The Buckdancer’s Lament
Leftists are so eager for any black or brown “intellectual” who will regurgitate race grievance talking points that they’ll go so far as to canonize someone like Ta-Nehisi Coates, who is objectively a sub-par writer and whose prose is overwrought and clichéd, in lieu of a whole litany of extremely bright and legitimately talented writers, intellectuals, and public figures for the simple fact that they do not espouse the Left’s exact worldview. This list of estimable individuals includes John McWhorter, Walter E. Williams, Thomas Sowell, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Carol Swain, Larry Elder, Taleeb Starkes, Burgess Owens, Antonia Okafor, Kevin Jackson, Clarence Thomas, David Clarke, Deneen Borelli, Allen West, Jesse Lee Peterson, and the bi-racial Shelby Steele; and though some of their beliefs are downright absurd, Herman Cain and Ben Carson are very accomplished in their own right and are savaged by the Left and especially other blacks despite being genuine success stories in their respective fields.
Watching the media froth at the mouth about mediocre actresses like Kerry Washington or politicians like Kamala Harris based solely on their skin color is actually quite nauseating. You see a similar scenario played out in virtually every arena, the slightest hint of success by a non-white eliciting the applause of the mighty Leftist Commissars, as if the individual in question were Koko the Gorilla and they’ve managed to spell their own name with blocks or something. It’s unbelievably patronizing for the many bright and talented “people of color,” but at the same time, there’s a real, unacknowledged basis for this reaction.
It has both everything and nothing to do with race: nothing because, when you control for IQ, black and white levels of deviance and criminality are comparable, and everything because blacks in America, on average, are a full standard deviation below whites in IQ, and in sub-Saharan Africa, two full standard deviations below whites. Asians, with higher average IQs than either group, commit less crime and make more money; earning potential, as I’ve covered in “From Womb to Tomb,” has a direct correlation with IQ, as does time preference and impulse control. This is a depressing thought if you’re invested in the equity agenda, and it’s little wonder the spread of this information has been so ruthlessly suppressed. It is the poison pill of egalitarianism.
I’m not saying blacks and browns are doomed to some Calvinist pre-destination of hell—there are many, many outliers. Realistically, however, we’ve got to start making civilizationally responsible decisions firmly rooted in reality and not patty-cake idealism. There are different kinds of intelligence, and though one may not score highly on the IQ test, we can assess an individual’s aptitude and try to train them in some field—music, the trades, etc.—that will still allow them to be successful in their own right. Not everyone needs to be a CEO. As evidenced by Pareto’s Distribution and other factors, there will always be clear divides in any society, and this is a natural occurrence. Inequality, like transience, is both the beauty and tragedy of life. Blacks, for example, are wildly over-represented in entertainment. Has anyone stopped to wonder why? A musical genius or a mechanical wizard need not be a MENSA member—they are a different kind of genius, and it’s not like IQ is the be-all end-all. We can curse the Maker all we want; there’s nothing we can do but maximize the hand we’re dealt. So much of it is luck of the draw, however, when it’s time to become a parent, there are obvious steps you can take to give your child the best chance at success—do not in-breed like many Moslems, emphasize pre-natal nutrition—especially iodine—breast feed, get and stay married, and do not beat the child, all of which will optimize your offspring’s mental acuity and emotional stability. The rest is chance and circumstance beyond your control, but success, as it were, is when luck meets aptitude and preparation.
As Stefan Molyneux says, “If you realize that IQ differences are significantly genetic, it’s tragic, but it’s no one’s fault.” The simple but reliable metric of IQ does more to dispel the egalitarian myth than just about anything else, besides perhaps professional sports, where the disparity between the haves and the have-nots is thrown into stark visual relief; we don’t clamor for a sixty-something percent white NBA to reflect the population distribution, so why do the reverse for a 13 or 14% black professoriate or software programming team? Jordan Peterson says it best: “Borders are rational.” This is exactly why the “standard” of egalitarianism is only selectively applied. It’s all about having your cake and eating it, too. As George Orwell once pointed out, the typical socialist’s motivations aren’t borne of empathy but of invidiousness; his peers didn’t care about the working class, they just hated and envied the wealthy. No movement genuinely based on compassion would have such a strong current of vitriol and intolerance running through it. This ideology is very appealing for many because it offers pre-packaged excuses and scapegoats for why they’re failures.
If America and the other Western nations are so terrible and oppressive, then we should be discouraging people from coming here, not facilitating it. The truly compassionate thing to do would be to turn people away and ensure those already caught in the jaws of white supremacy are deported or re-patriated immediately for their own benefit. Leftists must make up their minds, however; either the “Countries of Poop” as the French press translated Donald Trump’s “shithole” comment really are repositories of excrement, or they’re just fine, and we don’t need to “rescue” the hapless brown masses of the world. Further, this begs the question if the Third World nations in question are indeed Countries of Poop, how, pray tell, did they get that way, and what benefit would we in the West derive from importing them in the millions?
Damon Sajnani (Canadian rapper and former Harvard University Nasir Jones Hip-Hop Fellow, whatever the fuck that is) teaches a course at the University of Wisconsin called “The Problem of Whiteness.” Sajnani, whose doctoral thesis in African American Studies centered on “Hip-Hop and Civil Society in Senegal,” views the Democrats as a “far right entity,” so though he’s established his “woke” bona fides, it should be noted that in addition to the fact that he sports dreadlocks, his entire existence as a “rapper” and “professor” is centered on cultural appropriation. So the guy is basically the academic iteration of Snow (“Stop it, Silky, you’re killin’ him!”). Dr. Kris Sealey of Fairfield University in Connecticut is also deeply concerned with the “problem of whiteness”: “I teach on race have become courses [sic] in which I expect my students to engage in the hegemonic power of whiteness… the goal is to understand the role of the white gaze in the confiscation of the black body.” Ta-Nahisi Coates is stoked! Sealey’s interest (some might say pre-occupation) in “un-suturing… the black male body as different, deviant, ersatz” comes from an “experience” with a white police officer in the 1970s. The 1970s. Mate, things have changed a little since then, you know. Might I also add that “the black male” (I don’t know about the “body” since I spend minimal time “gazing” at it) is, in fact, deviant. Here are some fun facts from Edwin S. Rubenstein’s indispensable The Color of Crime (2016 Edition):
· In 2013, of the approximately 660,000 crimes of interracial violence that involved blacks and whites, blacks were the perpetrators 85 percent of the time. This meant a black person was 27 times more likely to attack a white person than vice versa.
· The overwhelming majority of black homicide victims (93 percent from 1980 to 2008) were killed by other blacks.
· There are dramatic race differences in crime rates. Asians have the lowest rates, followed by whites, and then Hispanics. Blacks have notably high crime rates. This pattern holds true for virtually all crime categories and for virtually all age groups.
· In 2013, a black was six times more likely than a non-black to commit murder, and 12 times more likely to murder someone of another race than to be murdered by someone of another race.
· For the crime of “shooting”—defined as firing a bullet that hits someone—a black was 98.4 times more likely than a white to be arrested.
· In 2014 in New York City, a black was 31 times more likely than a white to be arrested for murder. If New York City were all white, the murder rate would drop by 91 percent, the robbery rate by 81 percent, and the shootings rate by 97 percent. In 2014, almost two thirds of arrests for murder were of blacks.
· In an all-white Chicago, murder would decline 90 percent, rape by 81 percent, and robbery by 90 percent. Blacks in Chicago are 23.8 times more likely to be arrested for murder than whites.
· In Milwaukee in 2014 (the most recent year available), blacks were 12 times more likely to be murder suspects than whites.
· In Pittsburgh in 2012 (the most recent year available), blacks were 26.6 times more likely than whites to be arrested for murder.
· In California in 2013, blacks were 5.35 times more likely than whites to be arrested for violent crimes, and 4.24 times more likely to be arrested for property crimes.
· High crime rates among blacks are not limited to the United States. Statistics released by the Metropolitan Police in London, England, show that in 2009-10 blacks accounted for 54 percent of arrests for street crimes, 59 percent for robbery, and 67 percent for gun crimes. Blacks accounted for just over 12 percent of London’s population of 7.5 million. Likewise, according to information that had to be sought through a freedom-of-information request, in 2002, blacks were 8.1 percent of the population of Toronto, Canada, but accounted for 27 percent of all charges for violent crimes.
· Blacks comprise three percent of the U.K.’s population, but ten percent of its prison population.
· For most crimes, blacks make up a larger percentage of reported offenders than they do of those arrested.
Rampant criminality is very obviously not limited to blacks, as the assorted “brown races” of the world are also greatly over-represented in their “commitment” to deviance and degeneracy (just look at the “cultural enrichment” happening in Europe where the “beleaguered migrants” of all stripes are joining blacks at the vanguard of violence, crime, and sexual assault, or at Australia where despite constituting just 3% of the population, Aborigines make up 28% of the prison population), and though young black men especially seem awfully keen to exterminate each other, Latin Americans are giving them a run for their self-genocide money of late. Despite accounting for just 8% of the world’s population, Latin Americans are responsible for 38% of the world’s murders.
It is little surprise, then, that the inability to maintain infrastructure or the rudiments of civilization across the Third World is inevitably replicated when enough non-whites (Ashkenazi Jews and select Asians excepted) start to amass in a particular area. Yet we must turn a blind eye to this “inconvenient truth” and “check our privilege” in order to continue to allow ourselves to be infected with Bolshevism and colonized by the Third World while we pay them to do it. Carolyn Emerick writes, “How many times have Europeans been manipulated into killing their brothers and cousins? But now they’re perverted into letting their entire nation be cuckolded by foreign invasion allowed by tacit cooperation of traitorous governments?” Look at the Swedes: how could people who were once Vikings be so cucked?
John Derbyshire refers to immigration as the “salt in the stew,” and I think that’s a pretty apt metaphor. Too much salt, and the whole thing is inedible. Immigration can be a question of degrees, but we don’t do anything in moderation anymore, do we? We certainly don’t seem capable, or at least our politicians don’t seem capable, of making any kind of rational assessment divorced from case-specific emotionality, especially about immigration. As Victoria Garland notes:
If we should ban Muslims from our societies, should we not also ban white men, as Shaun King has facetiously suggested? Setting aside the facts that, when you control for population size, whites are underrepresented among terrorists and mass shooters, this question takes us back to our “utilitarian calculus.” White men are responsible for building and maintaining nearly every aspect of our civilization. Every population has its lunatics, and we try to manage them. But what unique benefits do Muslims bring us that outweigh the harm? That question deserves an answer.
Immigration is a very fixable problem if only we could muster the will to address it, but unfortunately the ennui gripping our civilization has stricken people with a kind of paralysis, rending them unable to even conceive of enacting self-preservational measures. We’re going to have to reckon with the aforementioned realities one way or another, but that does not mean we should fatalistically continue down the suicidal path currently laid out before us.
THE WRATH OF THE AWAKENED SAXON
by Rudyard Kipling
It was not part of their blood,
It came to them very late,
With long arrears to make good,
When the Saxon began to hate.
They were not easily moved,
They were icy -- willing to wait
Till every count should be proved,
Ere the Saxon began to hate.
Their voices were even and low.
Their eyes were level and straight.
There was neither sign nor show
When the Saxon began to hate.
It was not preached to the crowd.
It was not taught by the state.
No man spoke it aloud
When the Saxon began to hate.
It was not suddenly bred.
It will not swiftly abate.
Through the chilled years ahead,
When Time shall count from the date
That the Saxon began to hate.