like watching a good kata or finding out you did well on some test, but its relationship to intelligence is tenuous at best. As Mensa points out on occasion, it hosts triple PhDs and high school dropouts, multi-millionaires and the impoverished, and Marilyn vos Savant makes less money and gets less attention than Oprah.

Fixed systems thinking models are perhaps the most harmful imports recurrent within standardized tests. These methodologies ape creativity while stifling it--for example, how can you turn this eight-pointed shape into a nine-pointed shape by moving only one triangle? Easy: by breaking it apart and rebuilding it with nine points. By making do with the eight-pointed one while building a nine-pointed one from scratch, then using the eight-pointed one for something useful. By building a one-hundred-pointed one to begin with, so that vast quantities of resources are not spent every year, or every few generations, "upgrading" the previously-built, now-inefficient structure.

So much of so-called "white" test-taking strategies revolve around concepts of "having already fucked it all up." Standardized tests present a fixed-grid problem, propose only one right answer (which has been precalculated by the test's creators), and then purport to gauge holistic intelligence (and that's what they think, even when they claim to allow for people who have special talents or other ways of thinking), all while disallowing any variation of their rules. Standardized tests are godlike, in this, because you can't draw your own lines or find a new resource hitherto undiscovered. Rather, you work within the constraints of the set of lofty dunces who thought up the riddle.

Why is a raven like a writing desk, indeed? We've learned through Alice not to try to answer that particular one in the "right answer" way, although of course there are plenty of right answers--even some correct ones. But the Hatter was full of mercury, just like the people who think up and take IQ tests; it's not meant to be a model for intellectual behavior.

The deadly by-products of fixed systems thinking models, like those of narrative structure, is the reliance they create on the "cloud" of centralized authority. For all the vaunted intelligence quotients of today's brightest--venture capitalists, writers, doctors, lawyers, PhDs, whatever--their test-taking years have crippled them with a reliance on someone to set the boundaries of a game before they can play it. When someone tells them to think outside the box, they eagerly listen for strategies on how to do so, while still punishing each other when someone figures out how to actually do so; they can talk for decades about the theories of the past, but they have nothing themselves to offer, because fixed systems thinking preparation has taught them only how to present the best pre-selected answer from ages past. Dawkins can only harp about Darwin, and Hawking can only chatter endlessly about Georges Lemaître, and they're the one-eyed men in the land of the blind, kings with no depth perception who can only read back to us stories that others have already written, yet who genuinely believe they are accomplishing something, because after all, there were so many rewards after those test questions they answered "correctly," way back when. All the movies are fan-fiction and all the seasonal designs are retro.

Dealing with Black Racial Superiority, Section II: Grappling With Origins

For millions of years, basic Ecomaterianism has taught that planets develop dense atmospheric nerve endings, or trees, and complex autonomous nerves, or humans, which possess exofibrous coatings ("bark" or "skin") colored in coordination with the dominant chemical composition of their planet's soil. The most common such planets are browns, which produce Balrin humans, having coatings in varying shades of brown, pursuant to their developmental soil. Less common but still quite numerous red-brown or red planets produce Barians, which can range from very light brown to nearly pink, and yellow planets, which produce Bajirin humans, with according and complementary developmental effects. The exceedingly rare Bazins come from blue planets (not like a PBS special about places with water, but based upon the underlying carbonated soil structure, prettyish azure, like nothing we see near Sol).

The shortcomings of finite-response modes of thinking, as alluded to in the previous section, produce very tangible results, which can be systematically observed based, not (necessarily) on IQ score patterns themselves, but on the culturally associated relevance of said IQ scores. Planets whose humans develop finite-response models achieve rapid, unsustainable growth, and often end up so advanced that they become regressive wastelands. In the case of "Africans" on Earth 2014, we observe a population of native Balrins making excellent progress through hundreds of thousands of years of healthy econeural growth, then being gradually set upon by roving populations of Barians and Bajirins who are very different, and who seem to have developed long habits of settling, destroying, and moving on, hopped up on some kind of civilizational steroids that leave them great at killing, but not so very good at surviving long term.

In the meantime, up above in the sky not so far away, in two different directions lurk two relative spherical hells: burned out, abandoned whores of pink and yellow, badly scarred and apparently down on their luck. Though covered in methane or freezing, depressurized winds, stripped of their lifeblood, and seemingly impossibly far away, these hells are eerily prominent in the newcomers' cultural memories as possessing long-established characters and habits. The newcomers begin concentrating slave populations over tilling-based, unsustainably-extractive agricultural project-fed, urban resource voids, and a few K later, someone notices that everyone has nukes and the lights are starting to go out. The invaders just haven't been able to let the natives go this entire time; they're obsessed with coming there, interbreeding, stealing things to make up for what they've already cleaned out of their own benighted colonies, and subjugating the populace to prevent sustainable development--an occurrence that, were it to be allowed to continue to progress, would destroy forever the cherished subconscious instinct, "We were not to blame for what happened. It was inevitable. These people couldn't have done it any better."

Refusing to learn from past mistakes or adopt newfound semi-ancestral connections to their lands (almost like it's a rental apartment and not a family home), the invaders treat the new place as disposable, doing their best to drag locals away from the lands where they grew, while rushing through a dangerous technological procession that has, as its end goal, "We gotta get outta here, this place is gonna blow, time to colonize space in the pursuit of gobble-worthy resources."

(Just a bit of fiction, there, to make things interesting. Put it aside and move on.)

Dealing with Black Racial Superiority, Section III: Practical Proofs

However we cut the cake or dress it up, presume as true the future's persistent racial gaps in test scores, economic success, and violent crime. Assume that all our cards are on the table, and that it's not just decades, but centuries, of affirmative action later, and whites and east Asians are still winning at test scores and salaries.

Systemic Failure

The connection between salary, social success, and whiteness (or any other "ness"), is not a positive one. In societies this horrid, widespread social or financial success is not a good thing. The destructive, toxic nature of wealth and political power are indicia of bad individual and group qualities, rather than good. It is a sign of racial superiority that Africans have resisted inclusion into this model.

Disposable diaper islands, private prisons, humanitarian intervention, department head of economic science, director of emerging layoffs--this is the standard to which they should aspire?

What a blessing it would be, to the violent white nomads, if they could somehow make the blacks more like themselves--successfully confined within finite-response models, better at quickly extracting resources from an area, then leaving it a poisoned wasteland, dying off, and moving as battered survivors, anxious and depressed, to a new place for a new rape.

Deference to and Perpetuation of Evil

Why, hello, Mr. TSA man! Still working on that GED? Well, no problem--would you like to slip your hand between my labia, cup my young son's testicles, and blast all of us with cancer? Oh, it did? Okay, we'll go to the special waiting area for an interview. Gosh, it's nice of you to coordinate rolling our tickets forward to the 9PM flight. Yes, I will try to get to the airport earlier next time. Wait, what's wrong with my soda?

What's that, Officer? Why, yes, I've been drinking tonight--two glasses of mineral water, and one iced tea. What's that? You want me to get out of the car? Okay. Where should I stand? (Crud, the movie starts in twenty minutes!) Oh, no, those are my husband's. No, he doesn't "put marijuana in there and make it a blunt." Yes, I'm here of my own free will. Well, I was, up until you showed up. Um, no, I already told you, he doesn't "put marijuana in there and make it a blunt." Yes, I understand if I confess it now you'll let me go with a warning...fine, then search it. Yes, I know if I say no you can say my behavior gives you reasonable suspicion, just go ahead. (sigh) Well, the tire jack's under there, that's why...no, you have to move the carpet--sorry! Sorry! I'll just stay over here!

Oh, sure...yeah, I've just got my billfold and some stuff in there...oh! No, those are just birth control pills! Er, no, but who carries their prescription slips around with them? What? Oh, well, if I can pick it up on Monday... (But I've got a lunch scheduled that day!) Oh! Teehee! Yeah, I've carried that ever since I got mugged when I was seventeen. Wait, why's it a 'class 2 weapon'? It's just pepper spray! I haven't even remembered it was in there for the past six years! No, no, I'm sorry...yes, thank you...that's very kind of you not to make it a misdemeanor charge, and no, I don't want an arrest on my permanent record...thank you so much.

You mean, they killed her? Shot her dead in her own living room while her grandkids were watching? What's that mean, "wrong address"? And the DA won't press charges? Well, that's it! I'm going to, to sign an online petition!

Nine years old? And they've cleared themselves of wrongdoing? What kind of insane person would think that's in any remote way a reasonab...that's it--it's time for an indignant blog post!

Well, they say he had a gun in his hand, but it wasn't registered to him, so he must've stolen it. Sounds like a criminal. That other cop who died in the motorcycle accident a few days ago was going to testify about an unwritten department understanding of planting evidence, it's terrible he had that accident, but I still think the response was a little overblown...guess I should call my Senator's aide's secretary and ask that they look into it sometime...you know, when they can get the time, and after a few more elections when he's got some seniority and becomes a sub-chair of the sub-committee on public safety...

Dealing with Black Racial Superiority, Section IV: Compelling Humanity

Inside the murder machine, over a thousand years of historical evidence shows how resistant Africans have been to white diseases. Far prior to the European Dark Ages and the First White Invasion of Palestine ("Crusades"), African scholars had developed mathematics and astronomy, and built capitals with libraries and paved roads. At a certain curious point in history, this suddenly-evolved group of pale people showed up and started burning things, in a process that has not yet ended. Whites--including Persians and paler-skinned Egyptian leadership classes--have constantly enslaved Africans, exploited Africa's resources, and tried to turn the continent into a model of what has already happened in the exo-Caucasian zones of Europe and Asia. Africans have developed modern-style genocides and warlords of their own, but only when they've been infiltrated, armed, deceived, and heavily coerced by foreign powers. From countless outright invasions, to the most subtle of modern financial ploys, Africa has been a target for destruction.

Yet throughout it all, Africa has been resistant. It has consistently--even in the face of pressure from the banking cartels representing the entire rest of the world--returned to ideas of nationalized resources and guaranteed employment or minimum income. Time and again, Africans recover from western bombs, rebuild villages, hold constitutional conventions, and establish nations based around sustainable use of natural resources--whereupon they suddenly become a "security threat" to wherever the western imperial seat is at the time, and pass through twenty years of warlords. And when the people finally overthrow the western-backed dictator, and set up a new country, there comes BHP Billiton to make that government an offer it can't refuse on a foreign-operated copper mine...but a thousand years later, Africa is still there, and Europe is even more poisoned and jealous. The destruction cause by the white "Jews" of Israel is phenomenal, but still technically in Asia. Yet another Anglo foothold against the Zulu wreaks terrible, bloody havoc, piling up millions of dark bodies, as the Crusaders dig in for the long haul. Yet another push into Africa; yet another attempt to invade and displace those troublesome natives who just keep on living. Will this one prove any more durable than the last? Netanyahu is only Rommel's dumber, meaner successor, conducting a less-effective push into north Africa to replace brown populations with anti-inclusive white ones.

The trans-Orwellian nightmare of western civilization has arrived at terrible cost. Almost all of the technological advancements achieved by whites have been the by-product of dangerous, secretive rushing. Afraid to share their technology with others, whites have established thousands of years of intellectual property controls, creating staggered progressions of planned obsoletion, whereby millions of factory workers live in poverty and sickness, for decades, spending their lives to centralize and buttress the control systems that allow for the development of the steam engine. As they work, white managers think only of the objective, disregarding the "means" and poisoning their own habitat, such that their great grandchildren begin hosting cancer, and their great grandchildren face starvation. Like the perennial chant of "let your anger power you," the white industrial revolution came faster, harmed its creators, and produced an unsustainable mess.

Africa would not have this. And Africans, faced with the exploitative hell of western civilization, have shown themselves more humane, and more willing to stand up for dignity, than whites. The African American backlash against slave patrols and COINTELPRO is a healthy reaction, while the white tendency to submit willingly to genital groping, lack of access to liquids, and irradiative scanning, is the deadly submission of a population that has already given up.

African Americans do have more trouble with law enforcement, and it's for the right reasons. More people should be getting into altercations with cops--more citizens should be refusing "reasonable requests" from law enforcement, and flagrantly disregarding laws against victimless drug use or commerce. More people should be following the African example, and getting indignant and belligerent when some paramilitary asshole in an armored car pulls up to ask you questions about where you're going and what you're going to do there. Personal privacy, free speech, free association, and all other aspects of resisting dystopia are being exemplified by the African Americans who put their lives on the line for human dignity, even as the majority of whites and Asians are happy to sit, speak, fetch, shake hands, and "Go lie down!" whenever a KKKop tells them to.

Unfortunately, most of the tax-farmed livestock cultivated by white broodlords over the past millennia has left whites docile, afraid, and obedient--great at scoring high on multiple choice tests, great at avoiding homeless gazes, great at replacing the onsite IT staff with a company from New Delhi, but not so great at maintaining human independence and dignity. Whites have long accepted the idea of being powerless, bleating livestock. They report problems to the manager, get nervous when someone speaks up, avoid contentious issues to be polite, mind their own business, and get calmly put on hold by customer service. All of the undignified hell of the corporate war-world is lost on most whites, who seem more than happy to embrace it--while many blacks are willing to disobey unjust laws, fight back when some intruding totalitarian harasses their family or friends, and destroy property when the propertied are the ones paying for the kill squads.

All this is highly troubling to docile whites, who are definitely the best-behaved cattle in the industrial feedlot, not wanting to stand out or make any trouble. So many whites low in dismay whenever they see someone--white or black--make a break for the fence, gore a roving slaughterhouse employee, or lash out at the nightmare in any other way. Be reasonable! Be realistic!

8 comments:

  1. Chris Rock takes a break from being white to explain to blacks how to be white (when it comes to interactions with the police)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uj0mtxXEGE8

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There's a defense of Rock in the sense that, within what we might call "the black community," a lot of blacks are concerned about blacks who act like thuggish jerks for no particular reason. E.g., the guys who actually do get confrontational for nothing. Even inside that paradigm, though, there's an intrinsic whiteness in that attitude--the sense that, if people would start being generally docile and ignorant of the larger cultural insanity, then they'd have more of a chance of reaping middle-class "rewards."

      It's been interesting how "PC culture" has allowed so many blacks to become prominent by exhibiting white attitudes to shill for injustice. If the conservatives had been able to shut down "PC" at the beginning of the movement, then such inside jobs wouldn't be possible, because we'd be able to critique Rock/Obama for being bigots despite the fact that they have increased melanin. PC over the long term has revealed itself to be, in truth, a cover movement for the continued oppression of blacks.

      Delete
    2. Good points. Sadly, and worse, I found out about the video because a family member posted it as an explanation for what happened with brown - i.e. "it is okay to be executed if you behave like a thug" (and he had the same attitude to the shooting of the 12 year old).

      Basically the more serious problem I see with this (in addition to the misguided belief that obedience is the ticket to making it to the middle) is that anything short of total and complete obedience legitimately invites murder. I will not regain my faith in humanity for as long as the proportion of people who are okay with this remains fairly big from what i can tell based on my non-scientific convenience sample of acquaintances...

      Delete
  2. Huh, well you're definitely right that blacks who fuck the law are superior to whites who submit to police, pay taxes and get oh so successful jobs in corporate hell creating hell for other humans and other life. The genetic argument is definitely a very plausible possibility, and one I hadn't given much thought to before. Still, Chris Rock (whether he's 'serious' or not, and maybe even more so if he thinks he's being ironic), along with people like Obama seem just as bad as rational white people. Conversely, even Europe (especially Eastern Europe) has occasionally pulled some interesting things out of the hat, such as Makhnovism in early 20th century Ukraine, Dada inspired Situationism in France or Gnostic Christianity in ancient Greece, and there was peasant resistance throughout even Western Europe, although its now almost entirely snuffed out thanks to the Industrial Revolution.

    Do you think cultural explanations can be entirely ruled out? Certainly Arthur Silber's Ravages of Tribalism series makes a convincing argument that a lot can be done just through manipulating parents into scarring and destroying the capacity for free will of their children, allowing each successive generation to be more and more broken, liquidated and pushed in whatever direction is useful as adults.

    Anyway, as you've pointed out elsewhere, race isn't monolithic, and is really just an excuse for a caste system. Nri-Igbo society was before colonization and still is very different from Dahomean-Fon society, which is very different from 21st century African American society despite the fact that many African-Americans come from those nations. Russia is also a very different place from the U.S., and even French Canadians are marginally more capable of not being livestock than Americans are. All 'white' majority countries on earth are pretty corporate, although some hispanic whites have done better as a result of living with indigenous people, but then, it serves the capitalist superstructure's purposes to have a universal domestication skin marker so THEY can more easily liquidate 'human resources' and break down boundaries and cultures. The way THEY treat people might be responsible for this on its own.

    Then again, there probably is a genetic component regardless, the question is just how big it is. It's fascinating and terrifying how much a couple goons with a rusty spike can change long term with a few generations of suppressing resistance and herding and breeding cattle, sometimes without even understanding what they are doing...

    As usual, thanks for your wonderful blog!

    It's a wacky world! hAhA as Bosse de Nage put it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. <3

      The "genetic component," such as it is, would be a gene-ralization; a stereotype. Stereotypes can be employed without bigotry, e.g., we can see a white person and assume, "That person is more likely to be compliant with totalitarian goons," but we don't cross the line into negativity until we begin treating each and every white person as though they are, themselves, an exemplification of that otherwise-sound generalization. As individuals, we don't need to be worried or offended on behalf of our genetic background, anymore than the Irish are offended when their physicians tell them to put on more sunscreen than they do their African patients.

      Delete
    2. The irish should worry about sunburn though, and I'd say we should be very worried about the implications of our genetics on how are minds operate to an even greater extent than we are worried about how they affect the rest of our bodies, and especially when the hints are that a group has, in the white population, been bred for docility and grazing while our resources are milked in the tax and "employment" systems. In that case, we should be very worried indeed if most of our perceptions and thought patterns are inherently subverting our ability to realize our best interests or love one another. Then again, I think Silber's psycho-social argument is very convincing too, so its hard to quantify the relative effects of nature and nurture. We should be worried but ever skeptical and thorough in drawing conclusions. An interesting case study would be looking at white kids adopted by black parents and black kids adopted by white parents, although even then capitalist multi-layered caste structure gets in the way of seeing anything completely and generalization of variability makes it even tougher.

      I'm increasingly sure that getting offended is not particularly useful in any circumstance for anyone. Either solve your problem, get angry and build community solidarity together in order to solve the problem, refuse to take an overly serious asshole seriously and turn the joke around on to them, or realize that offensive statements indicate battle positions in a low intensity war, and either make an irrefutable case against their position or leave. Taking offense and getting in a huff and a puff is cliched, expected and not very productive ever I think.

      Delete
    3. Taking offense also implies you aren't so much mad at them for what they said, but for disrupting your oblivious little world where 'people don't say that', and you would much rather they shut up and continue silently then actually confront directly the larger problem of what what they said implies about them and about society.

      Delete
  3. Now that the focus has shifted from Brown to Garner, many white bois are anguished and lament the fact that selling untaxed cigarettes "certainly does not justify murder". Must we be so clueless? This is precisely what will get you murdered. Violent crimes against other peasants? Meh...

    ReplyDelete