“Driving While Black” & failure of objectivist rebut: analysis of YKW discourse

Posted by DanielS on Wednesday, 20 April 2016 20:12.

Bloomfield Ave. at Sunoco, focal point of a Seton Hall LS study showing it to be where most tickets are issued in a de facto border patrol between the races (it is also four blocks from where I was born).

It is my responsibility to undertake a critical discourse analysis of a Seton Hall Law School study depicted by “Vice News” - as it purports to represent, but rather misrepresents to the world, the reality of an area that I know, having been born and raised there. I will examine this discourse as set out in the Vice News video called “Driving While Black in New Jersey.” This might prevent (((misrepresentation))) ergo misapprehension by people from other areas and nations as to the reality of black, “latino” and White interests as manifest in this area.

Having experienced differences between demographics and towns in this area, having driven up and down Bloomfield Ave. countless times, I have some insight, as it is not only the hub of this Seton Hall Law study in traffic policing policy, it was an unavoidable artery constituting..

..a connection to the place of my birth, my father’s birth and my grandmother’s house in an Italian enclave in the North Ward of Newark; also a connection to other Whites, as I’d pass through always White Bloomfield via Bloomfield Ave. on my way to and from the house where I grew up - in predominantly White Montclair, just over the line of Glen Ridge, a few blocks from the Western border of Bloomfield.

                           

De facto border White/Black. Montclair is left of Glen Ridge

But Bloomfield Ave. also constituted a dividing line from surrounding black Newark and East Orange - a nightmare that pushed up against the White Bloomfield and North Ward of Newark, which was pushed up against the Bloomfield town-line along Bloomfield Ave.

Though always having mixed racial and economic demographics, ranging from poor, to the middle classes and the fabulously wealthy, Montclair remains mostly White particularly because of its middle and upper class properties. Bloomfield, on the other hand, though all White, had always been more uniformly lower middle class. Therefore, to remain the White town that it has been would be more tricky; but somehow, despite black East Orange looming ominously just to its south, it always did stay all White, until recently.

It was tricky for the Italian enclaves of Newark to stay White as well - traditionally they relied on a much less tolerant communal temperament that could extend to a somewhat exaggerated vigilantism and ethnocentrism; and thriving communities focused around a catholic church; but now only that vestigial Italian North Ward “community” remains.

This all occurs in Essex County, New Jersey, which is a part of what is called “the megopolis” - a heavily populated extension of greater New York City. Along with its mixed demographics it is also mixed with splendid suburban opulence, post industrial and urban blight. Newark is the largest city in Essex County and in New Jersey. It is mostly black as a result of the kind of “urban renewal projects” that E. Michael Jones describes in “The Death of The Cities”, viz., clandestine projects to break-up ethnic Catholic communities. From this failed liberal social project to integrate blacks, the city went on to suffer riots from the blacks in 1967 and it never recovered.

However, again, that vestigial Italian enclave, “The North Ward”, did survive, kind-of - there I was born, there we visited grandma’s on Sundays, there I returned to live twice, in 1988 and 1996 - just one block from Bloomfield Ave and the border of Bloomfield, New Jersey - always a lower middle class town and always all White, until fairly recently, when I began to see backs moving in. Then it became a cautionary tale that I would relate to people about the science fiction nightmare that can happen - what I’ve seen happen as blacks begin to move into a formerly all White town - and as such, what must not be let to happen: easier said than done with our YKW adversaries.

   


DISCOURSE ANALYSIS of Vice News’ “Driving While Black in New Jersey.” How Jewish coalition building of minority advocacy disingenuously frames necessary White vigilance on de facto borders against latinos and blacks - whose behavioral patterns are, in fact, detrimental to Whites; while exploiting White will to innocence in objectivism’s rational blindness as it colludes against White interests.

Bloomfield Ave., Bloomfield, New Jersey

Why objectivist criteria will not suffice to create a border between nations and race.

The film makers set the discourse frame through an academic declaration by Seton Hall Law Professor, Mark Denbeaux, who claims on the basis of a study of traffic ticketing by race, that it is an overwhelmingly objective fact that the Bloomfield, New Jersey police are persecuting blacks and latinos with traffic violations; and in effect making them pay disproportionately for Bloomfield’s municipal budget. His students go on to make additional objective claims on the basis of the study that this is a form of racial discrimination along a de facto border and discouragement of minorities from becoming ensconced in White Bloomfield by means of a de facto “taxation.”

On a higher analytical frame, Seton Hall LS is building a case, accusing The Bloomfield P.D. of violating The U.S. Constitutional rule of non-discriminating objectivity, alleging that they are imposing a relativistic penalty for non-White transgression into Bloomfield.

[Fast paced but hushed music sets the tone to be on clandestine alert among darting police cars and bustling courtrooms]

Voice: Mark Denbeaux, Professor, of Law at Seton Hall Law School - “Our data as to Bloomfield is overwhelming. The Police are sweeping people in there based on race; and they’re making people pay enormous sums of their municipal budget.”

Hurt feelings while awaiting imposition of a fine

The film makers continue to exploit objectivist criteria in the next sequence, as they focus on “the feelings” of blacks. “Feelings” are, after all, sensory “facts”, nothing socially constructed or any of that nonsense - a Lockeatine empirical basis has been enshrined as means for the pursuit of happiness and liberty; to live by one’s own senses is definitive of what it means to live in accordance with the U.S. Constitution: hence, these feelings must be important objective grounds, and are to be respected as a sensory means which people have to overcome the discriminatory fictions of racial classification. The film will invoke compensatory sympathy for how a black man must feel, their special feelings, as their rights are violated when they get pulled over by police - Whites might also feel uneasy when pulled-over by the police, but never mind.

 

Marquis Whitney (black student at Seton Hall Law School): “As a black man, you have that initial reaction that something could happen to me right now; it’s an uneasy feeling, every single time”


At this point, the film-makers cut to Bloomfield’s White Police Director, Samuel Demaio, making an objectivist assertion of the rational blindness (color blindness, in this case) of the Bloomfield P.D., viz., that it does not racially profile: and with that he attempts to defend against Professor Denbeaux’s study -

Police Director, Samuel Demaio: “We really do not see any of our police officers racially profiling anyone in this township. If we did, we would be way out in front of it.”

Then to a Bloomfield Municipal Court Judge who asserts the objectivist penalties which the study maintains are crookedly imposed:

[The fast paced music continues to assert the contextual tone of turgid and impersonal public bustle]

             

Bloomfield Municipal Court Judge (White): “We take checks, cash or credit cards, if you cannot work out a payment plan”..

         

At this point he is talked-over by the next commentator [Rich Rivera], but before moving to that, I need to discuss the point of the talk-over as that is critical of itself, as it frames the judge and the system as merely imposing non-negotiable authority, as if there is little in the way of recourse for those he addresses in the courtroom.

The White authority, the Municipal Court Judge, is imposing the alleged prejudicial enforcement of these fines. While the film makers do go on to mention [viz., Ostrovsky mentions] that these are not generally large sums, and may not seem like a lot to us, what they do not tell you, and keep out of the frame, is critical - when blacks and latinos are paying, the money from which they pay will often, if not most often, already have been given to them through some form of governmental assistance to begin with; and if a fine is a true hardship, there are a myriad of government programs to help them - especially because they are non-White. While there are no programs to help people because they are White.

The film makers cut-off the judge’s statement as he begins to invoke options available to those subject to fines, which begins with his assertion that he will take under consideration individual cases and their ability to pay; considerations which would then move to the many social services at the disposal of non-Whites to help them financially and otherwise (if defendants are not already on the various governmental assistance available to them, again, which they usually are).   

The judge’s statement to the effect that a black or latino person might have to pay an $80 some odd fee from money that was given to them from the public to begin with or that they would be met with public assistance if they truly could not, is talked over at this point.

       

Suddenly black and latino interests are blended back as one and the same with the rest of “the public” in an objectivist ideal of transparency in the next statement:

Rich Rivera (latino Seton Hall LS student and former policeman acting in the study): “When the public is perceived as the cash-cow for a municipality, that’s an adverse relationship and nothing good can come of it.”

Ok, protecting innocent people by innocuous vigilance against those people who show a pattern of crime will have to wait.

[fast music stopped; slow, sad and sympathetic harp music starts to play instead now]

While the sympathetic music plays, we’re shown a sad looking black male sitting in a car with some middle aged White male cuck. These are the only characters focused on whose identity is not given. We can surmise that he’s some sort of legal counsel to the kid whose got legal expenses and matters that are over his head. The White guy’s probably coming from the services available to blacks with problems, but the film makers don’t tell you that. Instead, the poor black youth is shown being given counsel by the White cuck demonstrating how Whites should be, confessing to the objective reality of the oppression and bad choices faced by the black kid in the rigged system.

He is doing “objectivism nice”, nice cuck, telling the black that his choices are bad - he can cop a plea, though the White cuck believes the black is innocent and that would only make “the police happy”, or he could take his case to a higher court, but in pure advice, he would not advise putting any faith in the system - the inference being that it is so corrupt by racial relativism as to be determinedly anti-black:

White cuck: “So, we got a couple of choices facing you. The first is to work-out and negotiate a plea, which is agreeing to something that isn’t true and you got to pay court costs” [obviously staged conversation for this film (the sad music continues, as do the sad expressions of the black, showing his feelings)]; “it’s a practical solution that works, but doesn’t make anybody happy, except maybe the police department. Second is, no plea, set me down for a trial later; but the cops have charged you with something that you say didn’t happen [din-do], and I completely believe you [lol], but it’s the state court system - don’t put too much faith in it.”

[Driving while cuck]

They might have advised the black kid to look still more sympathetic by removing his bling earrings before appearing before the judge, but society doesn’t understand the black man anyway.

So, they have set out a narrative of general White systemic oppression while they begin to focus on personal sympathy for non-Whites and the bad choices that they are up against from authoritative imposition. The myriad of recourse available to blacks let alone any suggestion of their imposition on Whites, has not been mentioned.

With that setting the background, the film-maker takes the stage. A Russian Jew, with duel U.S./Israeli citizenship, Simon Osrovsky, is being facilitated in making a name for himself in the anti-White media on a world stage. He has already done a Jewish number on Japan and Ukraine/Russia, doing his best to pry-open or divide ethnocentric strongholds. Now he takes aim at the line that Whites in New Jersey take against some of the most harrowing places that you can come across - the living science fiction nightmares of East Orange, Newark, Irvington and the other New Jersey towns that blacks have taken over. Ostrovsky takes for granted that when this film is placed on the world stage that it will invoke sympathy for the blacks it depicts and anger against Whites by those who don’t know the reality of these areas and the reality of just who the American system helps, discriminates against and how, as I have begun to set-out.

But I do know, because I was born there in that Italian enclave in Newark’s North Ward, a block away from the border of Bloomfield, right near Boomfield Ave., where U.S. Army tanks had to travel to get the 1967 black riots under control. Where my grandmother’s house was and route to my father’s employment at Budweiser, Newark; my family traveled Bloomfield Ave. countless times after we moved to Montclair, just barely on the other side of the Bloomfield town-line. I know this area, these towns, sections, the demographic history and behavior. Before commenting further, let’s return to the film narrative.


Simon Ostrovsky: “This is Bloomfield municipal court in Bloomfield, N.J., and a group of students from Seton Hall law school have selected it as the focus of a study about how the police collect fines; but crucially, who do they collect the fines from.”

We are taken into the court as the students and Professor file-in. The Judge addresses the room.

Muni Judge: “All rise. Good morning, please be seated. You are here today because you have already received a motor vehicle complaint, a criminal complaint or notice to appear.”

Ostrovsky: “This is Professor Denbeaux and some of the students conducting the study.”

         
          [note, White does exist]

Ostrovsky: “They are among the few White people in the room. In the four weeks that they have been taking notes on the people appearing in traffic court, they’ve noticed that most are black or latino. But Bloomfield is a majority White township, so why the discrepancy?”

Muni Judge: “All fines and penalties are due today. You leave the courtroom the same way you enter the courtroom; along the wall to my right there’s a hallway; and there’s a payment window at the end of the hallway. We take checks, cash or credit cards” [credit cards are the truly egregious aspect]; “if you cannot work out a payment plan you must get back in the courtroom. I’ll make a determination as to whether or not you meet the standard for time payments.”

Here is where social services begin to kick-in, if they have not already - a fact which editing leaves-out to facilitate mis-perception among foreigners; but lets focus on how petty crime prevention which functions as a de facto border patrol and control technique against more serious crime and social catastrophe is taken issue-with in order to side track the issue of what the White people are up against: blacks commit more violent crime - a fact not reported-on in the Jewish media, Vice News or otherwise. They also have more sex partners (including what might have been your wife), younger, enormous rates of single parenthood, poverty and any other other malady that they might inflict upon other peoples, but you won’t hear that in the said media either.

Simon Osrovsky: “Ever since Ferguson, police practices have been in the spotlight. But it’s not just about the killing of unarmed black men.”

See Ferguson officer Wilson interview; and discussion of how Soros’ et al. funded and contrived “Black Lives Matter.”

Ostrovsky: “That’s a huge problem, but much larger in scale are the thousands of day to day police interactions that often end in fines and set the tone of the department’s relationship with the community.”

That’s a huge problem” is a fallacious claim, discussed by former policeman, James Lancia

       
Driving while Twitch Monster. This first one sort of looks like the twitch monster, but we’ll focus on the nimble meek one.

Judge: “You understand that by pleading guilty, you are waving your right to an attorney, you’re waving you’re right to a trial, the only thing left for me to do is impose sentence, do you understand that?”

           

Ostrovsky: “Take for example the case of Bryan Nina, a Bloomfield resident” [and why should he be taken for granted as such, given that 20 years ago Bloomfield was all White; Watsessing Park in Bloomfield, the North Ward of Newark (Italian) and Glen Ridge were buffers against the adjacent black towns] “who police stopped, even though he hadn’t committed a moving violation. They told him it was because a woman had complained that he was harassing her [any merit to that complaint? It seems the Shell station attendant who made the complaint could have been pursued for an interview]. But he ended up with an $87 fine for having tints on his windows. He was also ticketed for three other violations that were eventually dropped; none of which had anything to do with the alleged reason for the stop.”

The film-makers found Bryan Nina, who is able to sufficiently act the Oreo part. He goes to show that the Oreos and Uncle Toms (or those acting the part) can be most dangerous as they function as a Trojan horse, opening the gates for the destructive pattern inevitably to come from blacks. Nina acquits himself sympathetically, despite tinted windows and a woman having called the police to complain about him harassing her - calling the police out of the blue that he was harassing her?...hmm. Never mind. Blacks don’t harass people and women always call the police to complain about harassment out of the blue. To Kill a Mockingbird, Paris Trout, A Time to Kill - these films tell foreign audiences the truth and all they need to know about blacks, Whites and discrimination - how ignorant that Whites are.


Bryan Nina: “I came out of Sunoco, I had made it to my house before he was able to pull me over. I parked and he had came up behind me and turned on his lights. I was about to get out of my vehicle, he told me to stay in my vehicle. He then came up to my window and aksed (sic) me if I had harassed a lady in Sunoco. I responded to him no,  he then aksed me for my license and went back to his car to check if I had any warrants or anything like that. He brought my license back knowing that I didn’t have any warrants and then told me to step out of the vehicle; he then aksed me if I had marijuana in my vehicle.  I had told him no, that I don’t smoke marijuana; he then told me that he was going to search my vehicle; he searched my whole vehicle, didn’t find anything. He went back to his car and he wrote me up about five summonses for my car.  I reported it to internal affairs. I tried to go the right way about it, but no one really heard my case out so I just” ...


       

Ostrovsky: “wow, so you reported this to internal affairs. Why did you feel that you had a case against the police?

Nina: “Because I felt like they pulled me over for one reason, to just give me five tickets, out of the blue. So I felt like it was a thing about my race or I don’t know if I was being picked at. I don’t know what it was about but, they pulled me over and they were just trying to pick at things; just to get me for something.”

Ostrovsky: “Just to harass you or to make money or something like that.”

Nina: “Yeah.”

Ostrovsky: “It sounds like you feel [Locke] you weren’t at fault and they didn’t have a right to pull you over.”

Nina: “Yeah, Yeah.”

Ostrovsky: “Why are you paying your fine today and why are you pleading guilty?”

Nina: “I didn’t have like sufficient funds to actually acquire a lawyer or proceed in that sense so I thought that I would just get it overwith.”

Maybe Nina isn’t so bad, maybe he is, but Jewish interests have a nefarious practice of advocating exceptions to the rule and thereby exposing the Majorityrights of Whites to the destructive pattern. He comes along with the destructive pattern no matter what. If he is a good one, let him ameliorate his own people. The only pattern that Ostrovsky observes is perhaps a desperate attempt by Whites to protect themselves and their habitats:

Ostrovsky: “$87 may seem like small potatoes on its own, but the Seton Hall Study established that 78% of the stops made are of minorities, in a town where only 40% of the population are non-White.” [twenty years ago it was all White and for good reason] “Many of those stops end in fines unrelated to the given reason for the stop. Which makes the black and latino communities feel like they are being unfairly targeted or even taxed.”

       

The assertion that the Bloomfield police are guilty of targeting groups: profiling, discriminating based on race.

And well they should be for the imposition their pattern imposes upon fine, White cites, such as Newark was (but was no longer after blacks moved-in with their hyper-assertive destruction - for example in the 1967 Newark riots.

Ostrovsky: “So what is driving while black like in Bloomfield? Two ex police officers [Jones and Rivera] turned civil rights activists [hyperbolas Lockatinism], who worked on the Seton Law School study, told us they could help us find out, in a driving experiment.

We met up to inspect the test car. I chose a suitably beat up vehicle, because they say, the profile of ticketed vehicles seems to skew toward the lower income bracket.”

Terrance Jones: “You may not believe it, but its actually a rental. You can rent a car in this condition in America.”

Rich Rivera: “So lets make sure everything works.”

Terrence Jones: “Ah, the lights look good, you have a tag, a New Jersey tag that’s displayed properly. Left turn signal’s working perfect, right turn signal is working perfect.”

Rich Rivera: “If I was police, I wouldn’t even want to go through this car.”

Terrence Jones: (laughs) “No crack cocaine, alright let’s check-out the rear.”

Rich Rivera (finding cultural affinity with the prior renter): “There’s a Mick CD in here, oh my god! There is an actual switchblade in here!”

Terrence Jones: “Oh my god, let me take it out, let’s pull it out, let’s take a look at it. It has a thumb-latch too. Oh, this is a good one. So, good thing we looked huh?”

Riviera: “Yeah”

[all legal and technical aspects of the car check out OK (though they did find a switch blade left by a prior renter)].

Terrence Jones: “Everything looks good. I mean, it’s a piece of junk but everything looks good.”

Riviera: “Its an ugly-assed car, but hey.”

[it is sufficient bate for police]

[they start playing the sympathetic atmosphere music again, no rap or anything like that]

Ostrovsky: “The idea was simple, to drive around Bloomfield in a vehicle full of black men to see if it attracted the attention of police. In the driver’s seat was former Philadelphia police officer Terrance Jones; with Seton Hall law student, Marquis Whitney in the front passenger seat.”


Terrence Jones and Marquis Whitney

[camera indicates that this experiment was conducted January 21, 2016 at 9:29 P.M.]

Ostrovsky: “We decked the test car out with cameras; and followed in a separate car, with a camera of our own. It was driven by former New Jersey police officer Rich Rivera.”


Riviera and Ostrovsky

Ostrovsky: “We’re just about to cross the city line into Bloomfield. And the time is now, just about 9:30 P.M.”


3rd Street is actually still well within in Newark, near where The First Ward used to be, an Italian version of one of E. Michael Jones’ forsaken communities.

Riviera: “So now you’re in Bloomfield”...

Osrovsky: “It didn’t take long to see that the police were out in force stopping cars.

Eventually, the police start biting.”

So, they are baiting, fishing for a bad police reaction; this is not a neutral, “objective” experiment.

Ostrovsky: “They followed the test car for several blocks. ...even as it made turns. Then, in spite of his plans to drive by the book, Terrance accidentally made an illegal left, giving the police a reason to stop them. Sure enough, he was immediately pulled-over and ticketed.”

Bloomfield police officer: “Alright, the reason for the stop, you made that left turn, you can’t make dat turn over dere.”

This is not a White way of speaking: “dat dere,” but it’s hard to tell if the officer is White because there is a convention among police to speak in a colloquial manner in order to make people feel comfortable: e.g., “how yuz doin’?”, that sort of thing.

Ostrovsky: “The police had clearly followed the car without any apparent reason. ..but in the end, there was a legitimate reason for the stop, so we continued the experiment.”

Marquis:  “the real question is, why did he start following us from the get-go, onto side streets, not even main roads?”

Maybe because you were driving around wearing hoodies? and trying to bait the police into stopping you in an area that you know that they patrol for its higher crime rates?


Driving While Hoodied

Terrance: “He followed us for about a minute and a half.”

Marquis: “onto side streets, not even main roads.”

Ostrovsky: “Then, on Bloomfield Ave right next to the Sunoco gas station, where the Seton Hall study showed that the Bloomfield PD made the highest number of traffic stops, the test car was pulled over again.  But this time, it was difficult to know why.”


Maybe because the driver was wearing a hoodie, concealing his face?


The hoodie was nice, but why not just wave a gun out of the window?

Ostrovsky: “They checked the paper-work and when they found that it was in order, they let the test car go.”

If I were a police officer, and I suspected a study, I would think they were testing my competence to stop obvious criminal types. I.e., you would almost HAVE to stop people wearing hoodies.

But we are supposed to empathize with Marquis Whitney’s declared feelings, and with him as black man in particular.

Marquis: “It’s just you know, real nerve wracking. You got cops on both sides, flashlights in your face, as a black man you have that initial reaction like something really could happen to me right now. It’s that uneasy feeling, every single time.”

Ostrovsky: “Our experiment was obviously mostly anecdotal, with mixed results, but the Seton Hall report showed that during the four weeks their study focused on, the most tickets were issued to non-residents, people passing through town in the southern, black part of Bloomfield. That abuts black areas in East Orange and Newark.”

First of all, Bloomfield does not abut a black area of Newark. The particular part of Newark that borders on Bloomfield has been an Italian section, thus, far more in need of protection than prone to foster criminality. But the film makers would not tell you that. Nevertheless, it is not but a few blocks from parts of Newark that are the same black hell as East Orange, Irvington, etc.

                                                 

Note that if they are ticketing non-residents, that shows supplementary ticketing against Whites passing through. The figures bear it out.

But, Ostrovsky goes on, mixing where and where from at the convenience of his narrative:

Ostrovsky: “The least number of tickets were given in the Whiter, northern end of town. The report says, this policing pattern suggests a de facto border patrol.”

Gee, I wonder why they’d patrol at the border of Newark and East Orange; and try to prevent migration over the town line from East Orange - hell on earth, planet of the apes, science fiction nightmare come true - choose one, all accurate metaphors.

Ostrovsky: “Back at Seton Hall the students meet with Professor Denbeaux to discuss their more scientific findings; discovered over the course of their study.”


“Objective facts” are discovered selflessly, by model White Professor and students.


Mark Denbeaux: “Our data as to Bloomield is overwhelming. The Police are sweeping people in there based on race; and they’re making people pay enormous sums of their municipal budget off of the ticketing practices that were taking place.”

The crucial matter here is how Jewish interests and rhetoric - unabashedly relativistic in its bias for Jewish interests among themselves - will exploit objectivism and White objectivism - particularly as it manifests through the earnest, intoxicating and messianic academic quest for objective integrity in pure truth, innocent and unbiased by lowly interests of that which might not be best or not universally true.

Ostrovsky: “and what do you do when you go into the court?”


Latisha Finkelstein: “We go in and we just observe the courtroom. We take down the data - names, ages, townships, what they’re being charged for; whether there are multiple charges, whether they’re being assessed court costs; race.”

Latisha Finkelstein is an interesting name. The question is whether she has Jewish parentage or is married to a Jewish man. At any rate, here she talks as if she has no such interests, but to be merely concerned for objective facts. White advocates are increasingly aware the race exists when it is being used conceptually against Whites.

However, our criticism of this discourse should not go to a refinement of the objectivist criteria - where and how court fees are applied based on the innocence or income level of the defendant or to continue to deny racial prejudice, which is really necessary, discriminatory social classification of people for the sake of accountability, coherence, agency, warrant and human ecology. Rather, we should deal with the fact that a kind of relative discrimination is going on, based on the AREA, the people and their pattern of criminality and destruction to White patterns - specifying the reason for the bordering vigilance, warranting and cultivating rhetoric to properly frame the validity of that increased bordering and vigilance; as it discourages that demographic’s incursion. The aim should be on a relativistic meta level, that this discriminatory policing, boundary creation and vigilance is eminently valid based on the relative pattern of blacks in East Orange, Newark and their increased presence in Bloomfield along with its predictable corollary to crime - far worse injustices than the “de facto taxation”, which they more than deserve; that we are fully warranted to observe this pattern and not base our patterns on their exceptions - who tend to open the gates and bring along the destructive pattern.

We need to counter the Jewish rhetoric of representing minority rights, by defending our majority rights against their majority pattern. Because Jewish interests, of course, will focus on violations of blacks to no end, highlighting their more benign exceptions - which there are, as surely as their pattern is a nightmare. Black patterns are a complicated matter, that has its nice ones, its strong, its compelling ones, its giftedly agile, its audaciously assertive - in a word, many who will prevail over Whites on the episodic basis of judgment that tends to be the fall-out of modernity; while Whites would more often prevail if broader patterns were recognized. It is not necessarily so easy to defend against their pattern, but especially when we are not allowed to speak about it, clearly destructive to Whites though it is. Jews know that too, and they also know that with our own unabashed assertion that we classify social groups and discriminate accordingly, that we are “racists”, that invocation of relativist criteria would allow Whites to defend themselves on the basis of patterns; while a sheer objectivist criteria leaves Whites defenseless in the long run (especially because the Jews are not going by that criteria).

The prejudice against prejudice as expressed in the Enlightenment’s quest for objectivity, including notably, through Locke, as his notion of anti-social classificatory individual rights were written into the U.S. Constitution, is far from innocent. “Racism” is the social classfication of peoples for the purpose of making discriminatory judgements based on their patterns. This is necessary. Anti-racism is prejudice. It is not innocent. It is hurting and it is killing people.

Another Seton Hall Law student adds to the anti-racist, anti-discrimination, objectivist narrative promoted by Vice News.


Fajida Tassy: “For us, one of the most obvious signs that this is occurring is that people were being pulled-over and given tickets for things like failure to provide their license or their registration without any reason for the stop.”

That is, no acknowledgement of a relatively positioned and accountable hermeneutic here. The frame is presumed: “Objective.”

They have a compliant White law student to go along with this.


Kelley Kearns: “We did notice that with some tickets, you have to come to court, so even if its a bogus violation you still have to pay a court fee…so, no matter what..sometimes we found that the fees were more than the actual violation.”

Are Whites not subject to court fees as well? The data has shown that most people pulled-over and given citations are not from the area, and thus would be disproportionately White, considering the area patrolled. Moreover, if the blacks in the area are more given to crime, should the social/legal system not want to have a look at them and evaluate them on a pre-emptive basis through a handling of minor infractions, perhaps as means to stave-off more serious crime?

Next the film makers cut to the sympathetic latino, former New Jersey policeman and present Seton Hall Law student, Rich Rivera, who is participating in the Seton Hall Study and Vice News cop baiting experiment:


Rich Rivera (former police officer who was in follow-up car with Ostrovsky): “and all the people who line up and say, ‘you know what, I know I’m not guilty, I didn’t do that, but it’s a lot easier for me to pay this and not have to miss work’...it’s a tax, it’s definitely another tax that’s been levied upon them.”

As Kumiko observes, yes, it’s a tax for their increased liability to the White town they are making incursions upon.

In addition to unabashedly acknowledging that it is a kind of tax, or increased insurance premium for their greater liability to the town, I would suggest adding a pro-White/defense of Whites rhetoric for x, y and z reasons as to why that tax or increased premium should be imposed. And again, note the many social programs and funds that blacks and latino’s have at their disposal - because they are black or latino - to pay for these minor penalties; programs and funds that Whites do not have at their disposal because they are White.

Ostrovsky: “The report concludes that race based ticketing is happening in Bloomfield, but another way to interpret the data is that police are focusing their work on the areas where blacks and latinos make up the majority of drivers; which in itself could be seen as discriminatory enforcement of traffic laws.”

“The report concludes” - it has reached THE objective truth. The Bloomfield police are targeting blacks and latinos for fines. Vice News provides a “meta-interpretation” that the Bloomfield police are guilty of prejudice and discrimination by focusing on an area that is predominantly black and latino.

Ostrovsky: “We took these findings to the director of police in Bloomfield.”

This is a good example of where objectivism does not suffice, and will tend to work counter-to patterned White interests.


Ostrovsky: “What they found in their study is that the population of Bloomfield is 60% White, but 80% percent of the traffic violations are given out to black and latino drivers. They want to know where does that discrepancy come from? Is that racial profiling in Bloomfield?”

Ostrovsky and Vice News proceed to try to hoist the Bloomfield Police Director by the petard of the rational blindness and objectivism by which he would attempt to acquit himself:


Samuel Damaio, Police Director, Bloomfield New Jersey: “There is no racial profiling in Bloomfield, New Jersey at all. And I think that if you take a look at the areas that the activities takes place are the areas of our township where our criminal activity is taking place. And the area of the township that is predominantly White, there’s very little crime; maybe 10% of the entire crime in the town takes place in that area. But where our south end of the township, which borders Belleville, East Orange and Newark, is where 75 to 80% of the crime takes place. So, in deploying our resources and where our officers are going to conduct their patrols, they’re going to conduct their patrols where the crime is taking place. While there’s going to be much less patrol in the areas where there is no activity.”

Hermeneutics accounting for history, perspective and narrative comprehension is crucial to prevent abuse of the capacity to exploit objectivism’s sometimes thin view of facts and circumstances, its empirical myopia of the moment. It can, for example, discuss the broader truths that these areas, Bloomfield, parts of Newark, etc, were until recently White, low in crime and nice places for Whites to live; and that the blacks in East Orange and Newark have a history of violence and destruction The latinos have a history of crime, structural denigration and decrease in property value.

Because it is non-Catesian, hermeneutics is also mandated to return to accountability of sheerer facts, where it should and must.

Bowery makes the empirical case of voting with your feet - and it’s a good one, but not fool proof, because it lacks recognition of the heremeneutic rigor. He cited the example of “the Polish corridor conflict”, saying that would have been resolved justly and promptly by a referendum of what the people in those areas might have wanted, given the opportunity to vote with their feet. But it really would not have been fair, as it would not take into account the history, including fairly recent violent history, in which these populations had displaced those who they’d be voting against; whereas the Versailles committee could, by hermeneutic means, take these historical matters, as well as logistical and other considerations properly into accout: The necessity of hermeneutics is discussed here.

Anti-racism, together with the prejudice against prejudice is Catesian, whether on the empirical end, through the Locketine civil, propositional rights of individuals against discriminatory group classifications or in pursuit of pure, abstract truths beyond nature - it is not innocent, it is prejudiced, it is hurting and it is killing people. Jews know this, defend their social groups against it, advocate other groups as anti-White unions (Marxism/Cultural Marxsm) when in their interest to do so - which is apparently always as a pattern, until Whites are effectively destroyed in their capacity to resist Jewish power and influence over Whites and their habitats.


Ostrovsky: “I think to some extent we’re talking apples and oranges here. Because you’re giving me the statistics for crime, so the racial breakdown of who’s committing crime and where, we’re talking about traffic stops, we’re talking about, you know, violations for not using you’re turn signal, for having a headlight out, for not having your drivers license on you.. so, I mean, I think it’s a stretch to call these things crime.”

These violations are all well known to be illegal. Moreover, driving is not treated as a “right” in America, but rather a privilege. The police can stop people to check for license, registration, intoxicated driving, car function, etc.

Ostrovsky: “Which is why I’m asking, when so many minority people are getting tickets here. Is it a case of them being worse drivers?”

Demaio: “No, I don’t believe so. I mean, I pulled our motor vehicle stop data, by race, this morning, before we did the interview to get it in real time; and we’re at 1,814 vehicle stops for the year so far and 576 are hispanic, 573 White and 574 African American. So, it is pretty even across the board and if it ever spikes then we’ll investigate why.”

These are very contrived figures which indicate a quota oriented AGAINST WHITES in order to balance off the number of black driven vehicles they see as necessary to stop in order to facilitate crime prevention.

In other words, Whites will be pulled-over and fined just to show a pretense of “fairness and objectivity,” though Whites do not have racially discriminatory programs and funding directed their way, as Whites, while as blacks and latinos do get government funding because they are black and latino and can thus pay the fines from the goverment’s prejudicial assistance that they are given.

Ostrovsky: “Yeah, but what you told me is really stark, because 60% of the population of Bloomfield is White and only about 20% of the population is black. You just told me that the traffic stops are roughly equal between the White and the black community. So, how do you account for that?”

30 years ago Bloomfield was very close to 100% White and did not have much crime. The adjacent town of East Orange was then, as it is now, predominantly black and rife with crime. The black population of The U.S. is about 14% and it is enormously disproportionate in the percentage of violent crime in America. Some figures estimate that if you could remove blacks, that the violent crime in America would be at a similar level to Switzerland (very low).

Demaio answers basically the same question again:

Demaio: “Like I said before, it’s basically where our police officers are deployed. There’s a higher concentration of police officers in areas of the township where our crimes are taking place; and a much less concentration of police officers being deployed in areas where there is little or no crime.”

Ostrovsky: “You don’t accept the findings of the study, which is that the minorities are being disproportionately targeted in traffic stops in Bloomfield?”

Demaio continues the language game of rational blindness:

Damaio: “Our officers from what we see and based on complaints and how we train them, we really do not see our police officers racially profiling anyone in this township. If we did, we would be way out in front of it.”

       

He maintains rational blindness but if the department can be accused of prejudice, such as racial profiling, he will go way out in front in a Cartesian quest ad infinitum to invoke objective purity and innocence.

Ostrovsky goes for what he believes is the clincher with the petard of the objectivism that “driving while black in New Jersey” is subject to unfair discrimination and penalty:

Ostrovsky: “It turns out that for the first year, Bloomfield has for the first time, instituted a computer system that tracks race in police work; and this new data seems to corroborate the results of the Seton Hall study.

The police are saying this is a result of them being deployed to areas where there is more crime; which happens to be where blacks and latinos make up the majority of drivers; but the consequence of this policy is that blacks and latinos are disproportionately ticketed and fined, just for living-in or passing-through areas of police enforcement.

Maybe the answer here is for police to focus more on the crime and less on the traffic violations, which are proving to be an unfair economic burden on a part of the community that can least afford it.”

The irony is, that if the police were to focus only on crime that blacks would be a much larger percentage of those appearing in court and being penalized.

Whites would be penalized less.

However, a means by which the police could invoke and patrol a de facacto border to protect Whites from crime and violence prone blacks and latinos would be hampered to the detriment of all.


It’s called crime prevention and it is a legitimate form of community pattern tax; which, in truth, is only a provisional border solution until such time as real borders between peoples as nations can be established because mere segregation under the same government does not suffice - particularly not inasmuch as Jews are involved -

Conclusion:

This has all been something of detour - on Bloomfield Ave. - from my thesis: why won’t “objectivism” suffice against Jewish tropes, such as “Driving White Black in New Jersey” or “Black Lives Matter”? Because they understand and misrepresent racial advocacy as praxis - which we need to recognize but fail to recognize for their misrepresentation and distortion of its premises; and they rely upon us to go on with our western tradition of pursuing objectivity - pure quest, “the prejudice against prejudice” - while they know that racial defense cannot be based on facts alone, and they hoist us by this petard as much as they can (a la Alinsky); they will just find another rhetorical angle where one fails to impugn our objectivity, and we are at a massive disadvantage (save perhaps for science) so long as we keep trying to play the objectivist game. Racial defense requires rhetorical advocacy and a recognition, contrary to the academic and media brainwashing that comes from Jews, that taking our own side is at least a tad speculative but essential for our coherence, accountability, agency, warrant and our human ecology.

Addendum:

Simon Ostrovsky
Claire Ward
David Givins
Phoebe Barghouty
Jeremy Rocklin
Brittany Ross
Michael Kalendarian
Veronique Huyghebaert
Tyler Hastings

Simon Ostrovsky: (Russian: Симон Островский; born February 2, 1981) is a Soviet-born American documentary filmmaker and journalist best known for his coverage of the 2014 crisis in Ukraine for VICE News and Selfie Soldiers, a 2015 documentary in which he re-enacted a Russian soldier’s social media posts to track him to Ukraine. He was briefly held hostage by pro-Russia militants there in April 2014. Ostrovsky won an Emmy Award in 2013 for his work with VICE.

Times of Israel, “Detained Jewish journalist released in Ukraine”, 24 April 2014:

Simon Ostrovsky, held by pro-Russian separatists for two days, is in good health.

American Jewish journalist Simon Ostrovsky has been released by his captives, according to a statement from his employer, Vice.com.

Ostrovsky, who also has Israeli citizenship, was held by pro-Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine since Tuesday.

Vyacheslav Ponomaryov, the separatist head of the eastern Ukrainian town of Sloviansk, told reporters Wednesday evening that Ostrovsky had been detained for reporting false information, Reuters reported.

“VICE News is is delighted to confirm that our colleague and friend Simon Ostrovsky has been safely released and is in good health. We would like to thank everyone for their support during this difficult time. Out of respect for Simon and his family’s privacy, we have no further statement at this time,” the website said in a statement.

Phoebe Barghouty: is apparently an Arab Muslim woman.

Brittany Ross is likely to be Jewish.

Will check on the others later, if necessary, but Ostrovsky and the Vice News’ gang’s hyperbolic liberal agenda in this and other “investigations” of theirs is more than indictment enough for now.


..............

                       

So what are the Bloomfield police trying to protect and what are the people they are protecting afraid of?

Well, first, in regard to what the kind of thing that they are trying to protect. Here is Newark in 1926.

Vice News’ “Driving While Black in New Jersey” is inaccurate in its claim that Bloomfield abuts a black area of Newark. It actually borders what is still a mild, small Italian enclave of Newark, where I was born, called the North Ward - it straddles Bloomfield Ave and the border of Bloomfield, at 13th Street, extending down to 6th Ave. However, a few blocks down to the very bottom of Bloomfield Ave, around 1rst Ave, was Newark’s First Ward.

Here was the onset of what happened, the affliction of Newark and what they are trying to prevent from happening to Bloomfield.

The First Ward was apparently a very interesting Italian enclave which was demolished in order to make way for black housing projects. This was a complete disaster not only for the Italian enclave, but for Newark. To these projects blacks were invited from the south and they became incubators for the riots birthed in 1967. Newark never recovered.

Newark riots, 1967

Newark riots ‘67, clip 2

E. Michael Jones’, “Slaughter of cities urban renewal and ethnic cleansing”, doesn’t talk about Newark’s First Ward, but the exact same thing happened to that Italian catholic community as happened to other catholic city enclaves that he spoke about as having been deliberately broken up.

The story of the destruction of this, the ethnic catholic enclave of Newark, is chronicled in “Michael Immerso’s, “Newark’s Little Italy: The Vanished First Ward.”


Driving while black?

How about walking while White?


Different host countries,
same hyper-assertiveness,
violence and sexual aggressiveness,
lack of impulse control,
presumptuousness,
at-home-ness,
social irresponsibility to females, especially non-black.
long term disastrous social consequences.

Learn the nature of the beast’s pattern.

Exceptions are not the rule.

         

Do not re-direct good resources after bad. Trillions of dollars and lives have already been wasted in the foolish effort to help blacks.

Driving while black?


Wearing clothes while White


How about riding the bus while White, in your own country, Sweden, when one of these American blacks is let to go there?


Not Forgotten.

 

IMG]https://majorityrights.com/uploads/mapmontbloomnewark.png?r=1460857946[/IMG]


James Lancia acquits the police well; and is articulate on the reality of blacks.



Comments:


1

Posted by Shield Maiden on "The Nice Ones" on Wed, 20 Apr 2016 21:45 | #

Though it is a hokey network, not functioning at a high level of integrity despite its claim to pursue truth, some good information does manage to pass through Renegade’s right-wing transom. Their commitment to A.H., the reich and other right wing foibles as well as some of the destructive contemporary fools that circulate there are unacceptable. I really cannot apologize for the fights that I had in comments there with a German guy named Markus or Blut und Boden - or with Kyle Hunt for defending them. They were wrong. However, there is some intelligence that passes through among the epistemological blunders of that site which can be sifted out.

I thought that this piece, apparently by a young lady calling herself “Shield Maiden”, complimented very well this story about Driving While black in New Jersey. She calls it, the “nice ones.” Though I did not need to include this story, having also written about this Trojan horse phenomenon of the Oreo and the Uncle Tom, i.e., “the nice ones”, I found that she makes a very eloquent statement; and it adds compellingness in that it comes from a White woman:

Shield Maiden, Renegade Tribune, “I Know A Good One!”, 12 April 2016:

At some point in your life you have heard a white person make this ridiculous statement about a black person or perhaps even spouted it yourself before becoming race conscious. Or you have heard other whites say something like, “But they’re not all like that!” Or, “We are only one race, the human race.”

To steal a line from the late great Dr. William Pierce, foolish whites always espouse this and then look at you triumphantly as if they have just said something really profound, as if we are supposed to fall to our knees in amazement at the deep, meaningful garbage that just fell out of their mouth. You could train a lion or a tiger not to rip your face off. Does that mean all lions and tigers won’t rip your face off? Yes, there are “good ones” in every group. There are Jews who protest against the horrific treatment of Palestinians by Israel. There are blacks who don’t rob, rape and murder. A man that saved one of the Rotherham victims from grooming gangs in Britain was a Muslim.

However, the real problem with these co-exist hippies is that they have never had the more important thought, the one that should immediately come after, “I know a good one,” and that thought is, SO WHAT?

The next time one of your unenlightened white family members or friends claims they “know a good one,” ask them if that “good one” makes the atrocities white people have had to suffer for decades worth it?

Ask them if it is worth the 40,000 plus white women raped every year in America by black males.

Ask them if it is worth it for white children to get a poor education because things have to be dumbed down in a fruitless attempt so black students can keep up.

Ask them how they feel about the fact that despite their white son making a perfect score on his SAT and having a high GPA, they will still have to pay through the nose for their son’s college as opposed to Tyrone and Shaniqua who can get scholarships and degrees handed to them just for being black.

Ask them if it is worth it to share a country with a demographic, which despite only making up 13% of the population, commits well over 50% of homicides nationwide.

Ask them if it is worth it to have lost once great cities like Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore, Atlanta, and so on to the dindu tribe.

Ask them if it is worth it to have our St. Patrick’s Day festivals and county fairs ruined by hordes of blacks chimping out.

Ask them if it has been worth the TRILLIONS of tax dollars (mostly paid by hardworking whites) given to blacks in the last five decades in the form of welfare, afterschool programs, and other charities in the feeble attempt to uplift them to the level of average whites.

Another harsh reality these deracinated whites don’t want to face is that a lot of those “good ones” secretly hate their guts or at least hold them partially responsible for black people’s plight. I have seen even the intelligent ones talk about white supremacy or claim that their people simply haven’t been helped enough. Yes, even the ones on the higher end of the bell curve think that blacks are poor, downtrodden souls who are where they are because they simply have not gotten enough gibsmedat’s from whitey. Remember, they too have been fed a steady diet of blame whitey and “We wuz kangs!” for the last fifty years. Even without Jew influence they would hate us. It is unnatural to have two completely different races living side by side. History shows us there is always going to be animosity and hostility between two races eventually, the Jews have simply made it exponentially worse by heavily promoting anti-white rap music, civil rights, and Afro-centric classes at their indoctrination centers-I mean universities’, for decades.

It’s also worth noting that had the Jews not brought blacks over here four hundred years ago, they wouldn’t be here right now. They would be dancing around a campfire banging drums or some shit. African tribes have never even invented the wheel, even after being exposed to it by whites. They never would have figured out on their own how to navigate the seas to get here. They certainly wouldn’t have figured out how to build and fly airplanes. They would never have gotten here by natural means and if most white people were really honest, deep down, they don’t really want to be around blacks. This is why they move out of neighborhoods as soon as blacks move in. They’ve simply been brainwashed by the Jews into denying it for fear of being called ‘racist’, that lone word that has acted as a mental sheepdog for whites for decades.

This is why the “I know a good one” line is always a tell-tale sign of Jewish brainwashing. These people have not stopped to consider that even the courteous black man who is well spoken and not physically harming anyone is actually still a threat to white society because black men will always want white women over black women. Just by procreating with a white woman, he has already harmed the white race, forever polluting her lineage with African genes ensuring that her bloodline is never white again.

White people deserve a country of our own where we can teach our children their true history, where they won’t have to be condemned to sharing their space with blacks who despise them. We have a right to preserve our race and traditions. We have a right to want beautiful white grandchildren instead of mixed race mongrels. Losing our heritage and handing over our countries to nonwhites just because there are some good ones is utter lunacy. The next time you come across a white person who claims they know a “good one” be sure to point out to them that this girl probably thought she did too:

 


2

Posted by On the ligher side of Newark on Wed, 20 Apr 2016 22:16 | #

Newark Song


3

Posted by Driving While Twitchmonster on Wed, 20 Apr 2016 22:58 | #

                Driving While Twitchmonster


4

Posted by Are you sewious? on Thu, 21 Apr 2016 00:52 | #

Colorful, friendly..

Clever, bubbly..

Are you sewious?

He has two kids too. What kind of female would have kids with him? Oh, that’s right, we cannot ask that or any other critical questions of females, that’s “beta.” We must only ask what they want, learn what they want by playing “game” and assimilating “alpha males” like this.


5

Posted by Nobody on Fri, 22 Apr 2016 03:06 | #

Nice bit of work, DanielS.  Typical BBB, just like everywhere else.  Interesting, no research on what happens in those nice towns up RT. 17.  Plenty of YKW lives there, so don’t even think about it.  But Jersey City and even Harrison are gentrifying at a lightning speed, and so will Newark.  Will take more time, but it’ll be Ironboundish eventually.  And Rt. 3 shown on the map is a small section of that road that is a full of cops and county looking for green.


6

Posted by DanielS on Fri, 22 Apr 2016 06:24 | #

Thanks Nobody. That gentrification of which you speak is undoubtedly a part of YKW plans too. The broad, pernicious cycle of scooping up foreclosed property for pennies on the dollar after their predatory loans are defaulted upon. As Bill Clinton once said, “for those who can live comfortably alongside others the reward for shall be great.”..until reality catches up with them and breaks through their denial.

Then America and other Western nations will probably become something like Mexico or Brazil ... retaining some gated White and Asian communities; quite walled communities in the case of conservative Jews and Israel; while subjecting others, including White genetic treasures, to the brown hoards.

But what many of these “elites” might be doing is making themselves into “technoslaves” and basically breeding cows (daughters) for the hoards and the Jews to prey upon and scoop up.

From those hoards mulatto supremacisms will emerge to challenge Jewish and White hubris - thick, cowardly, narrow minded alphas pandering in denial of their girlfriends whims, as always, will say, hey, “those Mulattoes are us, ‘White but strong!” - an expression of denial for which his air-headed girlfriends will ogle and coo at him   .. getting-off on the destruction of normal White men, while her ALPHA CUCK retains this stupid, right-wing denial - and by default, her mulatto supremacist ideal.

And why should we not think mulatto supremacism is such a good thing? For one thing, because it always comes along with the rest of blacks who will be as restive, aggressive, hyper-assertive, violent, fecund and dissatisfied as ever - then the Mulattoes will become less like Oreos and Uncle Toms and more like the regular ones among their element. In the meantime, our losses are vast, in many respects we’ve lost all, written-off as “betas”, “losers” because we saw patterns and didn’t think it was “all nonsense.”

Finally, there isn’t exactly a looming danger of black extinction; quite the opposite:


7

Posted by Evola, ontology project, misunderstandings on Fri, 22 Apr 2016 09:34 | #

This essay by Julias Evola (translated by G. A. Malvicini and published by Counter-Currents), illustrates to me a model of the “ontology project” to which GW aspires.

Because it is so very eloquent and thorough, it will also serve to locate those points exactly where there is a misunderstanding between GW and his ontology project and the conceptual tools that I have been proposing. GW should NOT have been reacting dismissively as he did in comments here, here, here and here. I believe his misunderstanding stems from a combination of three or four factors: 1) Being understandably enamored of this kind of account by Evola 2) Being put off by the distortions and misrepresentations of “the other side” and 3) not seeing that the “other side” does not have to be the other side when done properly - it is a complement; perhaps 4) he does not have confdence in me to believe that I am not hoodwinked as well, despite the fact that I say, time and again, that social constructionism proper does NOT deny genetics, their pre-condition, factual realty, etc., that the whole point of the project is to counter the Cartesian fallacy and its destruction - and there is nothing more Cartesian than denying genetics. etc.

However, now I know why he is determined, for the compellingness of Evola’s essay or its kind.

Nevertheless, this essay does not contradict social constructionism proper, what I am saying in critique and refinement of the kind of four part epoch that Dugin has in mind, nor what I am saying with the White Left or White Post Modernity.

Again, I will come back to this tonight. For now, here is the article. There are only a few places where misunderstanding can take place in comparing what I’ve been saying to Evola here.

Counter-Currents, “Nikolai Vavilov, “Counter-revolutionary,” 22 April 2016: Faces & Mud - by Julius Evola


Nikolai Vavilov

One of the episodes that best characterizes the spirit of Bolshevism is the so-called “Vavilov case.” Professor Nikolai Vavilov was a Russian biologist who was deported to Siberia along with other colleagues of his, not for strictly political reasons, but simply for being an exponent of the theory of genetics. Genetics is a branch of biology that admits the existence of pre-formation in human beings, i.e., of predispositions and traits that are internal, congenital (based on “genes”), not derived from external factors.

Genetics was declared “counter-revolutionary.” Marxism has it that everything that a man is, is the result of environmental factors — economic and social forces and conditions in particular. On this basis, communists seriously believe they can create a new humanity, a collective proletarian man, liberated from “the individualistic accidents of the bourgeois era.” This assumption, however, would be thwarted if one were to admit that man has an inner form, that persons exist, with their own nature, their own quality and, so to speak, their own fate, rather than the atoms of a mass ready to be subjected to an external, mechanical action, through which the desired collective would be produced. A timely campaign, led by a Marxist biologist, Trofim Lysenko, exposed the dangerous seed of heresy contained in the theory (albeit merely anthropological) of genetics, and Professor Vavilov was whisked off to Siberia, the place where minds are “re-educated” in Russia today.


Vavilov in prison

One of the theories that best expresses the North American mindset is “behaviorism,” in combination with the views of John Dewey. According to this theory, anyone can become whatever they want, by undergoing an appropriate pedagogical and technical process. If a particular person is what he is, if he has certain talents, if he is, say, a thinker, or an artist, or a statesman, it does not depend on his nature, and is not the sign of any real difference. Anyone can be like him, if they only really want to, and if only they know how to “train themselves.” This, clearly, is the truth of the self-made man, extended from the level of practical success and social climbing to all other domains, corroborating the egalitarian dogma of democracy. If such a theory is valid, one can no longer speak of real differences, differences in nature and of dignity. Every man can presume to possess, virtually, everything that another man is, the terms “superior” and “inferior” lose their meaning, every feeling of distance and respect becomes unjustified, every path is open to all, one really is in a condition of “freedom.”

Thus, we are faced with a fundamental view in which Bolshevism and Americanism coincide. Like the Bolshevik-Marxist ideology, the American theory expresses an intolerance with regard to everything in man that has a face, an internal form, a distinctive and unmistakable quality. Correspondingly, the organic conception is countered with a mechanistic conception, since everything that can be set up starting from almost nothing can only have the character of something “constructed.”

It is true that in the American view, there is an appearance of activism and individualism which can be misleading. But in practice, one sees what this really means, in Americans. They are the living refutation of the Cartesian axiom, “I think, therefore I am,” since “they do not think, and yet they are.” Infantile and “natural,” the way a vegetable is natural, the American psyche is perhaps even more formless than the Slavic psyche. It is open to every form of standardization, from the Reader’s Digest type of culture to social conformity, manipulated public opinion, advertising and the delusion of democratic progress. It is against this background that the theory mentioned previously must be understood. The counterpart of “I can be what anyone is” and egalitarian education is a qualitative regression: the man who has become inwardly formless.

This man, then, is what both communism and Americanism want — setting aside differences which do not concern the essential. The two views which we have spoken of have both a symbolic value and an aggressive vector of efficacy. They are both a categorical contradiction of the traditional ideal of personality, and they attack, at its foundation, everything in which man today can still find a defense and a means of reacting against the chaos of his civilization.

Indeed, at a time in which not only idols have fallen, but many ideas and values are compromised by rhetoric and inherent insincerity, only one way still remains open: to look within oneself for that order and that law, which have become problematic in the surrounding world. But this also means: being able to find in oneself a form and a truth, and impose it on oneself, realize it. “Know thyself in order to be thyself” — this was once the watchword of classical civilization. “May our thoughts and our actions be ours, may the actions of each man belong to him” — wrote Plotinus, and the Roman-Germanic world, up to Nietzsche, upheld the ideal of inner form, of difference, of fidelity to what one is, in opposition to every tendency towards disorder.

Does all this pertain only to the domain of individual ethics? Hardly. If we look for the root causes of the current disorder, rampant in the economic and social field to the point of precluding any possibility of a healthy, balanced existence, we find them in the mass betrayal of the aforementioned traditional ideal. Men do not know and no longer want to know what they are, and hence no longer know the place appropriate to them in the whole, in the fixed framework within which they can, without being distracted, develop their being and its possibilities and realize their own perfection, enough to really endow their lives with meaning and interiority, and at the same time actualize the part that corresponds to them in a hierarchically ordered world. Is this not what paved the way for the “economic era,” culminating, on the one hand, in the paroxysm of unbridled capitalism, and on the other, in livid class hatred? Is it not in this way that we have arrived at a world composed mainly of the agitated and the displaced, a world in which what matters is no longer “being,” but getting to this or that position?

But if that is the case — and if one reflects a little, it is impossible not to recognize it — is one not deluding oneself and deluding others when one sets one’s hopes in the power of one system or another, before there has been a detoxification and rectification in the internal domain of attitudes, interests, and the meaning of life?

Of course, this cannot be expected of the majority, and it cannot occur instantaneously. It is, however, always possible to provide the best men with an orientation. One can show that when one no longer has one’s own path, when one gives in to the fascination of external forms of growth, self-affirmation and production, one opens oneself to the forces that, even on the biological plane, turn the Marxist and democratic doctrine into a reality: the doctrine of formless being, of a world of atoms, of masses and mud, instead of men and faces. Whether to stop, and find once again the foundation for a just strength in one’s own way of being and in one’s own balanced tension, or — despite believing that one is doing something completely different — to give new fuel to a collectivizing process that is now consuming the world everywhere, is what each man must decide for himself, but it is also a premise, if what he might represent in political struggle is to acquire a real basis, a form and a prestige and, ultimately, determine the structures that must exist between men and the leaders of men.

- Translated by G. A. Malvicini

Source: Julius Evola, Ricognizioni: uomini e problemi (Rome: Edizioni Mediterranee, 1974).


8

Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 22 Apr 2016 10:36 | #

Daniel, Evola is not writing ontologically.  He is writing critically of both streams of enlightenment thinking, in much the same way that Tom Sunic wrote in Homo americanus.

You referenced some comments I have made on other MR threads.  They include this, which is ontological thinking in the most general and universal sense, ie, true of all organic life, and therefore true for all men at all times, and not merely something which becomes true in relation to some men at one time.

For the organic, the very touch of mechanicity brings decay and dissolution.  To subsist requires actual effort, because the universe is mechanical.  Dealing with it, surviving despite its relentlessness, is Nature’s sole function, and ours too, obviously, as we are but one of her forms.  We have to push it away in every passing moment or it will claim us.  Mechanicity always imposes itself and takes us away into nothingness as soon as we forget.

This idea has a corollary in evolutionary theory as the selection of adaptive traits over maladaptive traits, and in my ontology as attentional consciousness.  It is the source of all teleologies.  In philosophy generally it is the pursuit of the good.  In religion it is the struggle for self-perfectionment and for union with god.  Teleology is framework.  Only the pushing away from mechanicity is foundation.

If you are going to criticise my writing, please do so on a positive basis for what it says, not because you suppose it conflicts with your own ideas (when its probable impact would be to swallow and re-process them).


9

Posted by Social construction of Prof. Denbeaux on Fri, 22 Apr 2016 17:23 | #

More on Mark Denbeaux.

He marched in the Selma, with the"Freedom Rides”, and considers that to be the most formidable experience of his life. Although he was brought-up in Wellesley, Massachusetts, the same place that radicalized and produced Hillary Clinton.

NJ.Com, “The Selma march and the fascinating story behind an iconic photo”, 4 March 2016:

A photograph published in Ebony magazine of Mark Denbeaux, when he was a student activist attending The College of Wooster, in Ohio, marching towards Selma. Today, Seton Hall Law professor Mark Denbeaux is best known for his work on Guantanamo Bay, but 50 years ago marched on Selma Alabama in which he calls the most formative experiences of his life.

The historic photo is a little grainy, produced in black-and-white. That was not by choice, as some artistic metaphor; color photography in 1965 was expensive to print.

The picture was part of Ebony magazine’s coverage of the third Alabama voting rights march from Selma to Montgomery, which began on March 21, 1965.

Foremost in the picture are James Luther Bevel, who initiated the marches as a leader of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, and Cager Jackson, whose grandson, activist Jimmie Lee Jackson, was killed by Alabama police a month before.

Behind Jackson in the photo is a young, white college student, a head taller than everyone, wearing thick black eyeglass frames of the day. And his presence there, at that moment, is metaphorical.

“We showed up, that’s what we did. We showed up to bear witness,” said Mark Denbeaux, who plans to return to Selma later this month for the 50th anniversary. “I was just one guy walking over the bridge, being present and bearing witness.”

It was the most formative experience of my life.” Mark Denbeaux, Seton Hall law professor

Mark Denbeaux was 21 at the time, down from the College of Wooster (Ohio) with a group of buddies who made the 750-mile trip in a red Rambler station wagon, driving over backroads of Kentucky and Tennessee into the Deep South.

Denbeaux is now 71 and a law professor at Seton Hall Law School in Newark, best known for his extensive research into the detention center at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba.

He and his students have published nearly 20 reports, examining hundreds of thousands of documents to detail abuse of detainees and unwarranted claims by the government. It is a search for truth, or at least finding true north in the national moral compass, as we are a country with a constitution that holds dear the rights of individuals.

That sense of justice, instilled by his parents, brought him to the civil rights movement as a teenager.

“My father was a combat chaplain with (Gen. George) Patton’s 3rd Army,” Denbeaux said during an interview at his home in Woodcliff Lake. “He had five battle stars, he was at D-Day and the Battle of the Bulge, but when he talked about his war years, it was only about the concentration camps, and treatment and discrimination of the Jews.”

After the war, Fred Denbeaux became a theology professor at Wellesley and moved his family to the Massachusetts college town.

Mark Denbeaux remembers watching news reports with his parents about the Freedom Riders, an interracial group of activists often attacked while challenging segregation law on interstate buses.

“Those were brave guys,” Denbeaux said. “I become embarrassed when people suggest going to Selma when I did was brave. We didn’t get attacked and beaten. People lined the road and said vile things, but we had snipers up in the trees and soldiers on the road to protect us.”

Nineteen months before Selma, Denbeaux marched on Washington, where he heard Martin Luther King deliver his “I have a dream” speech.

“My summer job (at college) was working as a baggage agent at Greyhound, so me and a friend got free bus passes and went to Washington,” he said. “We slept in these bushes near the Washington Monument, and the next day we ran into my parents and my sister.”

Denbeaux called the march “iconic” and King’s eloquence moved him to return to Wooster and start a NAACP chapter, which still exists.

“The first black person to join was the groundskeeper at the college,” he said. “His name was Jim Harris, and we stayed in touch. I’m going to see him in October.”

In the summer of 1964, Denbeaux tried to join John Lewis and the Students Nonviolent Coordinating Committee for a voting drive in Mississippi.

“I had an interview and they turned me down,” he said. “They didn’t believe I was nonviolent enough. Now, I’ve never been in a fight in my life, but I guess they saw that while I wasn’t violent, I could be confrontational.”

The violence visited upon those in the movement - protesters being clubbed, doused with fire hoses or attacked by police dogs - and the courage of those under attack, moved Denbeaux to “bear witness” to the brutal but historic events.

The first attempt of protesters to march from Selma to Montgomery on March 7, 1965, was met with such violence. Alabama state and local police were met at the Edmund Pettus Bridge and “Bloody Sunday” commenced. Police officers in riot helmets and tear gas masks beat the marchers indiscriminately.

“People were knocked unconscious. When we got there two weeks later (for the third march), some still had bandages on their heads,” Denbeaux said.

On the way to Selma, Denbeaux and his friend weren’t too afraid of violence - “We were 21, we didn’t think about getting killed.” - but as they got closer, the sight of pick-up trucks with rifle racks unnerved them.

“Suddenly, the guys in the back were all trying to get the middle seat,” he said.

In Selma, they slept in the balcony of First Baptist Colored Church “on Jefferson Davis Boulevard,” Denbeaux said. “There were bullet holes in the walls.”

Their first night, he and his friends went to the office of Sheriff Jim Clark, who had marshaled the force against the protesters, to complain about the treatment of blacks.

“It was just what you’d expect,” he said. ““All these white, beer-bellied guys hanging around. On the wall was a poster of Nikita Khrushchev that said ‘A Vote for Lyndon Johnson is a Vote for Me,’ ” he said. “We asked to see the sheriff and they sent out the county engineer.”

Ten years ago, around the 40th anniversary of the march, Denbeaux and his son, Joshua, went to Alabama and Denbeaux finally had that conversation with Clark, who was in a nursing home.

“We took him to lunch and talked for three hours,” Denbeaux said. “He told us things weren’t any better since Selma. The world was better, he said, when everybody knew their roles.”

That mentality seem to be stubborn; 50 years after the march voting rights are still under attack.

“There is always a test to see who controls the voting,” Denbeaux said. “And that control is always used to make it harder on poor people. The places now where they are trying to force voting restrictions are all former Confederate states.”

But other things have changed.

When Denbeaux returned to Selma for the 40th Anniversary, he assisted an elderly black woman who was walking across the bridge.

“She told me, she had waited her whole life to cross it,” he said.

The woman was struggling and Denbeaux took her arm, without thought, without hesitation.

In 1965, as he marched with a few thousand other protesters, he took the hand of a young black girl next to him, in response to the racist hecklers who lined the road, but she stiffened under his grasp.

“She must have been a sharecropper’s daughter because her hands were rough,” he said. “And I remember how she kept her hand close to her side. I thought I was making a big statement and then I realized, ‘I’m going home, but she has to live among these people.

“I would give a lot to know what happened to her,” Denbeaux. “I hope it was good.”

 


10

Posted by DanielS on Fri, 22 Apr 2016 18:46 | #

Daniel, Evola is not writing ontologically.  He is writing critically of both streams of enlightenment thinking, in much the same way that Tom Sunic wrote in Homo americanus.

Well, this piece of Evola’s surprised me. I had been under the impression that he was talking a lot about “spirit” - i.e., a way of talking that does not interest me as I consider it to be too speculative.

I do, however, consider this piece to be on the other end, and quite ontological in its pursuit. It reminded me of your project - and not in any insulting way, it is very good.

You referenced some comments I have made on other MR threads.  They include this, which is ontological thinking in the most general and universal sense, ie, true of all organic life, and therefore true for all men at all times, and not merely something which becomes true in relation to some men at one time.

  For the organic, the very touch of mechanicity brings decay and dissolution.  To subsist requires actual effort, because the universe is mechanical.  Dealing with it, surviving despite its relentlessness, is Nature’s sole function, and ours too, obviously, as we are but one of her forms.  We have to push it away in every passing moment or it will claim us.  Mechanicity always imposes itself and takes us away into nothingness as soon as we forget.

  This idea has a corollary in evolutionary theory as the selection of adaptive traits over maladaptive traits, and in my ontology as attentional consciousness.  It is the source of all teleologies. In philosophy generally it is the pursuit of the good.  In religion it is the struggle for self-perfectionment and for union with god.  Teleology is framework.  Only the pushing away from mechanicity is foundation.

If you are going to criticise my writing, please do so on a positive basis for what it says, not because you suppose it conflicts with your own ideas (when its probable impact would be to swallow and re-process them).

Hmm. Ok, I’ll try to be nicer; but you know, you could have extended a similar courtesy as you asked of me with these pieces - they contain important ideas for and of western peoples and I shouldn’t just let them be treated dismissively. I won’t itemize the comments and it doesn’t torture me but it is frustrating when you tend to see what I’m doing as adversarial. I try to do for your ontology project what you suggest that you try to do with the ideas that I bring forth, to integrate them. So lets try to believe that a little better of each other and move on.


11

Posted by J's & universal declaration to Japan on Fri, 22 Apr 2016 22:56 | #

Jake Adelstein: Japan has incredible tolerance* for the sexual exploitation of young girls.

Simon Ostrovsky: What would you say to someone who said that we’re just coming to Japan with our puritanical ideals and that we’re telling the Japanese how to behave? - imposing our culture on theirs?

Jake Adelsein: I would say that Japan has signed the universal declaration of human rights, that it’s a member of the U.N., that it’s agreed to uphold the [ ] protocols against human trafficking.


All we’re asking Japan to do is to live up to the international agreements that they’ve agreed to; and publicly at least politicians profess - that they want equality for men and women; so, I don’t think we’re imposing our puritanical views on Japan. We’re just saying, do you really mean what you say?

* What tolerance it has is among its own EGI, not very bad and absolutely no business of f-ing Jews.

 


12

Posted by Captainchaos on Sat, 23 Apr 2016 01:01 | #

This is not a moment to be butthurt, but for a brave synthesis!

A moment to say, “Heil Britain, and fuck those Krauts (American)!”


13

Posted by Selfie Soldiers on Sat, 23 Apr 2016 11:59 | #

“Selfie Soldiers: Russia Checks into Ukraine”

Ostrovsky does implicate Putin in having sent clandestine Russian troops into Ukraine, but there is no mention Victoria Nuland and co., as having sent-in a Judaized plan of war to begin with,  vast resources,  if not troops in there, along with a liberalizing, Judaic plan for Urkaine as well.

You can be sure the YKW are playing both sides.


14

Posted by War is... on Sat, 23 Apr 2016 12:37 | #


...a Jewish harvest.


Usually, anyway. Don’t take that as a pacifist message. It’s just something to take into serious consideration before stepping into anything.


15

Posted by Dr Doom on Tue, 26 Apr 2016 00:23 | #

I’ll tell you something and you might not believe it.  The nigger is not just a biological weapon used against you, it’s also a smokescreen for a huge coverup.  The Nose Goblin is intellectually inferior. Their claims of having a median IQ of 115 is a BIG LIE.  Psychometric tests have several different dimensions to measure different faculties that make up g or general intelligence.  That 115 IQ number they babble on about is from the Terman Test.  Terman was a jew, but his test was somewhat accurate.  That 115 is the VERBAL SCORE.  There are two other scores.  One is numerical which tests mathematical knowledge and spatial which measures mechanical insight and understanding machines.  Here’s the thing, their verbal is extremely high, but their spatial score is retarded.  Their math score is under a normal White population as well.  Add them together and divide by three, and you get a number around 86, which is Mestizo Mexican gardener bad.  These niggers and their poor grades are a smokescreen to generate false sympathy to keep people from using IQ Tests.  If Americans knew that the jew was only about as smart as a Mexican, they would realize that there is collusion and conspiracy involved in all the jews in high positions.  Their claims of intelligence are their BIGGEST LIE.


16

Posted by O*R*I*O*N on Tue, 26 Apr 2016 18:52 | #

Great analysis.
A brilliant, incisive exposure of the predictably thematic propaganda-pattern repeated constantly in western, jew-run media.
I can fully confirm Daniel’s thesis that…

Ostrovsky takes for granted that when this film is placed on the world stage that it will invoke sympathy for the blacks it depicts and anger against Whites by those who don’t know the reality of these areas and the reality of just who the American system helps, discriminates against and how[.]

This is exactly the effect jewish-american media has had on most lemmings in my native country, Denmark.

Far into the reaches even of some anti-immigration groups, the venomously deceptive narrative presented over the many consecutive decades of jewish-american indoctrination (behavior modification) through movies and various other forms of junk-culture, has injected into the collective unconscious the deadly message which by now, unfortunately, has been so thoroughly internalized by most Whites throughout the West, namely the template: all negroes are apriori cool, sexy, friendly, rhythmically superior and/or charming, yet eternally poor and helpless victims of the evil White KKK.

Jewish media control ever since 1945 has truly been (still is) an electronic, human societal equivalent of the parasitic mindcontrol known from the animal world.

https://youtu.be/gEfRYlgtiX8

It has been a disaster ... still is. And as practically every other pathology in postmodernity it can be traced right back to 1945 and the deep political, economic and cultural zog infestation that followed.

Death to zog!


17

Posted by DanielS on Fri, 29 Apr 2016 09:11 | #

Ostrovsky: “It sounds like you feel [Locke] you weren’t at fault and they didn’t have a right to pull you over.”

The idea that hermeneutics (and social constructionism) is proposing (as opposed to Lockeatine empiricism or Archimedian Cartesianism), correctly, is that facts, sensations and feelings do not exist for us entirely independent but are connected to communication and language - narrative shaping, contextualization and social negotiation of how they count.

While it is a loosening into the broader (especially social) connections from the attempted non-human standards for determination by mere, brute facts as to how facts count, absent communication, i.e. “facticity”, hermeneutics conducted as a proper inquiry and investigative method would not be a denial of factuality on the other hand either (as that would be Cartesian as well, and a violation of its raison de dete as a methodology), but rather a more accurate means of determining how facts are to be framed and how they are to count by human standards.

In this methodology, Whites will find proper historical orientation, means and agency to defend and advance themselves as a people, and that is the primary reason why Jewish academics distort it beyond reason and place it as an abusively distorted ideology in the hands of antagonistic anti-White coalitions.

Spinning psuedo hermeneutic (really still Cartesian) yarns of nonsense and “critique” also serves their big academic business of selling talk to paying undergraduates.


18

Posted by TBB on Mon, 02 May 2016 08:56 | #



19

Posted by Santoculto on Mon, 02 May 2016 20:05 | #

Black thugs are like urbanized primitive vikings, in permanent barbarian pre-psychotic state.


20

Posted by O*R*I*O*N on Wed, 04 May 2016 05:37 | #

You don’t know much about germanic culture do you?
Comparing the blood ancestry of Anglo-Saxondom; the explorers of the North Atlantic; the founding race of Russia and the genetic wellspring of all current White nations, to black thugs, is beyond insulting.
—It is perfidious.
What kind of jew or christian are you? Sephardic or ashkenazim?


21

Posted by DanielS on Wed, 04 May 2016 05:56 | #

Nor have black invaders left behind European characteristics and landmarks like this:

Aci Castello

           


22

Posted by Newark Condos on Sat, 07 May 2016 10:59 | #


Newark condos, taking over Bloomfield real estate


23

Posted by New plan to smash White suburbs on Tue, 10 May 2016 22:46 | #

TNO, “Renewed Plan to Smash White Suburbs”, 9 May 2016:

                     

Hillary Clinton’s rumored running mate, Housing Secretary Julian Castro, is preparing to relaunch a housing scheme which aims to force nonwhites into white suburbs across America.

The plan involves super-sizing vouchers to help “urban poor” afford higher rents in pricey areas, while assigning government real estate agents called “mobility counselors” to secure housing in the suburbs.

According to a report in the New York Post, titled “Obama’s last act is to force suburbs to be less white and less wealthy,” Castro plans to launch the Section 8 reboot this fall, even though a similar program tested a few years ago in Dallas has been blamed for shifting violent crime to affluent neighborhoods.

The program forms part of a “grand scheme to forcibly desegregate inner cities and integrate the outer suburbs,” the NY Post continued.

Castro last month threatened to sue suburban landlords for discrimination if they refuse Section 8 tenants with criminal records.

Last year, he also implemented a new regulation—“Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing”—that pressures all suburban counties taking federal grant money to change local zoning laws to build more low-income housing.

Landlords of such properties are now required to accept Section 8 vouchers.

Castro is expected to finalize the new regulation, known as “Small-Area Fair Market Rents” (SAFMR), this October, in the last days of the Obama presidency.

It will set voucher rent limits by zip code rather than metro area, the current formula, which makes payments relatively small.

For example, the fair market rent for a one-bedroom in New York City is about $1,250, which wouldn’t cover rentals in the more affluent areas of Westchester County, such as Mamaroneck, “where Castro and his social engineers seek to aggressively resettle Section 8 tenants,” the NY Post said.

In expensive zip codes, Castro’s plan—which requires no congressional approval—would more than double the standard subsidy, while also covering utilities.

At the same time, he intends to reduce subsidies for those who choose to stay in housing in poor urban areas, such as Brooklyn. So Section 8 tenants won’t just be pulled to the suburbs, they’ll be pushed there.

“We want to use our housing-choice vouchers to ensure that we don’t have a concentration of poverty and the aggregation of racial minorities in one part of town, the poor part of town,” the HUD chief said, adding that he’s trying to undo the “result of discriminatory policies and practices in the past, and sometimes even now.”

A draft of the new HUD rule anticipates more than 350,000 Section 8 voucher holders will initially be resettled under the SAFMR program. Under Obama, the total number of voucher households has grown to more than 2.2 million.

The document argues that larger vouchers will allow poor urban families to “move into areas that potentially have better access to jobs, transportation, services, and educational opportunities.”

The theory is that offering them more money to move to more expensive neighborhoods will “improve their situation.”

But, as the NY Post pointed out, HUD’s own studies show the theory doesn’t match reality.

President Bill Clinton started a similar program in 1994 called “Moving to Opportunity Initiative,” which moved thousands of blacks from government projects to higher-quality homes in safer and less racially segregated neighborhoods in several counties across the country.

The 15-year experiment failed dramatically, the NY Post continued:

A 2011 study sponsored by HUD found that adults using more generous Section 8 vouchers did not get better jobs or get off welfare.

In fact, more went on food stamps. And their children did not do better in their new schools.

Worse, crime simply followed them to their safer neighborhoods, ruining the quality of life for existing residents.

“Males … were arrested more often than those in the control group, primarily for property crimes,” the study found.

Dubuque, Iowa, for example, received an influx of voucher holders from projects in Chicago—and it’s had a problem with crime ever since. A recent study linked Dubuque’s crime wave directly to Section 8 housing.

HUD then decided, the NY Post said, that the solution to the “problem” was not to halt the program, but that it was not aggressive enough. They concluded they could get the desired results if they placed urban poor in even more affluent areas.

HUD recently tested this new theory in Dallas with disastrous results.

Starting in 2012, the agency sweetened Section 8 voucher payments, and pointed inner-city recipients to the far-flung counties surrounding Dallas.

As government-subsidized rentals spread in all areas of the Metroplex (163 zip codes vs. 129 zip codes), so did crime.

Now Dallas has one of the highest murder rates in the nation, and recently had to call in state troopers to help police control it.

For the first time, violent crime has shifted to the communities north of the city. Three suburbs that have seen the most Section 8 transfers—Frisco, Plano, and McKinney—have suffered unprecedented spikes in rapes, assaults, and break-ins, including home invasions.

Castro wants now to roll this program out nationwide. Soon he will give Section 8 recipients money to afford rent wherever they choose—and if they don’t want to move, he’ll make them an offer they can’t refuse, the NY Post said.

Ironically, Hillary’s own hometown of Chappaqua is fighting Section 8 housing because of links to drugs and crime and other problems.


24

Posted by Policeman James Lancia interviewed on Sun, 15 May 2016 17:20 | #

Former policeman James Lancia interviewed


25

Posted by E. Michael Jones: "Shaft", The Pimp on Mon, 16 May 2016 19:53 | #

E. Michael Jones discusses C.I.A. reshaping of black identity from “activist” to placate it with sex as “the pimp,” as well as Jewish cultural subversion, such as collaboration with White elites in “the death of the cities.”


26

Posted by Wearing clothes while White on Thu, 26 May 2016 13:28 | #


Wearing clothes while White


27

Posted by TBB on Tue, 31 May 2016 16:20 | #

Typical black behavior


28

Posted by More TBB on Tue, 31 May 2016 16:26 | #

More TBB


29

Posted by O.J. Simpson, TBB & TJB on Wed, 15 Jun 2016 18:01 | #

O.J. Simpson, typical black behavior and typical Jewish behavior:
NPR, “The Perfect Perversity of the O.J. Simpson Case”, 14 June 2016:

         

          NPR series: there is no doubt that OJ Simpson committed the murders.

There were signs from the very fist date he had with the 18 year old Nicole Brown that OJ Simpson was violent.

..he had ripped open her pants.

...

The series reveals many other facts not usually known about the case:

Another 9-11 call from Nicole has a policeman arrive, whom she tells emphatically that Simpson is going to kill her. Brown has a bruise on her face and Simpson says he doesn’t care, he doesn’t want her in his bed, he has two other women.

The policeman tells Simpson that he is under arrest for domestic violence. Simpson goes into his house, ostensibly to get dressed but races away in his car via a rear exit. The police pursue, but don’t catch him.

This is one of the surprising elements of the series: The L.A. Police Department was not eager to prosecute Simpson. They treated him with kid gloves.

The detective who interviewed Simpson after the murder did not ask him to provide a time line of his day, which would have caught him in several lies - basically, because he was following The L.A. P.D.‘s tendency to treat Simpson and his celebrity with too much respect.

In fact, Mark Fuhrman, being racial, was an outlier to this culture. He actually had sued the L.A. Police Department for early retirement, claiming psychological disability because he could not stand having to deal with blacks.

L.A. P.D. did not accept Fuhrman’s claim and told him to get back to work.

Unfortunately for the case against Simpson, Fuhrman was the detective on the scene who found Simpson’s glove left at the scene of the murder.

Simpson was advised to stop taking his arthritis medicine so that his hands would swell up. When the glove didn’t fit Simpson’s hand in a demonstration before the jury, it added to the suggestion that Fuhrman’s racism was playing a part in persecuting Simpson - a Negro man in an interracial relationship which Fuhrman was known to not like - prosecuting him unjustly by planting fake evidence.

Allowing Simpson to try-on the glove was black prosecuting attorney, Christopher Darden’s blunder.

“If it doesn’t fit you must acquit” was Simpson’s black defense attorney, Johnny Cochoran’s famous line, but what was most important in the acquittal was the way he successfully pandered to a majority black jury, Jewish legal system and zeitgeist, by distracting its pursuit of “justice” from the obvious evidence against O.J. Simpson; and instead presenting the case as an indictment of Furhman and the L.A. Police Department’s early stage Hitleresque wish to genocide; racism and cover-up of its racism - a particularly effective argument with in L.A. following the Rodney King incident:

Key excerpts from Corchran’s closing argument:

Stop this cover-up. Stop this cover-up. If you don’t stop it, then who? Do you think the police department is going to stop it? Do you think the D.A.‘s office is going to stop it? Do you think we can stop it by ourselves? It has to be stopped by you. And you know, they talked about Fuhrman, they talked about him in derisive tones now, and that is very fashionable now, isn’t it? Everybody wants to beat up on Fuhrman, the favored whipping boy in America. I told you I don’t take any delight in that because you know before this trial started, if you grow up in this country, you know there are Fuhrmans out there. You learn early on in your life that you are not going to be naive, that you love your country, but you know it is not perfect, so you understand that, so it is no surprise to me, but I don’t take any pride in it. But for some of you, you are finding out the other side of life. You are finding out—that is why this case is so instructive. You are finding out about the other side of life, but things aren’t always as they seem. It is not just rhetoric, it is the actions of people, it is the lack of courage and it is a lack of integrity at high places. That is what we are talking about here.

[...]

I don’t know how this subject was raised but officer Fuhrman says that when he sees a Nigger, as he called it, driving with a white woman, he would pull them over. I asked what if he didn’t have a reason and he said that he would find one. I looked at the two marines to see if they knew he was joking, but it became obvious to me that he was very serious.” Now, let me just stop at this point. Let’s back it up a minute, Mr. Harris. Pull it back down, please. If he sees an African American with a white woman he would stop them. If he didn’t have a reason, he would find one or make up one. This man will lie to set you up. That is what he is saying there. He would do anything to set you up because of the hatred he has in his heart. A racist is somebody who has power over you, who can do something to you. People could have views but keep them to themselves, but when they have power over you, that is when racism becomes insidious. That is what we are talking about here. He has power. A police officer in the street, a patrol officer, is the single most powerful figure in the criminal justice system. He can take your life. Unlike the supreme court, you don’t have to go through all these appeals. He can do it right there and justify it. And that is why, that is why this has to be routed out in the LAPD and every place. Make up a reason because he made a judgment. That is what happened in this case. They made a judgment. Everything else after that is going to point toward O.J. Simpson. They didn’t want to look at anybody else. Mr. Darden asked who did this crime? That is their job as the police. We have been hampered. They turned down our offers for help. But that is the prosecution’s job. The judge says we don’t have that job. The law says that. We would love to help do that. Who do you think wants to find these murderers more than Mr. Simpson? But that is not our job; it is their job. And when they don’t talk to anybody else, when they rush to judgment in their obsession to win, that is why this became a problem. This man had the power to carry out his racist views and that is what is so troubling. Let’s move on. Making up a reason. That is troubling. That is frightening. That is chilling. But if that wasn’t enough, if that wasn’t enough, the thing that really gets you is she goes on to say: “Officer Fuhrman went on to say that he would like nothing more than to see all niggers gathered together and killed. He said something about burning them or bombing them. I was too shaken to remember the exact words he used. However, I do remember that what he said was probably the most horrible thing I had ever heard someone say. What frightened me even more was that he was a police officer sworn to uphold the law.” And now we have it. There was another man, not too long ago in the world, who had those same views who wanted to burn people, who had racist views and ultimately had power over people in this country.

People didn’t care. People said he was just crazy, he is just a half-baked painter. They didn’t do anything about it. This man, this scourge, became one of the worse people in the history of this world, Adolph Hitler, because people didn’t care or didn’t try to stop him. He had the power over his racism and his anti-religion. Nobody wanted to stop him, and it ended up in world war ii, the conduct of this man. And so Fuhrman, Fuhrman wants to take all black people now and burn them or bomb them. That is genocidal racism. Is that ethnic purity? What is that? What is that? We are paying this man’s salary to espouse these views? Do you think he only told Kathleen Bell whom he just had met? Do you think he talked to his partners about it? Do you think commanders knew about it? Do you think everybody knew about it and turned their heads? Nobody did anything about it.


30

Posted by OJ Simpson's daughter at age 30 on Sun, 19 Jun 2016 20:19 | #


OJ Simpson and Nicole Brown’s daughter at 30


31

Posted by I will destroy America on Tue, 04 Oct 2016 17:10 | #


32

Posted by Luton looks heavenly compared to American cities on Tue, 13 Jun 2017 09:56 | #

Tommy Robinson shows you Luton, England from his car:

     

From what you can see, anyway, it’s like heaven compared to cities like Newark, Paterson and Camden, New Jersey, USA.


33

Posted by Newark, New Jersey, Raw Hood on Wed, 20 Dec 2017 21:35 | #

Newark, New Jersey, Raw Hood Footage part 1; and part 2.:

It used to be the place to be, “beautiful city”


...when my father was born there in 1925.

It is, in fact, the city where I was born as well….


34

Posted by Hating while in New Jersey on Thu, 28 Feb 2019 15:04 | #

From VNN

“Hate speech” laws are unconstitutional.  America’s founders would not have tolerated any type  of “hate speech” laws. Neither did New Jersey in 1947 (back when NJ was White):

The New Jersey Constitution of 1947, Article I, paragraph 6:

“Every person may freely speak, write and publish his sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that right. No law shall be passed to restrain or abridge the liberty of speech or of the press.” (“No law” means “no law.” As in, zero laws. Zero. None. Like, as in, none. Not one).

But yet, despite that, we hear this from town leaders in New Jersey today:

“The Bloomfield Police Department is actively investigating this (White nationalist flyers) incident, and takes all forms of hate speech and hate crimes extremely seriously.” [Article].


35

Posted by ATM withdrawal on Wed, 20 Mar 2019 07:14 | #

...meanwhile in New Jersey, a colored guy wants to take an ATM machine with him onto a public bus.

     

       


36

Posted by Uncle Floyd's New Jersey: Bloomfield on Thu, 23 May 2019 22:18 | #

Uncle Floyd’s New Jersey: Bloomfield


37

Posted by John Lennon didn't avoid... on Thu, 23 May 2019 23:52 | #

What do Nixon, Frank Rizzo, John Lennon, David Bowie, Robbin Williams and Iggie Pop have in common?

They didn’t avoid, they watched Uncle Floyd.



Post a comment:


Name: (required)

Email: (required but not displayed)

URL: (optional)

Note: You should copy your comment to the clipboard or paste it somewhere before submitting it, so that it will not be lost if the session times out.

Remember me


Next entry: Can Cosa Nostra Re-Organize on its Racial Roots in True Honor to Defend Italy and Europe?
Previous entry: Scott Roberts with a bullhorn and a message to gatherings of implicit Whites (starting 45:15)

image of the day

Existential Issues

DNA Nations

Categories

Contributors

Each author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer.

Links

Endorsement not implied.

Immigration

Islamist Threat

Anti-white Media Networks

Audio/Video

Crime

Economics

Education

General

Historical Re-Evaluation

Controlled Opposition

Nationalist Political Parties

Science

Europeans in Africa

Of Note

Comments

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Sun, 22 Dec 2024 01:03. (View)

Manc commented in entry 'The Indian/Chinese IQ puzzle continued for comments after 1000' on Sat, 21 Dec 2024 16:14. (View)

anonymous commented in entry 'The Indian/Chinese IQ puzzle continued for comments after 1000' on Fri, 20 Dec 2024 21:12. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Thu, 19 Dec 2024 01:13. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Thu, 19 Dec 2024 01:11. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Sat, 14 Dec 2024 21:35. (View)

Manc commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Sat, 14 Dec 2024 20:51. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Sat, 14 Dec 2024 19:49. (View)

Manc commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Sat, 14 Dec 2024 18:47. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Thu, 12 Dec 2024 23:29. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'News of Daniel' on Thu, 12 Dec 2024 22:01. (View)

Manc commented in entry 'News of Daniel' on Thu, 12 Dec 2024 19:52. (View)

Manc commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Thu, 12 Dec 2024 18:17. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Thu, 12 Dec 2024 14:23. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Sun, 08 Dec 2024 14:19. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Fri, 06 Dec 2024 20:13. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Fri, 06 Dec 2024 01:08. (View)

James Marr commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Wed, 04 Dec 2024 19:00. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Mon, 02 Dec 2024 23:41. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'The journey to The Hague revisited, part 1' on Sat, 30 Nov 2024 21:20. (View)

James Bowery commented in entry 'The journey to The Hague revisited, part 1' on Sat, 30 Nov 2024 17:56. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Sat, 30 Nov 2024 13:34. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Sat, 30 Nov 2024 04:44. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Fri, 29 Nov 2024 01:45. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Thu, 28 Nov 2024 23:49. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Thu, 28 Nov 2024 01:33. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'News of Daniel' on Thu, 28 Nov 2024 00:02. (View)

Manc commented in entry 'News of Daniel' on Wed, 27 Nov 2024 17:12. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Wed, 27 Nov 2024 12:53. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Olukemi Olufunto Adegoke Badenoch wins Tory leadership election' on Wed, 27 Nov 2024 04:56. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Tue, 26 Nov 2024 02:10. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Mon, 25 Nov 2024 02:05. (View)

Manc commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Sun, 24 Nov 2024 19:32. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Sat, 23 Nov 2024 01:32. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Fri, 22 Nov 2024 00:28. (View)

affection-tone