American Zimbabwe: The War in Chicago.

Tags

American Africa, American thinker, American third world, Barack Obama, BBC, Chief Keef, Chiraq, Civilisation, Crime in Chicago, Dearborn, Dearborn Thinker, Defend the modern world, Kanye West, Lil Reese, Muslim, New English Review, slavery, VDare

The everydayness of gun-crime in America has long been a cause of great confusion (and in some cases, schadenfruende) in Europe, with the rates reported in cities like New York and Los Angeles seeming more appropriate to a Lesotho shanty-town than a bustling superpower, studded with skyscrapers.

But in reality, gun-crime is not really an American issue at all, but a peculiarly African-American one. ‘White’ states like Oregon and Washington have very low rates of crime and violence, while Black-heavy states like Georgia and Louisiana have rates well above the national average.

And of all African-American population centres, it is the city of Chicago, Illinois that makes for the most alarming case. This brilliant city, steeped in wealth and literary renown, is witness to an dizzying number of violent felonies, with the year 2012 clocking up 507 murders (by far the highest number in the United States), most of them committed with a firearm.

Many of the perpetrators and victims of these crimes are children; almost all of them having been trapped beforehand in a force-field of invented difference and meaningless rivalry. You’re from that neighbourhood, so why are you here? Boom! You’re meant to ride with us, so why do you wear that colour around your neck? Boom! And so on… This shocking rate of crime, coupled with the number of completed murders has led to the city acquiring the nickname ‘Chiraq’ – a portmanteau of Chicago and Iraq.

Most of these killings occur in a district of the city known as the ‘South Side’, made up of predominantly Black and poor neighbourhoods. Here, crack-cocaine manufacturing gangs are known to control the streets, and on occasion ‘provide security’ to whole tower blocks. Snitching on these makeshift police will only invite a swift demise. Failing to sign up to your local ‘clique’ (or ‘click’ – by the traditions of gang illiteracy) typically invites bullying, manipulation, shunning and possibly worse.

The culture of the South-Side is dominated by music; specifically a dark and violent sub-genre of Hip-Hop known as ‘Drill’ music. This trend was popularised by local artist Chief Keef, whose YouTube videos typically display the singer (and his friends) waving firearms at a cheap camera.

Keef (real name Keith Cozart) is known to have committed uncountable offenses in the city and has been directly accused of murder by the mother of one of the South Side’s child victims. His lyrics include barely-concealed references to homicide.

Among those who associate with Keef are an ignoble crew of villains and murderers. The video below depicts Keef’s collaborator and relative ‘Lil Reese’ beating up a young woman (for example):

Such practical misogyny is far from exceptional. Within Drill lyricism, a terrible emphasis is placed on ‘team sex’; a practice in which one’s entire ‘clique’ has sex with a single woman one after the other. For example, the lyrics of ‘Lil Mouse’ (who was 12 at the time of composition) include ‘If you wanna fuck me, then fuck the team”, while Chief Keef raps “You’re bitch won’t do the team? (I) bet she won’t fight!” – note that in the latter case, the boundary between consent and assault is terrifyingly blurred.

The life-expectancy of Chicagoan rappers has collapsed in recent years, with many aspiring musicians being snuffed out before their time. The rapper LA Capone, whose best-known songs include ‘Murder’ (the chorus – ‘Murder me? It’s unheard of’) was gunned down in 2012. His collaborator ‘Rondonumbanine’ was later arrested for murdering a taxi driver said to have been involved in Capone’s death. Chief Keef’s cousin ‘Blood Money’ was assassinated in 2013 by rival gang members.

So strong is the whirlwind of nihilism affecting Chicago, many of its rappers perish barely having had the chance to establish themselves. A small, baby-faced child calling himself ‘Lil JoJo’ made a nightmarish video (below) trolling the rival ‘Black Disciples’ gang (of which Keef, Capone, Reese and Blood money are or were members). He was killed within a month.

Drill’s popularity radiates far beyond its homeland. Outside of Illinois, young African-Americans compete with each other to imitate the criminals of Chicago. The black thug responsible for the bestial murder of Christopher Lane (a race-hate killing even if the media pretends otherwise) quoted Chief Keef on Twitter (“I’m with my niggas when it’s time to start taking lives”) the day before he and his friends committed the homicide.

In the established worldview of racist thinking, Black Africans represent the lowest tier of humanity and a biological fusion of human and pre-human. In doing the research for this post, I have myself felt the twitch of racist emotion; a heavy, slightly burning anger supported with a sentimental fear for the future. Should the numbers of these people be contained? Should segregation be considered?

I now see the world back in focus. Black people are as varied as any other race. There are Black professionals, Black thugs and innumerable varieties in-between. Nevertheless, the West must be firm about the issue of tribal violence. It simply doesn’t belong in this part of the world. Chicago’s children, women and law-abiding citizenry deserve better.

D, LDN.

Advertisement

How Real is Race?

Tags

Amren, Anti-Racist is a Code word for Anti-White, Franz Boas, Freud, Hispanics, Is race real, Jared Taylor, Liberal conservatism, Middle-ground, Race realism, Social construct, VDare

Regarded as toxic, unnecessary and destined to cause more harm by its investigation than benefit, no scientific subject is more reliably controversial than race.

I am not a racist and have no racial agenda to advance. Nevertheless, I find the denial of racial difference extremely injurious to human understanding. It is surely worthwhile to learn about and understand our collective past and also the deviations we took as a species to arrive at our current variety.

Such a grand treasure of facts should not be abandoned to the politicised black-market of the underworld. We are more than capable of discussing these things in a civilised manner, and so let’s do that here.

How real is race? A simple question with a complicated answer.

The Left-wing line on racial difference hasn’t changed in more than 50 years. Liberals maintain that what we call ‘race’ is merely a ‘social construct’ – that is, an invented system no more meaningful than class, language or nationality. By this reckoning, the notion of a black race is no more legitimate or scientific than a blue-eyed, brown-eyed or left-handed race. (Note that ‘Race’ to these folk, is almost synonymous with colour and has no deeper implications).

Over time, the Left-wing view has become dominant in Western society. No politician could be elected having questioned the dogma of ‘we’re all the same underneath’. The mainstream ‘right’ is thereby just as wedded to the concept as the Left.

To find the contrary view, we must go to the far or extreme right. There, people hold the view (in agreement with the majority of scientists) that race is not only real, more than skin-deep and scientifically viable, but also immensely important as a tool of explanation. They argue that a country like Uganda is less developed than Japan for primarily biological reasons. They reject the notion of innate, inborn human equality as little more than wishful thinking. And they view multiracial societies like those of the US and UK as wrong-headed utopian experiments that can only end by robbing the White peoples of their hard-won evolutionary advantages.

My view? Well, in the cartoonish way I’ve described the matter, I lean strongly toward the latter interpretation. I do believe race is real and that biology can explain things like behaviour and intelligence – perhaps not completely, but reliably enough to provide a guiding rule.

Nevertheless, the Left-wing argument is not wholly wrong and deserves more consideration than ethno-nationalists seem willing to grant it. There plainly are ‘races’ with a socially constructed basis. The surreal American conception of ‘black’ (one drop of African blood makes you fully African) is a social construct, for example. A black man in America might be a White man in Brazil and vice versa. The Arab and Hispanic ‘races’ are also social constructs (both Arabs and Hispanics are heterogeneous categories defined only by language).  Japanese and Koreans are so genetically similar that the hostility between them has a mostly social basis. The treatment of Jews and Arabs as ‘White’ Caucasians on the American census is a social decision. The demented division of White Europeans into Alpines, Nordics and Mediterraneans by Madison Grant similarly represents a product of human bias more than scientific reality.

Thus, the race as social construct idea is not as wholly wrong as we might regard it at face value.

Of course, the reason we might feel inclined to disregard it likely arises from the way the theory is used by our opponents. To take the commonsensical points I have conceded and use them to argue that nothing biological separates a Black African from a Swede is simply crazy. A great deal of evolutionary difference separates them and has supplied them both with very different characteristics.

There is much to be fascinated with in racial science. The athletic superiority of black people, the apparent inclination of East Asians to obedience and feelings of shame, the religiosity of the Semites, the efficiency of the Nordics, the romanticism of the Latin peoples etc… All of these phenomena can (potentially) be explained scientifically. I for one would think it a shame if we shied away from doing so.

D, LDN.

James Watson: A Modern Alan Turing.

Tags

Amren, Auction, Bell Curve, Bell Curve controversy, Civilisation, Controversy, Correct, IQ, James Watson, James Watson Racist, Jared Taylor, John Derbyshire, Nobel Prize, politics, Race and ethnicity in the United States Census, Race and intelligence, racism, VDare, Watson

James Watson, the genius who – with Francis Crick – discovered the structure of DNA, has fallen on hard times. Ostracised for his comments on race and intelligence many years ago, the distinguished scientist has now felt the need to auction his Nobel Prize medal to the highest bidder.

Some have greeted this pitiful news with heartless derision:

“This sounds awful” –  wrote Adam Rutherford in the Guardian –  “…an 86-year-old hero ostracised for his views, shooed from public life by the people who walk in his scientific shadow…. But it’s not awful. Watson has said that he is “not a racist in a conventional way”. But he told the Sunday Times in 2007 that while people may like to think that all races are born with equal intelligence, those “who have to deal with black employees find this not true”. Call me old-fashioned, but that sounds like bog-standard, run-of-the-mill racism to me.”

No sympathy there then. Rutherford’s twisted viewpoint is repeated across the spectrum of the uninformed mainstream. It is only outside of this spectrum that the matter is seen for what it is – an unambiguous tragedy and a disgrace to science.

A man who has done more than anyone alive to aid humanity’s understanding of itself; a man whose invention and wit upgraded the field of science, exposed the hidden potential of medicine and stirred the imagination of a million minds is reduced to near-penury simply for holding an unfashionable opinion.

Watson reminds me of nobody more than the British code-cracker Alan Turing who, after breaking the enigma code of the Nazis and thus enabling the defeat of fascism, was cast out to the margins of society by his ungrateful country for being homosexual. (Turing later committed suicide by biting into an apple injected with cyanide).

The Left adores Turing and so he is wildly (and rightly) venerated. Watson annoyed the Left and so he is ostracised. That says a lot about which political wing is currently dominant over academia, doesn’t it?

And is Watson actually wrong? Surely that is the most central and vital thing to consider. Here is the statement that got him into this mess:

“I am inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa [because] all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours —whereas all the testing says not really… people who have to deal with black employees find this not true.”

This (admittedly clumsy) statement is far from ‘hateful’. It is grounded in fact by a crushing weight of experiment and analysis. Here is an excerpt from the book-length study of the subject ‘The Bell Curve’:

“Ethnic differences in measured cognitive ability have been found since intelligent tests were invented. The battle over the meaning of these differences is largely responsible for today’s controversy over intelligence testing itself…There are differences between races, and they are the rule, not the exception… External evidence of bias (in IQ tests) has been sought in hundreds of studies…Overwhelmingly, the evidence is that the major standardized tests used to help make school and job decisions do not underpredict black performance, nor does the expert community find any other general or systematic difference in the predictive accuracy of tests for blacks and whites.”

Those who would call James Watson ‘ignorant’ are themselves ignorant, and those ‘scientists’ who back these catcalls should not be considered scientists at all.

D, LDN.