All in a day’s work

Posted by Guessedworker on Saturday, 03 March 2007 00:42.

The cunning, effort and sheer bloody manipulativeness that is required to post at majorityrights.com goes sadly unrecognised. So here, for your edification and enlightenment, are two examples of the kind of thing that has sometimes to be done (it never works, of course, but it is done):-

The first is a letter written to the Schools Minister and Labour MP for Dorset South, Jim Knight. The writer is one “John Standing” of Brighton, E.Sussex - a man indeed of some standing in the life sciences (though I wouldn’t be too sure about that). He was moved to protest to Mr Knight by a BBC News article about the nature of the black male. Well, it’s not about the nature of the black male, that’s the problem. It’s about white racism:-

Black pupils ‘are treated worse’

Black pupils are routinely punished more harshly, praised less and told off more often in English schools than other pupils, an official report says.

It says the staff in many schools are “unwittingly” racist, with black youngsters three times more likely than white to be expelled permanently.

It describes this as an “iconic issue” for black Caribbean communities.

The Department for Education and Skills said using “the R-word” was unhelpful, but it is to issue new guidance.

... The report - Getting it. Getting it right - had advocated a focus on the 100 schools with “disproportionately high” exclusions of black pupils.

... The report stemmed from a “priority review” involving officials, head teachers and others, headed by the department’s director of school performance and reform, Peter Wanless.

... It says every year 1,000 black pupils are permanently excluded and nearly 30,000 suspended.

... The review considered two strands of thought.

One argument holds that “largely unwitting, but systematic, racial discrimination” means staff expect black pupils to behave worse.

The other argument is that black pupils, especially boys, are subject to outside influences and cultural stereotypes that cause them to behave more aggressively in school.

The report favours making schools the focus. It says they can be categorised broadly as those that “get it” and those that “don’t get it”.

“The main barrier to an effective closing of the exclusions gap is the need to engage the co-operation of those schools who have not ‘got it’ yet.”

The report highlights - in bold, in a red box - what it calls a “key decision: using the R-word”.

“Properly understood, Institutional Racism is not such a ‘scary’ thing for an institution to admit to,” it says.

Schools Minister Jim Knight said: “We want to ensure that we are able to equip our schools to identify the in-school factors and have a better understanding of ‘.”

“Culturally different behaviours”. What can you do with people like this? Only one thing. In true democratic style, you write to your representative. And that’s exactly what “John Standing” did:-

Dear Mr Knight,
I have just read a most disturbing account on BBC News On-line of the “Getting It” report:-

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/6413265.stm

It is headed, “Black pupils are treated worse”.

I have not read Wanless, on which the “Getting It” report appears to have been based. I understand that there are many ways in which information can be - and, heaven knows, is - shaped or misrepresented. Certainly, in this case there appears to be a powerful sectional interest at work. The gist, as I understand it, is that black and white children should have not only equal educational outcomes but also equal behavioural records, and the lack of them must be explained by institutional racism in schools.

For me, that behavioural assertion is the final straw. Those of us with a professional or even lay interest in the life sciences are only too aware of many well-attested and extremely robust explanations for black educational outcomes and behaviour, just as we are aware of explanations for the outcomes for Chinese and certain other, specific racial groups. There is no mystery here, except the mystery of why the educational Establishment will not examine them.

The lack of such an examination, Jim, causes all manner of weeds to grow, an excellent specimen of such being “Getting It”.

I do not expect you, of course, to develop an interest overnight in the circadian rythmicity of Syrum Testosterone or the evidence for mean differentials in impulsivity, attention span, brain cavity volume et alia. But I hope that you will recognise the inherent racism at work in denying the existence and implications of these measurements and, instead, transferring responsibility upon the host community.

“Getting It” is racism, and richly deserves to “get” consideration only as such. It would be a fine and, one would think, electorally advantageous thing if government ministers began to refute activism of this sort in public. I invite you to be the first.

Yours faithfully,

J Standing,
Brighton,
E.Sussex.

“John”, I can tell you, does not expect a reply. But I am completely confident that should one be forthcoming it will appear on this page.

The second proof of my dedication to your cause - entirely pointless but enjoyable for all that - was brought about by a visit to the BNP website this evening, whereupon I found this characteristically OTT article. It linked to the blog of the leader of the Conservative Party in the Welsh Assembly, Nick Bourne.

This graceless man had declared the BNP to be:-

... a nasty,mean, distasteful and grubby bunch of sub-human flotsam and jetsam who we need to ensure do not prosper from the democratic process.We do that by force of argument and so long as the BNP act within the law ( and they often do not )we cannot, in my view, treat them any differently from any other political party in terms of election addresses and PPBs and so on.

Again, the keyboard glowed white-hot:-

I can’t quite believe you said that about the BNP, Nick. Quite amazing.

However, I am more interested to know about this “force of argument” you claim to employ (obviously, alongside the ad hominem). I own what is generally acknowledged to be one of, if not THE, most cerebral and interesting conservative-nationalist group-blogs operating anywhere today. It is called majorityrights.com. You are most welcome to visit. But, Nick, here is another, more interesting invitation for you:-

Mail me an example of this “force of argument” with which you so effortlessly despatch the BNP to the margins. I don’t mind how long or short it is, providing it is well-reasoned and more civil than the language you have exhibited here. I promise I will put it up on the blog unedited, and we’ll see if you are able to defend it.

I hope you won’t decline this small intellectual challenge, and may even find it fun … and instructive.

Yours,

Guessedworker
http://majorityrights.com

Will either little duck pop up from his little patch of long grass? We’ll see.

Tags: No particular place to go

Comments:

Posted by Stanley on Sat, 03 Mar 2007 07:13 | #

The above letters are great examples of fighting defamation by attacking back. These letters do have an impact, and do lead to change never doubt. It just takes time and some repetition. In our experience, it is fashionable among WS and WN types to sneer at such letter-writing, but it really does work over time. And both messages are about defamation, one way or another.

JOHN STANDING’S MESSAGE

If John Standing’s letter rebutting the left-wing racialism of MP Jim Knight in the BBC News article on Friday, 3/2/07, headlined “Black pupils are treated worse” was sent by email, its effect is exponentially increased in two ways.

First, by sending numerous blind email copies to every MP and BBC email address that can be found on-line because the more who read it, the better, plus who knows how a well-turned phrase will undermine the writer in future intra-BBC competitions, and the MP in future parliamentary power struggles.

(When we say “blind copy” in the USA, we mean that the recipient’s name appears but does not contain any of the other recipients’ names. A huge block of “copies also sent to” renders any such message nugatory.)

Second, by telegraphing the message in the subject line, e.g., “MP Jim Knight & BCC Hate Behavioural Diversity” or “MP Jim Knight & BCC Admit Left-Wing Racialist Hatreds.” Many people simply delete outside email messages, but they have to read the subject lines on their email platform.

LIARS USE STATISTICS

One point on a claim made in the body of the BBC article is almost certainly factually false: “It says every year 1,000 black pupils are permanently excluded and nearly 30,000 suspended.” We saw this claim made in the USA in an irresponsible way, and here is the trickery that was used to deceive. While it is probably accurate to say 1,000 were permanently excluded (not an outrageous figure), it is probably erroneous to say that “30,000 were suspended.” We had a local mini-crisis about this when it was revealed that there were 16 suspensions (one to three days) of black students in one middle school class, but on analysis it was revealed that one black student was suspended for one day once, and a second black student was suspended for one day on 15 occasions. That is, only two were suspended, but one was suspended on multiple occasions. I imagine the same thing is true in England or Britain or the UK. (I can’t remember the preferred label.)

So while there may have been 30,000 one or two day suspensions, it is probably true that only 3,000 black students were ever suspended. A good rule of thumb for such statistics that appear abnormally large is that the last zero is a fraud…we have seen this time and time again in so many different areas.

NICK BOURNE PUMMELED

Guessedworker’s letter to Mr. Bourne was also perfect. A good subject line for this message would be “Nick Bourne’s Supremacy Message: Hate Democracy” or “Nick Bourne Denounces Political Diversity.” It is okay to go OTT (over the top) in the subject line. And it would be great if the entire email list of Welsh Assembly members were to receive blind copies.

SUBJECT LINE CONTENT

Such messages can be fun. Those of ours that have been published on MR.com have been long ones, but most of our spankings are short and to the point. Hyperbole is fine, especially in the subject line. One of our best ones was gross, but here it is. We see that Asian American writers almost alone among the different continental origin groups like to call us European Americans in the USA “Caucasians” and themselves “Asian Americans.”

We don’t like it at all because we do not identify with all Caucasians by any means, notably the Bosniaks, Albaniaks, Southwest Asians, and North Africans. So when we write to complain about “Caucasian” shoved on us by Asian writers, male or female, we use this in the subject line, “Caucasian = Cock Asian” and we never see Caucasian used again. I know, it’s gross, but our quest to identify and describe ourselves is never ending. There’s always a mean-spirited, but memorable way to telegraph the message in the subject line. And there’s no point in seeking to eat at the high tables if you have to crawl to get seated there.

REPLIES

Replies to such messages are not frequent, but if they come, they will come according to the cycle of awareness, much like the typical steps in grieving. Responding to messages like the above usually come in this order:

1) Mockery & ridicule from the recipient.
2) Hatred & malignancy from the recipient.
3) Anger by the recipient.
4) Denial & deflection by the recipient.
5) Awareness shown by the recipient.

Hard core left-wing racialists, of course, stay with 1-3 above, but fashionable left-wing racialists without conviction generally will move nearer to your position over time. We’ve had great success, not complete success by any means, with this type of message sending.

Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 03 Mar 2007 12:17 | #

Stanley,

I will take your advice and build an e-mail list of the Weslsh Assembly members for circulation as suggested.

Because John Standing doesn’t exist I don’t think I can pursue the same tactic by mailing that one to Members of Parliament. Still, there will always be another day.

I might, however, send them the following article which appeared in The Monitor, a publication in Kampala, Uganda. There’s more honesty in it than you’ll get from a boatload of race hucksters here.

Hat-tip to Troy for the link.

Uganda: Why Black People Have Remained Backward

Elias Biryabarema

Mr. Yoweri Museveni has a background of good education. A calm and well exposed man. Straight thinking and intelligent. His grasp of contemporary world affairs, including some quite complex stuff, is commendably firm.

For years he burned his young energies battling vile governments. Narrowly escaping death on occasions, he showed resolve, sacrifice, devotion to his people and a deep abhorrence for oppressive leadership. Sure. This man had no shortage of good qualities.

And yet, to the astonishment of history, Mr Yoweri Kaguta Museveni has still failed us. 20 years at nation building have produced incompetence so shocking that some think a psychopathic illiterate, Idi Amin, did better work.

Uganda has been fairly stable long enough. The conditions for an economic takeoff have been there for 20 years. Mr. Museveni has enjoyed generous goodwill from nearly all the world’s rich governments. Their largesse has poured in ceaselessly and in hefty amounts.

Uganda should have taken off. We haven’t. We’re stuck. And so is Tanzania, Sudan, Ethiopia, Mali, Ghana, Burkina Faso, Kenya, Eritrea, Malawi, Congo Republic and pretty much all of Black Africa, excluding the region’s sole economic power, South Africa. This led me to pose a question to myself: can Black people build prosperous societies?

Just about every reason-from slavery, colonialism, neo-colonialism to inequitable world trade rules-cited for the backwardness of Black African nations has been so debunked by time that it has now become necessary to look beyond the realm of such contemporary explanations. The maddening inertia of Black people and the mystical forces that keep tamping down our nations, in fact, seem to have their roots deep within us, not from without as has been argued for decades.

Just about everywhere you look, evidence abounds. Vietnam suffered a war of colonial conquest and it was eventually subdued by France in 1884. For almost a decade, it again fought a devastating independence war until France was vanquished in 1954. And then came the epic battle of 1965 to 1973 with US military and its allies, seeking to squelch the North Vietnamese communists.

When the guns fell silent with the withdrawal of US troops in 1973 and the eventual fall of Saigon in 1975, the Vietnamese toll stood at a horrifying three to four million. Diplomatically isolated, its economy shredded and its population maimed and traumatised on a scale unparalleled in any Black African nation (except DR Congo), Vietnam would seem to have no chance at success.

But just two and a half decades later, Vietnam is storming the world stage as an economic powerhouse. Its exports are flooding western nations; heavy and advanced manufacturing is thriving at a rapid pace. Its GDP, $258 billion, is having an average growth rate of 8%, the second highest in Asia after China. Europe had to put curbs on the country’s shoe exports after they nearly sunk much of the continent’s manufacturers.

According to a news report in New York Times on October 25, 2006, Vietnam now sells “nine times as much to Americans as it buys from there.” Since 1990, a space of 15 short years, Vietnam has pulled off one of the most stunning economic feats: reducing absolute poverty-World Bank standard: subsisting on $1 a day-from 51 to 8% of its population.

Vietnam

Back home here, the sort of wars and the scale of devastation that Uganda has suffered since independence can hardly be said to be as crippling as the cataclysm that struck Vietnam.

This is true for many of the Black African nations. But the difference is staggering. Vietnam’s economy is roaring. Sub Saharan Africa is dead stuck known more for: constant disease outbreaks, emergency food relief appeals, civil strive, genocide, chronic corruption, flimsy or nonexistent infrastructure, constitution breaches, state failure than anything else. This disgusting state of affairs after, according to an estimate by South Africa’s Brenthurst Foundation, a colossal $580 billion worth of donor money has been poured into the region since independence. Why have the Vietnamese overcome their historical setbacks and prospered while Black Africans stagnated or regressed?

Or if we may ask another question: why is it that White people prosper wherever they settle while Black people head for the opposite direction. The British crown started asserting its colonial rule over small territories on the continent of Australia in 1788, taking several decades before it brought all the areas into a unified Australian colony.

Throngs of Europeans emigrated en masse and settled there throughout the 1800s. These émigrés went ahead, starting from really little or nothing, and established one of the world’s economic and military powers that is Australia today. The history of New Zealand, the other White country in the Southern Hemisphere, is pretty much the same.

Now contrast these nations with Haiti, the only black nation outside of Africa. It gained independence in 1804. It’s near the US, the richest market on earth and Haiti has a coastline unlike other African nations whose landlocked status is blamed for their underdevelopment. And fine, it has had a fairly brutal past but nowhere near Vietnam’s horrors. But what have our Haitian brothers made of these generous natural advantages: it remains the most backward country in the Western hemisphere, bound up by privation, cyclical coups, spasms of mayhem and blood-thirsty gangs. At home and away, that’s your Black people!

In fact Haiti is perhaps just about the best that we can achieve in nation building. Ethiopia never had colonialism. It registered impressively high levels of literacy as early as 1970, a fact a friend of mine brought to my attention recently. It has a rich and widely shared cultural heritage, a common ancestry. This should have propelled Ethiopia but see the shameful portrait of hunger and disease that this country projects to the world.

And so, to go back to that question that I have been chewing over and over again of late: can Black People build prosperous societies; I firmly believe the answer is a sad NO.

The dumbfounding incompetence of President Museveni thus is not a failure of an individual. It’s a failure of a people: Black People. Museveni only rose and touched our low ceiling. The shamefully limited achievement of his “fundamental change” regime thus should be interpreted in this cruel context.

Now, isn’t that a refreshing change from the trite and hateful output we are so accustomed to from our politicians, “experts” and opinion-formers?

Posted by Frank McGuckin on Sat, 03 Mar 2007 20:36 | #

Guessesworker,

How much longer before the English, Wesh and Scots revolt? There are fewer places in the UK to run away from, blacks, asians and muslims. At some point in time, I would think, there will be race riots. Is there any reason to think that this wouldn’t happen?

In America, as soon as there are no more places to flee to, a full blown revolt will not be too far off.

I believe that efty enviromenatalists will speed up the revolt.

This past august, there was front page story in the WALL STREET JOURNAL ABOUT a conflict between environmentalists and immigrants just outside of San Francisco. The immigrants were looking for cheapland to live on. The liberal/leftists environmenlists actually drew a line in the sand and said to the mexicans “no, you can’t live on land set aside for endangered species.” At some point in time the contradictions will be just too great.