The predatory savages among us, and what to do about them
(Note: The opening paragraphs of this entry have been revised twice, as explained here.)
John of Powerline notes the savage attack by a gang of blacks on a white man outside an amusement park in the Twin Cities. Even the ultra-liberal Star Tribune can’t conceal the racial status of the attackers, who employed the standard black method of assault:
Eight young men are accused of taking turns stomping on and kicking the head of the 41-year-old man, who was knocked unconscious as his wife and three daughters tried to help him. Prosecutors say more serious charges could be brought against the men if the man’s injuries are permanent.It’s not definite from the Star-Tribune’s story what the race of the victim is. The victim’s wife’s comment about the thugs “I never seen them a day before in my life,” seems more likely to come from a black person than a white person. But Scott of Powerline in a follow-up entry says the victim and his family are white. And since he writes from the Twin Cities, and since the Powerline guys are the farthest thing from racial rabble-rousers, I take his word for it.
One could easily devote an entire website just to the ongoing savage violent crimes by blacks against whites in this country, several of which VFR has reported on recently.
Our society, particularly whites, must publicly and explicitly recognize that young black men are dangerous to whites, and start acting accordingly. That means complete public frankness about black violence and particularly black-on-white violence; it means acknowledging that white people’s desire to avoid blacks is not “racist,” i.e., immoral; it means acceptance of natural residential racial segregation; it means race-specific policing, and much more.
However, apart from the racial dimension of the problem which must be faced and dealt with, it is imperative that conservatives bring back to center stage the necessity of marriage and the presence of a father in a boy’s life—the issue that George W. Bush relegated to the sideline of conservatism in 2000 when he ran on the slogan that “single moms” have “the toughest job in America,” and are deserving of special respect and special help. Due to Bush’s maleficent influence, conservatives dropped opposition to illegitimacy as one of their key concerns. That must be reversed. A society of people born and raised outside of wedlock is a society of dysfunctional and criminal people—a reality that is not limited to blacks, as Simon Heffer’s story in the Telegraph about the horrific social conditions in East Glasgow makes clear.
However, to revive the common understanding and expectation that childbirth must take place within marriage, society must raise the respect for marriage, which can’t be done when the popular media of the West continuously legitimize and glorify illegitimate births, as, for example, the New York Post did when Britney Spears’s 16 year old sister had a child. In a West that wants to survive, celebrities who have children outside of marriage, such as Angelina Jolie, will be condemned and shunned, not treated as gods.
The revival of the ethos that childbirth belongs within marriage also cannot take place while society is in the midst of surrendering to the legalization of same-sex “marriage.” Homosexual “marriage” radically devalues marriage, first, by de-linking marriage from the natural conception of children, and second, by eliminating the very concepts of husband, wife, father, mother. Since, under a same-sex marriage regime, these natural, sex-specific terms exclude same-sex couples, they must be replaced by such generic terms as “partner” and “parent.” Furthermore, young men’s willingness to give up their freedom for marriage requires that the married state convey a special quality of honor to them. That promise of honor is destroyed when marriage includes homosexual “marriage,” and young men contemplating marriage realize that instead of becoming a husband, they will become a “partner,” the moral equivalent of a homosexual man or a lesbian.
Therefore, tying the above together, if we are serious about arresting the slippage of Western countries into savagery, we must defeat the movement to institutionalize same-sex marriage, and the only way to do that in the U.S. is through the Federal Marriage Amendment.
Everything is connected to everything else. Only the return of traditional morality can save us.
Lydia McGrew writes:
Apropos of this post, I agree with the Powerline writers that a better-armed citizenry and one more active in self-defense and the defense other innocents will help us to deal with the thugs among us.LA replies:
Why do libs oppose the death penalty so absolutely? Because they see it it as the ultimate act of inequality, and specifically of unequal power: the state claiming and exercising the power to take the life of a human being.LA wrote to Mark J., who had said he lives in the Twin Cities, a couple of miles from the amusement park where the attack took place:
Have you got information that victim was white? All I have is Scott of Powerline’s unsourced comment.Mark J. writes:
I searched the online story archives of both major newspapers and two of the major television stations, plus a Google search, and I find no mention of the family’s race in any authoritative source, only in the comments sections. It may come up in follow-up stories on the father’s medical condition.LA replies:
“The fact that the Star Tribune editorial focused on how we should not give in to any racist thoughts about blacks because of the attack also suggests it was an attack on whites.”James W. writes:
No, Mr. Bush, single moms do not have the toughest job in America; single moms are the toughest job America faces.LA replies:
Conservatives and traditionalists simply have to put this issue front and center like never before, in an all out attack on the legitimization of illegitimacy in this country.Mark J. writes:
The white population of the Twin Cities has been getting an intense education in the realities of “diversity” for a while now. This area was very white since the establishment of the Twin Cities and Minnesota in the 1840s and 1850s, and then in the last two decades or so the number of non-whites has skyrocketed. The change has been shockingly fast. I would not be surprised to learn that the Twin Cities is one of the fastest-changing cities, demographically, in the country. I read that the percentage of non-whites in the Minneapolis public schools in 1970 was 14 percent.Mark J. continues:
I have to say one more thing. I noted that the angle at the Powerline site (at least among commenters) seemed to mainly be about how important concealed carry and the right to be armed are. There was no discussion of the fact that the attack likely wouldn’t have happened at all if blacks and other minorities had never moved to the Twin Cities area in significant numbers. This is akin to people supporting heightened national intelligence efforts and more intrusive eavesdropping on phone calls, etc, as a response to Muslim terrorism. If we allow Muslims to mingle in among us in our nation, we are going to have to be constantly spying on ourselves, checking ourselves at the airports, and so on, to try to avoid being victimized by Muslim terrorism. And if we allow blacks and other minorities to live and mingle among us in significant numbers, we are going to have to carry weapons, install security systems, avoid walking alone, etc, to avoid being victimized by minority crime. These Powerline-style conservatives who are excited about concealed carry laws are missing the point.LA replies:
Posted by Lawrence Auster at July 17, 2008 09:58 AM | Send