Category Archives: Race

What Direction is “Right”

The wasteland of American politics, amongst a hundred other logical and moral perturbations, is roughly divided into a party of life and a party of death, neither perfectly, of course. But… but roughly, yes. One party is aligned more with “pro-life” and one is aligned more with abortion, or “pro-choice.” Anyone can state which is which since it’s fairly well known where the two “parties” stand.

But it’s a circle and not neatly linear. The leftists, or progressives, infatuated with victim-identity-groups, exercise their dudgeon in support of “civil rights,” regardless of the effects on the group they describe as victimized by the denial of this or that civil “right.” In the case of abortion that group – and it’s a good, big one – is every woman. Rightists, or conservatives, are opposed to abortion because they think it’s evil and bad for individuals. They see the “right to life” as somehow the opposite of the freedom to choose abortion when pregnancy occurs, seeing the unborn child… and the mother… and the father, as affected individuals protected by the constitution. Leftists see the decisions about pregnancy, both the inception and the termination, as strictly the purview of the mother – so far always a woman. And so we divide.

It is impossible to avoid hypocrisy when it comes to other positions involving life and death. For example, progressives are both pro-choice and anti-death penalty, while conservatives are anti-abortion and pro-death penalty, very generally speaking. The latter would say that the unborn have a “right” to life but that murderers and other capital offenders have relinquished that right by their actions.

Progressive argue that pregnant women have the unique right to choose abortion, a right that must be protected, while those condemned to death at the hands of the “state” deserve a right to be rehabilitated from the conditions – many of those social – that caused them to kill or brutally rape and that the state should not become a murderer, itself. Both sides defend these “rights” and views with passion. Well, okay.

War – or defense – muddles the life or death arguments of both camps. Stalin, for example, caused the horribly painful deaths of millions of peasants (and intellectuals) in order to impose purer Communism, and he is regarded as a leftist exemplar and hero, today. After all, a thousand deaths are a tragedy; a million or more is a statistic. Hitler killed many fewer millions but the left declares him “right-wing,” although it is the right, today, that defends Israel. Hitler, a different-striped socialist than Stalin, the left has decided to hate; Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion mill in the world – and most profitable – they love. It can be confusing.

Progressives also fight for the “right” of illegal entrant women to have their babies (in the United States) so the confusion of leftists and of rightists trying to comprehend them, is understandable.

Giant business conglomerates that make armaments are identified with the right, although those companies, themselves, have literally no concern for parties or even nations. Their partnerships with governments removes them from the capitalist economy, in a sense, since they have saddled taxpayers with the burden of their success, not competitive customers. Both parties like these people because they are willing to support anyone financially, who will maintain them in power. It’s no longer recognized as corruption – just business, although it has little to do with the free-enterprise engine of capitalism that pays for everything.

To function over time armaments manufacturers need conflicts and threats of conflicts. Both parties come around the circle of life and death to where they bump into war and the manufacturers of the implements of war. The unpleasant side-effect of war, unfortunately, is death – death of soldiers, men and women, who despite volunteering for the military still didn’t want to die, and death of innocent civilians, no matter how careful politicians would direct the soldiers to be. Lots of death, injury and ruin, and both parties enable war in their own ways; both run in the opposite life or death direction from their opponents and inevitably bump in to the war business that puts the lie to most other philosophies each espouses.

Rightists tend to identify with “a strong military” and they use patriotism to the fullest for their advantage. Leftists, in very recent years, have come to despise patriotism, our anthem and the flag, itself, which rightists still can’t figure out. Conservatives see militarism as protection of the nation’s “life.” Progressives seem to have grown tired of the U. S. and patriotic references to it are of no value to them and may be readily opposed if only to aggravate the right. One might infer that the “death” of the nation wouldn’t upset the left nearly as much as it would the right.

Still, very generally speaking, the “right” tends to be pro-life while the “left” is pro-death. Like other destructive (of constitutional republicanism) movements based on “rights,” the right to destroy one’s fetus is defended as superior to the historic right to life. Indeed, the distinction between the two conflicting rights is a point of battle, not just opinion. As vital and fundamental as this conflict has been for 40 years (and for hundreds of years before Roe v. Wade) Society is now being sundered by the conflicts between “rights” unheard-of 40 years… or even 20 years ago.

Of ironic interest is the intensifying effort to grant Constitutional “rights” or “protections” to illegal entrants. While a pleasant-sounding attitude, there is no logical basis for giving such hard-earned rights to non-citizens. The Constitution was formed by American citizens in an era of freedom purchased by the blood of the first Americans. Citizens in the first thirteen states approved it. It is a benefit of citizenship whether by birth or by adoption, not of illegal residence or illegal presence. Yet there are large minorities in both parties – larger in the anti-Trump party – who are evidently quite happy to damage the nation, no matter how permanently, by breaking down immigration and border-defense laws. Many of these are equally enamored of Socialism… even of Stalin, himself, not because they understand what they are doing, but because they are willing to do anything to damage the United States. Make no mistake.

Many of the “no borders” zealots preach the “right of immigration” to improve one’s living conditions. It is a broad and ill-defined right that extends to everyone who is, first and foremost, not white. Like the right to abortion, when actually contemplated, the image of an immigrant or of an aborted immigrant to life, is covered in brown skin. Whites have been defined as oppressors in any and every instance, and are therefore entitled to almost no rights and chief among those so proscribed is ownership of private property. Thank you, education systems.

A more dangerous trend, Prudence teaches us, is “rights” codified based on personal, self-declared feelings. Our culture has been turned, if not twisted, by the 30-year fight for “gay” rights. Initially it was a logical, and reasonable push back against cruelty and discriminatory rejection of professed “gays” and “lesbians.”

Appropriating the word, “gay,” apparently applied primarily to male homosexuals but is sometimes used to describe lesbians as well.

But the “gay rights movement” quickly morphed from tolerance and non-discrimination towards unusual people, into demands for total acceptance and legalization of every permutation of sexual deviance – all of it self-declared. In other words, a person can declare him- or her-self to be “gay,” and come under constitutional protections now accepted as protecting every form of “expression.” That same person, however, can also choose to live as a heterosexual, self-declaring a non-gay status, and have, in effect, fewer rights or protections than previously.

This seems like a preposterous basis for application of the 14th Amendment. We have moved into a realm where people’s feelings are made the basis for anti-discrimination protections. More diaphanous is legislative logic for “trans-genderism.” With no physical evidence, men and women… and boys and girls… are permitted, if not encouraged, to live out their fantasies of being the opposite “gender.” The argument is based on “gender” being a linguistic designation of maleness and femaleness, and therefore nothing “permanent.” The lack of permanence is based on the fluidity of feelings and not of gender, itself, necessarily. Some exercise their convictions to the point of bodily mutilation and chemical distortion of their natural hormonal beings. The legitimization of these emotional incongruities has found its way into governmental responsibility for the emotional satisfaction and even physical or chemical balance of military personnel and even of prisoners who self-declare their identification with the opposite sex from that of their birth. Again, individuals are able to gain rights and protections based upon only their declarations and not on verifiable evidence. It is a dangerous path; parents keep your children safe – society no longer will.

Finally, and simply for the length of the essay, come the new “rights” to be offended. This amorphous body of social “rule-making,” stems from the concept of “hate crime” and its bastard child, “hate speech.” For a legal and judicial system that can’t define pornography, defining “hate” as an enforceable term seems a bit of a stretch. By some sort of arcane, subjective reckoning, a murder performed by a killer who keeps his feelings to himself is LESS of a crime than if he advertised his extreme dislike of the group he thinks the victim deserved to be part of. A dope who kills a fat person and who also hates fat people is in worse trouble than a murderer who loves them. You figure it out.

Academics and others who are ostensibly intelligent, actually nurture the concept of unbridled “offense” and attempt to set rules against “hate speech” (anything traditional, conservative or Constitutional… or critical of liberalism… or of Hillary Clinton), or insensitive pronouns like “his,” hers,” “he’ and “she.” By accepting the mythical “fluidity” of gender, colleges and other self-righteous arbiters of “education” buy in to the concepts of self-selected pronouns the meaning of which is decided by their inventors, with no connection to our common language(s). It’s another dangerous path, one that leads to hatred and confrontations initiated by the supposedly offended. Social and cultural adhesion are the victims… as is freedom, itself, in a country of rules rather than laws. Those are the tools of socialist fascism.

The loss of freedom our rabid quest for “rights” engenders (speaking of “gender”), is a form of death for every free person.

Po Boys and Indians

At Book Club the other night we discussed a disturbing, true story from the 1920’s about the only partly resolved multiple murders of Osage Indians and the origins of J. Edgar Hoover’s FBI.(1)  Following the final forced relocation of the Osage to what looked like useless land in northeast Oklahoma.  Beneath that land, it was soon learned, lay a gigantic pool of oil and the Osage owned all rights to it.

Subsequently whites were declared to be “Guardians” of Osage “rich redmen” ostensibly assuring that they handled the contracts and ownership of their great wealth properly.  Instead, most took financial advantage and many, probably dozens, took part in both slow and quick murders of Osage families such that control of the oil and the leases would wind up in white hands.  The FBI finally got to investigate a handful of the murders and to convict a couple of conspirators and murderers, whereupon victory was declared.  In fact murders had occurred prior to those the FBI investigated, and continued past that time.  Sordid, and disturbing; dozens of Osage Indians were murdered but, in the views even of lawmen of the time, “they were only Indians.”

Prudence has always required that Nazi Germany be soundly condemned for treating a class of citizens and neighbors as something less than human and needful of extermination.  One wonders how so many Germans could have followed Hitler, accepted the “Final Solution” or actively ignored it, even as trainloads of Jews passed by and as gas-chambers and ovens processed them nearby.  Lo and behold, hundreds of Americans coexisted with, if not participated in, systematic murder of the Osage, even whole families, for no more than financial gain.  The membrane between Judeo-Christian ethics and societal murder schemes, is very thin.

So, the whole chapter might be buried in our national memories as something that we have moved beyond and would never, in our enlightened state, today, be repeated.  A bit more reflection is in order.

Following King Phillip’s War, or the French and Indian War, American colonists clarified their perception of the new continent as theirs for the taking, lacking only a few courageous men and women to push the frontier further and further and a little further.  The sometimes peaceful “Indians” who already lived on it were deemed uncivilized or even savage, and therefore lesser beings, a perception proven over and over as “Indian” land, waters and hunting grounds were “settled” by colonists, French, Spanish and English (as well as Germans and others), and the occupants lashed out in the only ways they knew, killing and brutalizing many “whites”.  It became easy to kill those indigenous “savages” since they were lesser and God clearly had provided “America” for the colonists.

Natives couldn’t seem to handle their liquor, either.  Frontiersmen quickly learned that “Indians” could be weakened and controlled with alcohol.  The fact that “firewater” was a problem for Indians was reinforcement for the idea that they were lesser humans and their problems were due to their own flaws – get rid of them.  Some Osage had those weaknesses, at least some did, and despite their remarkable assimilation, were perceived as not quite worth a white person and flawed, as shown by their ignorance of white people’s connivance and thievery.  Thank God we have moved beyond such arrogance and prejudice. Not.

One need look only at the last 55 years(!) of federalized welfare policy and effect to see that the “Osage” of that period are simply mainly inner-city blacks, today, but also Hispanics.  Their flaws, in our liberal sympathies, are evidenced by poverty and worthy of welfare programs too numerous to count.  Instead of stealing their oil we steal their opportunities by trapping them in failed ghettos and failed schools, failed health-care and failed economics, partly because of political advantage, but partly, Prudence dictates, because of a never-admitted belief that the inner-city demographic is not as capable of success as “normal” people.  This attitude is “proven” by the statistics of gang warfare and high murder rates.

Now professional sympathizers and the employees of the welfare industry will scream that I am racist because I think that poor “folks” are guilty of being poor when it is really my racist attitude that keeps them stuck in welfare.  The opposite is true.  There is a large bloc of people who earn elections and financial power off the backs of welfare recipients… but it isn’t comprised of conservatives.  Prudence suggests that a clear-minded examination of the last 55 years of inner-city problems and failures reveals that those awful conditions could never be sustained, maintained and profited from unless it fulfilled some over-arching purpose.  And, if not an articulated purpose, at the very least, an over-arching belief!

Fifty-five years is a long time, even for an all-intrusive government with unrestricted debt-creation power, to accidentally allow millions of its citizens to live in failed circumstances while trillions of dollars in entitlements are sent to them or spent on them.

While “Indians” have a flawed relationship with alcohol, for inner-city populations it is drugs.  Fortunately, in someone’s decades-old view, drugs also provide a source of income for blacks and Hispanics and they do, after all, mostly kill one-another, gang members, somewhat bad neighbors.  Just make ‘em vote correctly and leave the suburbs alone and, in fact, the rest of us can leave them to their miserable daily existences.  It’s a de-facto policy that has worked for over 50 years!  Who’s the cynic… or the racist?

Unionized social work and current public policies are certainly not the solution.  Dominant philosophy holds that these people are unable to break out of poverty because “government” – right-wingers, primarily, won’t provide “the resources” to make it happen.  Failing schools, by the way, also unionized public services, use the same logic. Rapid growth in expenditure-per-pupil have failed to reverse declines in educational achievement; more “resources” will fix the problem.  Worse, now that pharmaceutical companies and sales companies have expanded addiction into the suburbs, the dependable drug trade that has kept blacks and others from being too restive in the inner cities is causing wider concern about drugs and the whole corrupting profit-structure may collapse leaving ghetto-dwellers in a tough spot.  Only a racist would want that to happen.

President Trump has begun a decades-overdue process of review and undoing of welfare programs that have failed continuously.  What will make that actually “stick,” if any of it may be accomplished against the welfare bureaucracy and politics, is a change in philosophy, attitudes and beliefs, starting with belief in black abilities as equal to those of any whites.  Maybe this is the last generation that treats inner-city residents like children or, worse, like “Indians.”

(1) “Killers of the Flower Moon: The Osage Murders and the Birth of the FBI”
by David Grann

Government by Unreality

We are truly vexed in this, our great, open, rich, cruel, loving and generous country with our $20 Trillion debt, by social and civic problems of our own making. Whole industries are comprised of complaining and hating perceived groups of people unfairly imposing problems and then unfairly benefiting from them. Not much money seems to flow toward the loving business, but various dolled-up hatreds are profitable.

Some hatreds are aimed at Republicans, for no specific reason other than party affiliation; some are aimed at Democrats for the same reason. Both of those groups seem to have the same goals of expanding welfare, growing government and raising the debt ceiling. Neither is trying to seriously fight the LGBTQW revolution, although one side obtains money by claiming the other side hates LGBTQW “victims.” But aside from a lot of posturing, little honest change is proposed by either party, whether in power or out, although there’s plenty of the opposite.

When erstwhile Republicans and various independents and conservative-leaning parents elected a hard-to-fathom or mollify President Trump who thought he had the balls to actually change SOMETHING, leftists and others wedded to the status-quo ante began raising gobs of cash from fellow travelers and bird-brains who actually do hate HIM. Most of the money comes from people who hate haters. Those same hate bigots – people who pre-judge their neighbors as somehow flawed, just as much. In fact, they are able to spot bigots from quite a distance, especially if they are wearing one of those stupid red hats… or deign to vote for Republicans.

There has been some change, but nothing so dramatic as to let Constitutionalists relax.

In our hubris, we, Americans, a large minority of us at any rate, are convinced that normal laws of economics and well-established human nature no longer apply to us. Through our elected representatives we have become convinced that we can borrow a richer life, today, from our great grandchildren to whom and for which we’ll never answer.

We also believe that our enjoyment of freedom and wealth is somewhat automatic and somehow deserved. We are so happy with it and it’s easy accessibility, and being suspicious of our governors and bosses, we’re determined to share it with anyone those governors and bosses don’t like – just to get even. Why should we be so selfish as to keep America to ourselves? This misunderstanding leads us to fight against any standards or limits, like anachronistic borders, that those cruel governors want to maintain.

Freedom is some sort of gift, leftists say, provided to us by government, the source of all that’s good. If you aren’t as free as you’d like, more government will fix it. They don’t want to be limited by those Christian haters, especially the ones actually in churches… you know the ones, in their black suits and robes who read the “Bahh-bull,” for Heaven’s sake. The basis of Western civilization has no connection to today’s disconnected leftists. “Thanks, God,” they say, “thy system was far from perfect so we’ll take it from here. Call me, we’ll do a funeral.”

It’s the perfect statement of non-responsibility, which is the leftist, group-identity outlook. Whatever group we can burden you with is the reason things have gone the way they have for you – even if we don’t really know how things have gone for you. If you’re black (the best group ever invented, thank you, Lord, for giving them different skin; it helps a lot) then all sorts of causes for your victimized life can be proclaimed. Don’t y’all worry about finding justice in this White-privileged world, we are here to help the helpless. Take this check and be sure to put yourselves in POWER on election day.

To live a political existence on the basis of resentment of White people, is to, eventually, be subsumed by hatred. Evidence of this effect is everywhere poor, or “disadvantaged” blacks and other minorities are concentrated: ghettos. Surrounded by others who feel cheated out of their fair shares, and further surrounded by more richly “advantaged” Whites, ghetto residents become hateful, regardless of EBT cards, free health care and food subsidies. Welfare becomes merely a down-payment on justice.

It should be obvious, had education done its job, that government cannot create or impose justice on a social system; but, it can adjudicate injustice. In other words, if laws are made clearly and succinctly, the failure of some one or of several some-ones to treat another person or group of several persons fairly under the law, then government can ascertain appropriate charges for failing to act legally toward another or toward others, and prosecute illegal actors for their failing and impose penalty or restitution to those so treated.

What government should never do is create crimes out of feelings, or stretch clear laws into fuzziness about things people feel are unfair. This includes creating laws to cover self-declared conditions for which there is no empirical, quantifiable proof. Unfortunately, this includes special laws concerning homosexuality, sexual indecision or confusion, and mis-named trans-genderism. It should also not provide special legal strictures based on race. Rather, law is intended for, and only fair if applied to, sanctioning individuals or legal constructs like corporations when those persons/entities act outside of clear laws that are applicable to everyone of the members of society. We as a people or nation, create immense structures of unfairness and unreality when we attempt to legislate based on feelings and political unhappiness.

This old observer suggests that mankind’s worst circumstances result from acceptance of – even codification of – unreal, baseless claims and beliefs. For some this is religion, and many examples of severe warfare between religious groups or sects, can be cited. For shame. But there are other incredible murderers, like Hitler, for whom occult religious stories justified warfare on a global scale. Coupled with hatred of a group for unreal reasons, it formed an upheaval from which we still suffer, almost 80 years later. Unreality made “real.”

Communism is much the same. Not so much riven by group hate, Communists hate individuality and freedom. It is more economic than philosophical, and even more deadly than hatred. Power, of course is the currency of socialism of all stripes. For Communists there are only two groups: the official Party and, economically, everyone else. Resistance to being part of the nationwide serfdom into which Communism inevitably devolves, yields starvation or the gulag. Venezuela is an obvious current example of Communism’s “promise.”

Communism is based on unreality although its effects are brutally real. It believes in a different human nature than what is in fact reality. We are on this same path in the United States, evidenced not the least by our world-threatening debt.

Yet on we stumble, electing and re-electing people who don’t like America or the ideas that created it because the people who crafted it were white or owned slaves in a slave-owning society, or picked their nose in public. They are blind to the fact that these were the men who built a ladder to get us out of slavery and a thousand other unfairnesses. And so we are locked into hatred and failure and inability to govern while anguishing over millionaires taking the knee at football games, another example of trying to “govern” based on unreality.

Unreality as the basis for action is the same as dishonesty, well-stated by Mark Twain: “It’s not what you don’t know that’s the problem; it’s what you do know that just ain’t so.”

Antifa, Socialism and the Garden of Eden

Americans, citizens at least, owe it to ourselves… indeed we are OBLIGATED… to obtain the truth about “antifa” and other culture-threatening, community-threatening militaristic “organizations.” Our media and other institutions are failing miserably to challenge their premises or their statements of justification for breaking laws and heads at will. The place to start is the money. It was costly to bus the “Anti-KKK” protestors into Charlottesville. There were 3 or 4 big buses that dropped off the “antifa” group and then left the downtown straight away. Witnesses state that whites with “KKK” Tee-Shirts(!) arrived on those same buses.

I don’t think I know anyone in the KKK, never saw a march of the KKK, never heard a KKK speech. But it’s clear that actual and former members have done their best to hide any association with the truly white-supremacist organization. This begs the question: Who the Hell would want to wear a “KKK” T-shirt? The only advantages to doing so would be 1) to avoid having your own team bonk you during a fight, and 2) to show up clearly in videos and on TV. It is no more likely that one would arrange for such T-shirts to be printed on the morning of a “Unite the Right” rally, than that he or she would obtain the PERMIT for the rally on that same morning.

There was something rotten in Charlottesville. The self-named “antifa” so-called “protesters,” are literally paid to create conflict. Evidence indicates that some of the “right-wing” rally-ers were also part of the paid actors sent to Charlottesville. Why? Who, really, is served by conflicts that rub old, old racial hatreds raw? What is the true intent and what is the inadvertent intent of these cynical displays?

The United States was formed as it was formed. The intense courage of isolated settlers is unimaginable to soft Americans today. The people who chose to come here were who they were. They were raised in a different time and culture and they grew up to believe what they believed. And, here’s a news flash: Not a single one of them came here out of hatred, or with the intention of making “Indians,” who they believed were pagan savages, sick. Not one. And they were all quite religious – Christians of their time, motivated by the need to atone for sins and to sacrifice for others and for the future. That’s why the “invasion” took root and survived. We can go back further and recognize that Christoforo Colombo had no intention of hurting people and was impressively courageous as well. He, and his crew, and his Spanish sponsors, and his home city and the rest of Europe believed what they believed. They had no benefit of the past 520 years of experience.

What profit is there to “hate” them now? Why isn’t Spain hated MORE than the United States? Why isn’t England hated for slavery? The real target of conflict is to decouple the ideas of America from the future. It’s not new.

The first and most effective way to confuse a population that believes it’s “free” and even “sovereign,” is to dis-educate its children. That is, purposely don’t teach them their nation’s history, both “good” and “bad.” Just teach about how bad things were done by “heroes.” Then skip over the courageous and pioneering steps taken in face of extraordinary odds. Concentrate on movie stars, sports figures, and popular opponents of the basic structures and institutions of their culture and heritage.

Fundamental to dis-education in the United States is ignorance of, or ignoring of, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. Added ignorance of the Articles of Confederation and the Northwest Ordinance will also be valuable in separating citizens from ageless philosophies and truths that underlie our exceptional nation. The trouble with all of these ideas so documented is that they tell us that we are free NOT because of being subjects of a governor or government, but because of our CREATOR. That is the greatest threat to secular power structures.

The allegorical story of the Garden of Eden reveals the conflict in the most basic terms. Adam and Eve are created and blessed with everything they need for a bountiful life – the “thesis.” The metaphorical serpent provides an “anti-thesis” regarding the denial to Adam and Eve of the “fruits” of the “Tree of Knowledge.” Whereas God warned that “eating” of that particular tree’s fruits would cause them to “die,” the “Serpent” tells Eve that she and Adam could be as wise as God and that surely, they would not actually die.

Eve and Adam eat of the forbidden fruit, realize forbidden knowledge and God promises them great travails in life and bans them from His bountiful Garden of life. The “synthesis” is in place, slightly toward the secular and away from the original “thesis,” theos – God. They weren’t killed, but for ever after, Life will be the Death of them. This is how Socialism/Secularism spreads its sticky ideas. The thesis is always closest to our Creator’s original premise; the antithesis is always a little farther away from that and toward totally human control of life and history. This brings us to ever-larger segments of populations dependent upon human government, and less and less responsible for the consequences of their actions, or “sins.” Now we are politically agitated over publicly financed abortion as some sort of Constitutional right.

“Antifa” is but the tip of yet another antithetical spear, serving totally secular, financially dictatorial masters who wish to separate mankind from concepts of freedom and individual sovereignty. Not everyone is willing to be so separated, and they are the distinct targets of antithesis. Anything that teaches youth about the thesis, and about lessons learned in defense of the thesis, must be torn down or covered with tarpaulins.

Racial Fascism

There is an extraordinary dichotomy playing out amidst a mix of misunderstandings, hatreds and pure ignorance across the United States.  It is fueled by the ignorance and connivance of a predatory press as well as the instantaneous sharing of ignorance and hate over the internet.  It is instructive to diagnose how America became so stupid as to threaten its own existence with so much energy.  There are people and institutions worthy of being blamed for their role in the descent to our current condition.

The highest profile is held by president Trump, of course.  He has drawn fire, as it were, from several stripes of Democrats and other leftists of varied antagonisms, toward himself, individually, and toward the United States collectively… and comprehensively.  America- haters love the current circumstance.  Trump is ultra-sensitive to criticism and literally hurts himself to get even.  It is sad that that kind of give-and-take hurts his agenda – which Prudence indicates the nation needs to see enacted.

In his defense, Trump has been attacked with largely meaningless, deliberately misconstrued charges, along with the handful of real criticisms.  The whole process started out making lots of supporters angry, but now the attacks have devolved into calls for impeachment on amorphous, hate-based charges.  These are dangerous to the president and to the country, but the hatred – not political opposition, but hatred – actively encourages more virulent enemies like George Soros and his forces – like Antifa and Black Lives Matter.  They think they’re winning.  What they are winning is ill-defined.

The conflict in Charlottesville, Virginia is widely – and wildly – misunderstood, even after weeks of angst and anguish.  We are supposed to believe that it’s about the offensiveness of statues, as though the history represented by those statues were about to repeat itself with chains and slave auctions, given the pudding-like mentality of white people.  The lessons of history are best to be learned, Prudence instructs, not buried.

But there are certain elements of anti-white fervor who must have fresh targets on a regular basis.  A pudding-like press and equally useless politicians latch on to that pious hatred and feed the demands for removal of “symbols of slavery” as if removing the statue of military genius and anti-slavery southerner, Robert E. Lee, would place a strong brick in the wall against slavery’s breaking out again!  Where are the adults?  Where was education?

The new jack-booted thugs, “Antifa,” really care not a whit about Robert E. Lee, or Stonewall Jackson or even Jefferson Davis.  They are paid, literally, to break heads.  Screaming about anti-fascism while executing fascism better than anyone since 1945 may fire up the pudding-heads in the left-wing media – print and broadcast – but it doesn’t make anything “Antifa” says or does true or honest.  “Black Lives Matter” is nearly as debauched.  They, too, have seized upon a flaming hot button that delivers money and power into their hands – police killings of blacks, some of whom are innocent and whose badged killers deserve jail time.  The deaths of thousands of other blacks in inner cities, mostly drug and gang-related, has no commensurate value.  Making themselves enemies of local police is not helpful, but, sadly, rational to “BLM.”  What is the end-game?

One would think that there might be different judgments directed toward people who are paid to hate, as many of the “Antifa” are – paid, that is, by George Soros-connected “organizations.”  Soros, when not cooperating with real Nazi’s during WW II, has made his disdain for the American experiment quite clear.  He hates the ideas of America.  He hates individual sovereignty.  He pays his thugs not to defend ANY of the purported causes they shout about, but to generate discord.  Even in Charlottesville, slowly being revealed as “staged” in large part, the result that was sought by Soros and other enemies of freedom, has manifested:  widespread belief that many Whites are racists with KKK and, illogically, Neo-Nazi beliefs.

This media-touted “meme” of widespread racism is the ideal “lever” by which anti-freedomists  can and have manipulated public policy (such as removing statues – not out of understanding but out of fear) to change the culture of a nation.  Combined with left-dominated public education that is sympathetic to everything being “wrong” with America, purpose-driven forces opposed to our sovereignty, nationality and freedom are dividing us from our heritage, our history and our future as a free people.

Photos show that fighters for both sides in Charlottsville arrived on the same buses.

 

 

Damned Conservatives

Alas poor education, we once were free.  For those of us… you, who are angry with “conservatives” and who agree that conservatives are (choose all that apply): 1) racist;   2) homophobic; 3) Islamophobic; 4) “Trans”-phobic; 5) anti-women; 6) anti-science;    7) climate change deniers; and 8) fascists.  Excuse me, I forgot, 9) Christian fanatics.

Conservatives who support or, worse, don’t mind Donald Trump, are also stupid.  Did we pretty-much cover it?  Let’s not forget the Russians – don’t mean to slight anyone.

The United States was premised on the concept of individual sovereignty and liberty.  This isn’t taught anymore, but it’s true.  If you perceive or believe that we are “free” only when our entire group is free, then you are, to a degree, believing that the very basis for the exceptional founding of our nation, is no longer valid.  That’s quite sad.

The U. S. was not founded to be a unionized social-service mega-agency.  That we have become so is far from a testament to our benign compassion for the poor; not at all.  Rather, it is a massive subversion of liberty by the left.

“What?”  You exclaim, “Should we just let these poor, oppressed people starve?  If that’s what conservatism is, leave me out!”

No, conservatives would have taught those starving people to feed and otherwise take care of themselves.  Those same would then move forward in life without the artificial welfare of any government.  That seems, to the racist, homophobic, anti-women Neanderthals that liberals hate so deeply, like the ultimate compassionate action, and is, in fact, the very basis of free-enterprise capitalism.  There is wide misunderstanding about these principles.

The most easily grasped distinction between liberalism (in modern definition), or leftism, and conservatism (in modern definition), is responsibility – personal responsibility.  That is, modern liberals perceive everyone only as a member of a “demographic.”  Everyone only has identity due to matching characteristics of a named (must be known by a name) group.

Easiest to understand in this odd universe is a group known variously as “people of color,” “African-Americans,” “blacks,” or the current liberally-correct description.  People with brown skin are of a hundred origins and genealogies.  By definition they do not comprise a “group” or a tribe or even a nationality.  Why on earth would rational people look at people with brown skin as if they were somehow all connected or similar?  The answer reveals the heart of modern leftism.

The only rational purpose for grouping individuals who share a trait or appearance… even a little, is because those who consider them so might gain political power.  This rationalization has also infected members of the artificially constructed group, who join with liberals in maintaining the belief in the existence of a group that exists only politically and not in fact.  Great anger, hatred and historical distortion stems from this artificial group perception.  By automatic reflection, or reaction, every action of unkindness or perceived “hatred,” practiced by anyone not “in” the artificial group, becomes a failing of everyone in the “outgroup,” so long as its members share some identifiable characteristic – like a different skin color.  Suddenly, politically, hatred of the outgroup has flowered, and “white privilege” is the result.

Such hatred requires nurturing and nutrition.  Once embarked on the road to political power, people who know how to profit from hatred can’t seem ever to reverse course.  The joys of political office are too enticing; the lack of true responsibility too comforting, the outlandish emoluments too rewarding.  Today, hatreds are the MOST COMMON political motivations; statesmanship is nearly invisible.

For some “hatred” is simple cynicism.  These are they for whom “public service” is mere aggrandizement, and to Hell with society so long as they get as much out of our pockets as they can.  For the next level of public cynics, power is their profit, and they are satisfied to gain power for themselves, and to Hell with the rest of us.  The consequences of their powers are of little concern to them – indeed they generally absolve themselves of requirements to adhere to laws they codify.  Mixed into the second group are some of those who learn how to employ baser, defined hatreds in order to gain and retain their cynical powers.  Now it’s not simple lies and thievery, it is society-threatening.

And here we are.  Conservatives will point out that the left, constantly riding the “racist” bull, are using black hatred for white supremacists to enhance leftist political power, when it is the left that actually hates blacks by cynically trapping and consigning them to an artificial welfare life.  Blacks, themselves, hate what has happened to them, as they should, but careful education has taught them that it is conservatives who have done this to them.  And on the cycle of hatred goes, while fattened liberals live in mansions, sometimes not even in the districts they “represent.”

There are conservative haters, some of whom actually “hate” black or brown people.  Those are a very tiny minority.  Careful education and media manipulation teaches blacks that these few represent all conservatives.  This is easily refuted, but that is never taught. If one simply sets aside personal concerns temporarily and contemplates the question: “What element of society is primarily responsible for social and governmental failure?”

The likely answer will be “conservatives” or, at the very least, “Republicans,” the two far from synonymous.  At that point, the thoughtful and caring citizen has to wonder if that is a) possible; and b) how he or she came to think so.

Real conservatives, here defined as constitutionalists and others who believe in free enterprise and personal responsibility, are not haters… of anyone.  Mostly they, we, are disappointed that people of color aren’t doing better, on average, particularly with so much evidence of people variously brown in skin color, becoming champions of every field and discipline.  Clearly, or so it seems to us, there is no genetic reason for social failure.  It is based on beliefs, including carefully nurtured hatreds.

The actions that stem from hatred have no claim on forgiveness – from anyone.  The same is true for white-skinned people only more so, since they have no minority status to overcome along the way to happiness.  We have a left-induced tendency to forgive the hatreds of blacks, while trumpeting and often imputing those of whites.  Both destroy society and are to be condemned.  They are not to be exploited, God forbid.  But they are, to our shame… Black and White.

National Conversation

The divisions between parties and people appear wider now than at few other times in our nation’s history.  Well, what about the Civil War, you are screaming, those divisions cost us so much blood and treasure and hatred?  Surely nothing compares to that!  Besides, that was about SLAVERY, you privileged white hater, and nothing could ever compare to that… so there.

Well, I am duly chagrined for suggesting otherwise, and soundly disreputed for any other opinions or ideas I might ever deign to utter.  Or type.  Of course, it is not I who equates every movement to undercut Judeo-Christian morality and more, with the struggle for “racial equality.”  There are fools and worse, allied with those with hate-filled desires to rip apart America and her premises, who not only are able to deny that Jews have been treated even worse than so-called African-Americans, and that the “Holocaust” never happened, but who are tickled to prosecute the piece-meal holocaust that’s happening now.

Where so-called Christians supposedly caused all prior offenses against human rights, the new holocaust(s) are the work of so-called Muslims and their fellow-travelers who, while decrying beheadings and the like, and any other desecration of civilized life, actually wish the so-called Muslims success in the tearing down of Israel and, better, the United States.  After all, there are still people able to make decent lives in “the West” who don’t embrace so-called trans-genderism, and that is equivalent to all oppressions that have gone before!

Why, there are those who aren’t fully on board with the new homosexualities, anti-sexualities, a-sexualities and parentless child-rearing.  Imagine.  Their oppressions are every bit as oppressive as the inhumanity of slavery.  We’re all down for the struggle, my brothers.

Blacks have a solid point.  Whites of many shades historically dominated blacks with greater technologies, and enslaved them.  That’s historic fact.  But it’s not the only historic fact, a truth that many modern blacks are unable to consider.  It is also true that the United States is the only society where people with brown, black and somewhat-black skin coloration, some of whom are actually related to black people who were slaves, are able to disrupt the daily lives and economics of millions of their fellow citizens on the basis of slavery having been a rotten thing for our ancestors to have done to their ancestors, some of them.

It is the only nation where currently angry blacks are mad at currently confused whites about rotten slavery that is no longer practiced, lo these 160 years.

Blacks do not agitate against slavery in England despite it having been the English who introduced the slave trade to the colonies, except for the French slaves in the Carribbean, and the Portuguese and Spanish slaves also brought to – and taken from – the new world.

There is virtually no mention of American blacks’ hatred for blacks in Africa who practiced slavery, themselves, as part of the spoils of conquest, and who sold people into the holds of slave ships and who have taken more advantage – murderously so – of other blacks to this very day.  The struggle stops at the water’s edge.

Only the United States deserves this wrath and militant demands for reparations.  Modern people who practice slavery in other parts of the world are of no concern to modern so-called African-Americans who build careers out of hating modern whites… in the United States.

Interestingly, “African-Americans” who come to “America” on their own tend to integrate and succeed economically without much concern about the rottenness of slavery two centuries removed.  Non-Blacks from Africa may not call themselves African-American however.

So, we have a conundrum.  The United States has undertaken to right the wrongs of history more than any other nation or society – a thousand times more.  The United States has fought to make opportunities available to every race and class more than any other nation or society, and paid mightily of its treasure to ease the plights of the poor, homeless and hungry – a thousand times more than any nation in history.  Yet, black-on-white hatred is increasing… here.

There are reasons for this, and facts, I’m sure.  Thousands and thousands of facts, and reasons, and motivations and political gains, about which I have many opinions.  But there will be no “national conversation” on race relations until someone or lots of someones can answer the question: why is this agitation occurring HERE, and nowhere else?

RACE? AGAIN?

Prudence says that America needs some fresh thinking about race.  Anthropologists can “describe” some 300 “races” using markers like blood-type concentrations, in a process that tries to use physiology to delineate human “types” or races.  It is largely a waste of time for most people since it cannot relate social activities, social actions, with physiological differences.

RACE is a construct for both safety and control within societies.. except, lately, a construct for hatred.  The most visual markers are employed – like skin, facial distinctions, hair, eye-color… virtually meaningless attributes in terms of how people ACT, but crucial when differing groups come together.  No training or understanding is required to distinguish physiognomy.  That is a matter of belief.

Prudence has thought long about the power and dangers of belief.  It can exist and guide the actions of millions of people without paying any heed to reality… to truth.  Just as faith is the engine for maintaining religious traditions, there are many other belief structures to which individuals can adhere that effectively replace reality with constructed, believed paths of action that guide whole lifetimes.  Belief can be so self-fulfilling that it becomes its own evidence of “truth.”  It’s commonplace.

Less common is honesty.  An honest person can be taught the error of his or her beliefs and it is this very effect that has held the United States together through slavery, Manifest Destiny, the Civil War, destruction of Native American culture, waves of immigration and the Great Depression.  Beliefs have changed, honing more closely to reality little by little… until the 1960’s.

It was under the aegis of “The Great Society” that we changed the role of government to one of, essentially, social engineering – unionized social services that Lyndon Johnson and other hubris-laden socialists believed could change the nature of both rich and poor people for the better.  Change has certainly happened.

Blacks, who were making sure, but uneven progress in the 1950’s, have regressed in the inner cities where federal and state policies have re-enslaved them for 3 generations.  Why such conditions continue, even as the drug trade flourishes in that population, seems a great mystery to progressives.  It must be the fault of Republicans.  Our incoming president has mentioned conditions in the inner cities, but no policy changes have been described.

It’s all a matter of belief.  Progressives have long held the belief that the most generous “safety-net” possible, especially now that welfare has been federalized, will cause people WE have taught to be irresponsible for themselves, to become responsible, self-sufficient citizens.  We have placed them in a system where the only way to “get a raise,” requires careful cheating – things like getting two EBT cards or SNAP allowances beyond one’s entitlement.  Or, to sell some drugs, perhaps.  There should be no surprise that blacks hate whites.  They believe that whites have kept them from opportunity, that we discriminate in a thousand ways, that we are racists and on and on.  Some of it is true.  But the policies that have done so are not those of most whites, who feel guilty about black’s condition, and who act a little nutty because of their guilt; they are the policies of progressives who believe socialism will make better humans than God has… despite all reality to the contrary.

One might infer that Prudence indicates that progressives may not be truly honest, else they could learn the error of their beliefs, lo these past 50 years.

ARE WE DONE HERE?

riot-3If you are rescuing a family, maybe several families from, say, a flood, and to do so you are wading through the flood waters, pulling the boat carrying those you are rescuing (you also brought warm food, hot chocolate and dry clothes for everyone), should the people in the boat be whipping you to get the rescue done more quickly?

I can hear sensible people saying “No, how could they?” But, when the process is not taking place in a boat but in our income-redistributing welfare morass, then the rescued can vote their rescuers into greater hustle. Suggesting that they should not be voting is seen as extreme cruelty. Hmmnnh.

Ostensibly smart professors are attempting to “teach” student snowflakes about “white privilege.” Apparently, in their history-debasing opinions, being white means being guilty of… well, everything. Surely there cannot be any differences in productivity, inventiveness or innovation between peoples, groups, races, tribes or religions – those differences that we white people are supposed to celebrate… those differences? When seen in a macro view, “white privilege” is the politically (corrupt) correct way to undermine Judeo-Christian heritage, ethics, beliefs and the enlightened philosophies that underpin the United States.

Law originated among small populations based on self-interest of protecting oneself and one’s family. That meant protecting food sources, safe shelter, wives and children. Very soon it became clear that groups (tribes) of families were a source of safety and better food security. Agreements were made as to what land “belonged” to one group and where the boundaries were. The “laws” between groups or tribes were laws only because of the ability to enforce them.

Within groups natural differences manifested. Some worked harder or smarter than others. Some cheated or stole; some sacrificed to help others; some were better boundary protectors; some were better hunters; some, better gatherers. Economics developed not by theory, but practicality.

“Treaties” were negotiated with other tribes, bound in fact by military power. Wars were prosecuted over various encroachments including of land, of resources and even of women. Slavery of the defeated generally resulted. Still, there was progress, spurred by conflict and deprivation… and shared beliefs, ethics and morals. Groups comprised of members who shared concepts of “right” and “wrong” were stronger. Inevitably, rebellion against those concepts resulted in punishment, death or banishment.

With closer-knit communities of central buildings and surrounding farm or grazing lands, ever more rules of behavior were required and codified. Outside of each “city,” however, military strength made the “laws.” Slavery was common, especially of subjugated peoples, and of them, especially of those who had resisted subjugation the most or who had attacked the victors. Competing religions accentuated conflict and subjugation.

Still, economics spurred trade over greater and greater distances – economics spurred by envy and deprivation. Some tribes or, whole kingdoms, were better at producing certain goods. They may have had the good fortune of possessing lands with suitable ores, or which grew coveted spices or which had good salt. Trade and economics had their own rules and ethics. Soon there were contracts.

Two areas of Earth saw great invention and innovation: China, basically, and Europe from south to north. One, the far East, remained insular and severely hierarchical; the other, the “West,” based in small, competing nations, fought through serfdom and developed democracy, economic freedom and a remarkable urge to explore and colonize. From competition came freedom and the great sciences and mental explorations.

It is all rooted in the sweep of Judeo-Christian philosophy – the heritage the “West” is squandering, undermining and cheapening in a headlong rush to out-think God. Sadly, our federal government – and many states’ governments – have devised new “rights” and sanctions that reach directly to from-the-pulpit homilies and even scriptural readings. This in the one nation founded upon religious freedom.

America was founded by, in effect, Hebrews! That is, as the tribes of Israel and Judah were scattered by the Egyptians, Assyrians and Babylonians, ultimately migrating into Europe and forming the royal houses of virtually every nation there, out of those nations came very strong people who sacrificed everything to get to the “New Jerusalem.” We are fools to deny the history of, well… white, Judeo-Christian peoples.

Is our success due to the “choosing” of the Israelites? Let’s leave that to religious scholars and recognize what may be proven: that Judeo-Christian mores include intellectual strength and education, strong moral strictures… and sacrifice – for family, for others, for the future. This is not in defense of churches, but of history. The economics derived from that belief-structure produced the greatest personal freedoms, scientific advancement and standards of living. Now we are running away from it, scorching the Earth as we go.

Is the new hatred of whites, Jews and Christians most particularly, rational? We are not perfect and do not claim to be. Neither are those who would destroy us. Will our haters willingly destroy this nation in order to make whites pay a price for imperfection?

Evidently.

Black Lives DO Matter

blmblogPrudence and I were at our Book Club the other night – it was at one of the member’s homes in a room full of smart people. We felt a little out of place. Good food, though.

Our book this time was titled “From #BlackLivesMatter to Black Liberation” and it’s not an easy read. The professor who advocated for us to read this particular book was unable to make the meeting, so 8 white guys had a discussion. The topic is definitely worth the work.

Author, Keeanga Yamahtta Taylor has done America a service, although its presentation is flawed by numerous non-factual declarations that are merely – and purposely – bumper-sticker- inflammatory. But one can get past them and still learn from the mountain of evidence she has laid before us.

Ladies and gentlemen of the polity, we do have a problem.

However, the book is a little one-sided. Problems faced by, let’s say, unsuccessful blacks, are not being solved in the “system” that America embodies, in Taylor’s (and #BlackLivesMatter’s) view, and that argument is valid. To them, the fact of some excessive force against black suspects and some unjustified killings of blacks by police, are reasons to indict ALL police and, by conflation, ALL of white Americans and, to seal the accusations, ALL of capitalism. To all of that our question is: What is the end-game?

Taylor and #BLM call repeatedly for the end of capitalism. This is somewhat understandable when considered from the standpoint of large numbers of blacks for whom “capitalism” doesn’t seem to work, and worse, is defended by a police-state of brutal, murderous police forces. Well. Given that George Soros and other America-haters provide funding to #BlackLivesMatter chapters, socialism is made credible for dismayed blacks. But, the “soul” of #BLM is dichotomous.

On one hand, and that most publicized, #BLM is fighting to change policing AND to obtain reparations for slavery, Jim Crow and for “institutional” racism of which all whites are (must be) guilty. On the other hand, they seem to be advocating for the dissolution of white America and replacing it with a socialist democracy that will share its wealth with downtrodden blacks. This aspect is not as publicized, as the acquiescence of guilt-ridden whites is essential to #BLM’s political success. Amorphous guilt is working; fear of total loss will not.

Prudence and I are not ready to destroy what does work and which can be made to work much, much better. Unfortunately, and largely thanks to corrupt politics, American capitalism is twisted and encumbered by unbelievable debt, tax games and cronyism, and outright government-sponsored monopolies. The past 8 years of the first “black” president, Mr. Obama, has brought the flaws of politicized capitalism into stark relief. (He is not blessed with a large fraction of “black” genes; his black African roots comprise about 1/8th of his African ancestry, while Arab ancestry fulfills the balance of that “half” of him. His mother was white, of course, denying him the percentage of “blackness” needed to claim African-American as his “race.” Indeed, his Arab ancestors may have been selling blacks into slavery.) While Wall Street revels in a Federal-Reserve-fomented bonanza, black America has slipped even further behind in terms of employment, income, apparent opportunity, and familial net worths. Concentrated neighborhoods of poor blacks, mostly a burden of large cities, but not exclusively so, became, again, tinderboxes of hopeless dissatisfaction and outright hatred of “white privilege,” which most evidently exists given the (near) total absence of “black privilege.”

Colleges and even grade schools have tried to inculcate the guilt-laden concept of “white privilege” in white students. Only if whites can be made to regret their apparent membership in a national bloc of proto-slave-owners, can the plight of blacks continue to be purveyed as the result of nationwide group suppression. Like all politics based on anti-capitalism… that is, on the left, these views deny the sovereignty, power and responsibility of individuals.

Most white individuals have nothing to do with making or keeping blacks poor, although if they (we) were more sensitive to the distant or unseen conditions in black ghettos, perhaps we would demand better government and governance. Several problems pervade American politics and its resulting economics.

First, politics has become organized theft. A majority of us have agreed to take part in and benefit from the thievery. Despite 19th century warnings, we figured out not only how to vote ourselves money from the public treasury, but how to vote ourselves “money” from the future. Our hunger for this “free” wealth has resulted in $20 Trillion of debt and a worldwide distrust of American economics. Americans themselves are happy to suspend disbelief so long as “benefits” or “entitlements” keep appearing in their bank accounts and on their “EBT” welfare cards.

As debt has grown, periodic increases in the “debt ceiling” have been voted by Congress primarily to buy votes from beneficiary groups, including poor blacks on various forms of welfare. Welfare, despite shifts in programs, called “cuts” has grown fairly steadily since the federalization of it in the 1960’s. Welfare doesn’t make blacks happy or grateful. For white politicians (maybe for all colors of politicians) welfare is the only tool they can wield to keep blacks contained and not too restive in their ghettos. It’s a system we have tolerated/imposed for 50 years, and it deserves some questioning, like, “Who benefits from the welfare-hopelessness cycle?”

The socially blind might say that blacks do. After all, look at all the money “we’ve” transferred to them from the public treasury. More cynical types might say that over time, only the politicians benefit. Keeping blacks somewhat nurtured and somewhat angry means that politicians can commiserate enough at election time to direct their votes toward themselves. Democrats do this in no small part by pointing out to blacks that it is those evil Republicans who have failed to take care of them; indeed, it is Republicans who prevent caring Democrats from enacting the programs that will transfer enough money and other support to finally make for “level playing fields.” What bastards they must be.

Next is drugs and crime. The U. S. is not really serious about cleaning society of drugs and, if one were cynical about this, too, he or she might observe that “drugs” and brown skin tend to concentrate in the same parts of cities. Despite our 50-year “war” on drugs, they are more available today than ever. So, the same question pertains: Who benefits from drug crime? And a corollary: Does the ongoing drug economy fulfill a social or political purpose?

Our response has been to “manage” the drug economy and build more prisons. One might be reminded of national treatment of “Injuns” and “redskins.” Their susceptibility to alcohol didn’t bother us, it fulfilled a prejudice. In a sad, sick way, the fact that blacks (and browns) are affected the most by drugs and related crimes, seems to fit a prejudice, too. Unaffected people see the self-destruction of blacks and their communities as a “natural” outgrowth of weaknesses in black character. Worse, so long as it keeps blacks busy and of limited danger to suburbanites, no ultimate solution to drugs is in the works.

Unfortunately or, perhaps, fortunately, drugs are killing suburban white kids in noticeable numbers, now. Perhaps a real war on drugs will be finally joined. If so, it still won’t be because we are deeply concerned about black lives. All lives matter.

So, despite their odd politics, #BlackLivesMatter has a valid point, but not a true target for its efforts. Rogue police officers and “prejudices” within police departments are certainly a problem, and a wildly public one, lately. Bad practices on the part of police do result in wrongful deaths – some practices/reactions far worse than others. Prejudice among police personnel at every level should be corrected, removed, discussed, stamped-out, brainwashed away and punished – all of those things, maybe more. But, prejudice doesn’t really matter so long as police actions are preserving of life and safety every time it is possible to be so. Actions may be modified by training.

Better training of police officers, however, will do virtually nothing to improve the lives of most blacks. Blacks in the welfare/hopelessness cycle must be taught to believe something different about their lives and possibilities. Neither the Federal government nor any other amoral entity can perform that function. Correcting the spirit of hopeless people is almost impossible. Not killing them accidentally is possible.

So, #BlackLivesMatter has selected a politically advantageous target in the relative handful of cases so destructively publicized as to foment riots and new levels of hatred by blacks and of fear by whites. They have not – and will not – take on the big target of destructive welfare policies, destructive drugs, destructive fatherlessness, destructive life choices and all the rest of it. Right now, they can’t; neither, politically, can, or will, anyone else.

At some point, if #BlackLivesMatter, and others who claim deep concern about the future of black lives, can come to a more honest understanding of politics and economics, perhaps a totally different approach to black society’s dysfunctions will manifest. It must be free of political profit, for one thing, and based on a moral, marriage-based code. All the social license and all the foolish names we concoct for it, cannot replace stable families with two parents. Prudence says that some adults have to step forward… adults who can lead the children the rest of the way to a drug-free, non-communist promised land.