.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Thursday, September 10, 2015

To end white privilege put all black (and white) criminals in jail

White people have a very clear privilege compared to blacks. Strangers do not expect, upon seeing our race, that there is a very substantial likelihood that we will turn out to be violently and viciously criminal, whereas with blacks this is a likelihood that absolutely cannot be ignored, for anybody who does not want to be violently and viciously violated.

That is a huge racial privilege and society ought to try to reduce it. So who is to blame for it and now do we get rid of it? Black criminals are to blame for it and we get rid of it by putting all criminals, white and black, into prison or into the ground and keeping them there.

Do an effective job getting rid of the criminals and you get rid of the expectation that unknown blacks who are met in free society will turn out to be criminals. That is how society gets rid of "white privilege," by cracking down harder on criminals, not going easier on them, as this BlackLives criminals'-lobby is urging.

If black privilege is desired as a kind of compensation, that can be achieved too. Let the white criminals continue with their marauding and only remove the black criminals from free society. Then it is unknown whites who will be assigned an especially high likelihood of turning out to be criminal, and voila: black privilege, in the exact mirror image of the white privilege that exists today.

To limit crime, people can either defend themselves (the right to keep and bear arms) or they can call for more police

Policing is an inferior solution to crime. That's because society has an unfortunate tendency to criminalize whatever any powerful enough interest group finds momentarily bothersome, and then these laws stay on the books forever, which over time ends up criminalizing a whole lot of things that should not be criminalized, making law enforcement a sometimes serious nuisance, which in turn makes more intense law enforcement a more serious nuisance.

The better solution is the one what the founders of this country wrote into the Constitution. People can defend themselves against crime by keeping and bearing arms. Because serious and violent criminals get stripped of their gun rights the effect of gun rights over time is to systematically shift the balance of power on the streets in favor of the law abiding. Kids coming up see who has the power and they scorn the criminal path.

It is an ideal system. Unfortunately blacks in this country keep depriving themselves of it by voting Democratic, and that is entirely on blacks, who are the author of their own powerlessness in the face of crime. Don't blame the police and don't blame whites. I've been lobbying for black gun rights for 20 years.

Having voted for their own disempowerment, leaving no solution to black crime but a more burdensome police presence, it is no surprise that many blacks are unhappy with the police, but this cannot account for the radical perversity of the OnlyBlackLivesMatter movement.

BlackLivesMatter is a lobby in defense of the worst criminal behavior

Their two leading martyr icons are a pair of blacks who were killed while committing attempted murder (Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown). That's a criminals' lobby, directly on the side of the worst bad guys, so long as they are black.

Other BlackLives icons were not killed intentionally but died of accidents and happenstance that proceeded from their own criminal decisions to fight the police (Oscar Grant and Eric Garner), but BlackLives again inverts blame, as if dying makes the drunk driver who causes an accident a victim instead of a perpetrator.

Some BlackLives icons died while police were enforcing questionable laws (Eric Garner, selling "onsies," and Freddie Gray, not even allowed to carry a folding knife). Who is to blame there? BlackLives, for voting Democrat, when it is Democrats who pass these noisome laws. Don't blame the police for enforcing the laws YOUR votes supported.

Always backwards, always trying to switch blame from the innocent to the guilty, with no compunction and no limit. The peak of their outrage is in response to what any normal moral person regards as a "feel good story of the day": when a criminal attacks an intended victim and it is the criminal who ends up dead. The most immediate goal of the BlackLives group is to protect black criminals from the people who are trying to resist their criminal behavior.

Which side has the cowards who can't handle an honest discussion on race?

BlackLives activists are welcome my interrupt my visit to the restaurant with obnoxious demands for "conversation on race," but don't expect it to be one sided. I will gladly explain where white privilege comes from and how to get rid of it. Permanently remove all of the serious criminals from free society and there will be no white privilege.

Alternatively, treat the police as the enemy, have some demagogic success in making police pay a price for shooting blacks in self defense, and you force them to retreat and become less effective at controlling black crime, which jacks the already disgustingly high rate of violent black criminality up yet another notch, which forces every rational person, white, black or "other," to be that much warier of unknown blacks.

Of course those who declare for the BlackLives criminals'-lobby are no longer unknown. They are known to be allegiant to the criminal side and should not be trusted one inch. Odd that they seem to be hurt by that distrust. Their icons are attempted murderers. They hold stopping the worst crimes to be an injustice. It is a purely racist movement. They will side with the worst criminal over his intended victim purely on the basis of race. To them ONLY race matters. This is a radical evil.

That some not-all-bad people get caught up in it is comprehensible. The policing that black criminality brings down on innocent blacks is a serious burden and people who are in pain often lash out in ways that makes the pain worse. Society just needs to reject the racist dyspepsia of BlackLives, regardless of its threatening magnitude, and actually get rid of white privilege by doing a much more effective job of removing all criminals from society.

The best way is by allowing the law abiding citizenry of all races to end criminal threats with a gun. The other way is by upping police activity, but one way or another the criminals need to be eradicated.

Knowing that unknown blacks pose a high risk of vicious criminality is NOT racism

To have a pejorative meaning the term "racism" cannot refer to rational information processing, and it doesn't, not if we are being logical. The logical meaning of racism is to continue to expect a person to act as other members of their racial group on average tend to act even when the information one has about the person as an individual indicates a different character. If a black individual shows a strongly law abiding character it would be perverse to still treat him as if he is as likely as other blacks to engage in vicious criminality. That would be racism.

Logically, information about a person as an individual trumps information about group behavior. Like all additional information it needs to be accounted, and it is better information. Wherever individual information is available it reveals where group based expectations are off the mark (or on the mark) in the particular case, rendering the group-based information irrelevant henceforth on the revealed point. 

There is an industry of blacks concocting ways to see things that aren't racist as racist because this is seen as a source of power. If you can claim victimization you can demand redress, but of course it tends to backfire. People aren't going to want to have anything to do with you at all if they have to worry that you are going to concoct false charges against them as a way of trying to make off with some ill-gotten gain.

It is a kind of criminality and fits with the other ways that people (white and black) expect unknown blacks to turn out to be criminals, and that is not working out so well for blacks. Think Vester Lee Flanagan II, who murdered his television ex-co-workers for such "racist" comments as telling him that some other reporter was "out in the field." "This guy was a nightmare," said one co-worker, "Management’s worst nightmare."

This near-criminal extortion game raises negative expectations about all blacks, but it blows back most directly on the individuals who engage in it. People recognize what they are, that these are bad people who can't be trusted. Their particular bad nature of course interprets the negative reaction to their demagoguery as racism. So we get these crazy-angry blacks, constantly looking for any way they can find to interpret everything under the sun as racist, and when people quite rationally recoil from the imminent threat they present, they are enraged, in Flanagan's case to the point of murder, but it goes far beyond Flanagan.

The entire BlackLives movement is doing the same thing. Whenever a black is injured in the commission of even the most murderous crimes the movement erupts with insane cries of racism, prompting their shock troops to burn down their own cities and viciously attack any whites or Asians they can get their hands on.

As a result, there has probably been a solid 20% increase in "white privilege" over the last few years. The more monstrously racist blacks on average become, the more strongly people recognize the danger that blacks on average present. Hire a black who you don't know to be immune to demagogic race-mongering and you could end up with one of a million potential Vester Flanagan's on your hands.

There is a whole movement built around Vester's kind of thinking and it seems to be widely embraced on the black left. Since most blacks are on the left, expect more and more employers to be willing to risk equal opportunity lawsuits rather than risk bringing a racist time-bomb into their workplace. BlackLivesMatter is the biggest engine of white privilege and black disadvantage ever.

Now they are waging a graffiti campaign across Texas urging the ambush murder of police officers, as was done to police officer, husband and father Darren Goforth.  When the murder-baiters get caught, plaster their name far and wide so that they will never be hired as long as they live. That is the proper individual punishment for bad individual behavior, but when all that people know is a person's racial group it is rational for them to take into account group behavior. This widespread black descent into the most extreme moral depravity is going to make everyone that much warier of all not-well-known blacks.

It is not racist to expect people let into college under lower standards to be less able than other students

Beyond the epidemic of deliberate attempts to concoct phony claims of racism there is also a real difficulty that a lot of well meaning people have in understanding what is and isn't racism. They think that any expectation about racial groups, no matter how rationally founded, is supposed to pushed out of their mind. That is morally insane. All information has to be rationally processed.

Rational information processing is how we get to the King ideal of judging people by the content of their character instead of by the color of their skins, by learning to give individual information its proper priority over group information, but we can't do that if we at the same time try to block people from rationally processing group information. Everything irrational is nonsense. It is known to be wrong. Not being willing to embrace known error is a quality of mind. Do you care whether you are making sense? The war against rational processing of group information, to the extent that it is successful, destroys the quality of mind that is needed if people are to give individual information, when available, its proper priority over group information. 

Want to get rid of the presumption that black college students are less well qualified than their peers? Stop admitting them under lower standards. All that affirmative action in college admissions has achieved is to shift the entire population of black students out of their element, from where they would be on a par with the other students to where they are less qualified, and the same happens with jobs.

Promoted ahead of ability on the basis of race, co-workers all rationally expect blacks to be less able. Knowledge of them as individuals may come to confirm that expectation or to reject it but the "white privilege" remains: that whites don't have to endure the rational group-based expectation that they don't merit their position.

To get rid of white privilege we have to get rid of the affirmative action policies that create it. We could go further, if we want to create a black privilege, by raising the bar for blacks to be hired. Co-workers would rationally expect blacks hired under such policies to be extra-qualified. But we shouldn't allow any racial group to have these "privileges." The cost is high (suffering bias in hiring, or high rates of criminal victimization), and the resulting privilege is unfair.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?