Thinking on US race-wars . . .

The following is taken from a comment that was posted on a Yahoo! News article that tried to explore the Constitutionality of Obama’s unilateral actions on immigration law.  I don’t necessarily agree with it, but thought it was an interesting point-of-view to consider. – V

———————————————————————-

For almost 150 years the United States has been conducting an interesting experiment. The subjects of the experiment: black people and working-class whites.

The hypothesis to be tested: Can a people taken from the jungles of Africa and forced into slavery be fully integrated as citizens in a majority white population?

The whites were descendants of European societies who had created several majestic civilizations. The former slaves had been tribal peoples with no written language and virtually no intellectual achievements. Acting on a policy that was not fair to either group, the government released newly freed black people into a white society that saw them as inferiors. America has struggled with racial discord ever since.

Decade after decade the problems persisted but the experimenters never gave up. They insisted that if they could find the right formula the experiment would work, and concocted program after program to get the result they wanted. They created the Freedman’s Bureau, passed civil rights laws, tried to build the Great Society, declared War on Poverty, ordered race preferences, built housing projects, and tried midnight basketball.

Their new laws intruded into people’s lives in ways that would have been otherwise unthinkable. They called in National Guard troops to enforce school integration. They outlawed freedom of association. Over the protests of parents, they put white children on buses and sent them to black schools and vice versa. They tried with money, special programs, relaxed standards, and endless hand-wringing to close the “achievement gap.” To keep white backlash in check they began punishing public and even private statements on race. They hung up Orwellian public banners that commanded whites to “Celebrate Diversity!” and “Say No To Racism.” Nothing was off limits if it might salvage the experiment.

Some thought that what W.E.B. Du Bois called the Talented Tenth would lead the way for black people. A group of elite, educated blacks would knock down doors of opportunity and show the world what blacks were capable of. There is a Talented Tenth. They are the black Americans who have become entrepreneurs, lawyers, doctors and scientists. But ten percent is not enough. For the experiment to work, the ten percent has to be followed by a critical mass of people who can hold middle-class jobs and promote social stability. That is what is missing.

Through the years, too many black people continue to show an inability to function and prosper in a culture unsuited to them. Detroit is bankrupt, the south side of Chicago is a war zone, and majority-black cities all over America are beset by degeneracy and violence. And blacks never take responsibility for their failures. Instead, they lash out in anger and resentment.

Across the generations and across the country, (as we have seen in Detroit, Watts, Newark, Los Angeles, Cincinnati, and now Ferguson) rioting and looting are just one racial incident away. The white elite would tell us that this doesn’t mean the experiment has failed. We just have to try harder. We need more money, more time, more understanding, more programs, more opportunities.

But nothing changes no matter how much money is spent, no matter how many laws are passed, no matter how many black geniuses are portrayed on TV, and no matter who is president. Some argue it’s a problem of “culture,” as if culture creates people’s behavior instead of the other way around. Others blame “white privilege.”

But since 1965, when the elites opened America’s doors to the Third World, immigrants from Asia and India–people who are not white, not rich, and not “connected”–have quietly succeeded. While the children of these people are winning spelling bees and getting top scores on the SAT, black “youths” are committing half the country’s violent crime–crime, which includes viciously punching random white people on the street for the thrill of it, that has nothing to do with poverty.

The experiment has failed. Not because of culture, or white privilege, or racism. The fundamental problem is that white people and black people are different. They differ intellectually and temperamentally. These differences result in permanent social incompatibility.

Our rulers don’t seem to understand just how tired their white subjects are with this experiment. They don’t understand that white people aren’t out to get black people; they are just exhausted with them. They are exhausted by the social pathologies, the violence, the endless complaints, the blind racial solidarity, the bottomless pit of grievances, the excuses, and the reflexive animosity.

The elites explain everything with “racism,” and refuse to believe that white frustration could soon reach the boiling point

Stop the Omnibus, I want to get off . . .

You may possibly know that I have active blogs on more than one web site.  One of the friends I’ve chatted with since I first started blogging years ago posted a blog yesterday that bears sharing.  It’s title is the same as this blog’s.

His blog is here:

http://www.emagill.com/rants/eblog309-stop-the-omnibus.html

Justice or legal ?

Goddess_of_justiceThe United States was, from the very beginning, an experiment.  So many facets of it’s creation were unique to world experience that nobody had ever seen the like of this before.  But the crowning achievement was the Constitution, and the fact that this was to be a nation governed by laws, not emotions or the whimsy of the rulers.  There would be clearly defined parameters so everyone would know what was acceptable and what was not, and everyone would have to face those parameters as equals.

It worked great – at first.  Between 1780 and 1840 (just 60 years!) we went from being a “mom and pop start-up” to being one of the dominant world powers.  Our system isn’t without problems, though, and a dream I recently had highlights what is perhaps the biggest one.

The dream was – well, calling it bad would be like calling the US Government “a bit off”.  In the dream, it was like I was an invisible being, wandering around observing the actions of others – and the others were mostly teenaged-to-twentysomethings, who were traveling around in gangs killing, looting, and generally living a lawless life.  They had no respect for anything or anyone but each other.  There was a serious tone of despair to the whole scene.

This may be easily dismissed as “it was just a dream” or any of the “dreams are meaningless” variations.  But I have come to believe that dreams are the subconscious mind’s effort to resolve problems we encounter in our waking, normal, lives.  And if you look beneath the surface, this dream is confronting a real humdinger.

You see, this dream tells the story of the natural result of having a “nation of laws” where the laws are divorced from the notion of justice.  Justice is the brutality of law tempered by wisdom and mercy.  It is hope that we can all become better than what we have been.  When courts, even the SCOTUS, fall into the trap of enforcing the letter of the law, justice dies.  We’re seeing the early warning signs of this now, with huge international corporations getting the government to pass laws that make 16 year-old kids wanted felons for sharing music with their friends, or single mothers with 2 jobs become criminals for using a back-up program to preserve the DVDs they spent the precious little disposable cash in their budget on. There is no compassion, no justice, to such laws.

Oh, and as an aside, I would dearly love to see someone mount a court challenge to the bizarre notion that anyone can voluntarily surrender “inalienable, inherent, natural rights” by agreeing to the fine-print in an EULA (End User Licensing Agreement).

I think our nation’s Founding Fathers knew this might happen, though, because they originally included rules that made corporations very hard to create, and even harder to maintain.  Each corporation first had to pass a “public service” test – you couldn’t just form a corporation for the sake of selling your restaurant some time off in the future.  No, it took something big, like making the Erie Canal, to form a corporation.  Which naturally led to the second condition – the corporation, once formed, was only licensed to exist for a maximum of 5 years (rare extensions were allowed, such as the aforementioned Erie Canal project).  Corporations had no “personhood” – no rights, no property ownership.  This kept them from amassing the powers they flex so easily today.

YOUR DYSFUNCTIONAL AND OUT-OF-BALANCE GOVERNMENT

The United States needs a ballot initiative pushed by grassroots citizens groups to add one more Amendment to the Constitution. We need to allow the possibility of a vote to recall the POTUS if 2/3rds of the Governors of the country call for it. No President should ever feel secure that, once sworn in, he can’t be removed from office before the next election. Oh, and the same amendment should alter Congressional pay – everyone in Congress should be paid by the state that elected them, not the Federal Government. Even a dog knows not to bite the hand that feeds it.

Arlin Report

quote-the-accumulation-of-all-powers-legislative-executive-and-judiciary-in-the-same-hands-whether-james-madison-307954

A system  of checks and balances was built  within the Constitution to protect us against tyranny .

The Executive, the Judicial and the Legislative branches of our United States Government is a checks and balance system, right?   This C & B system really does work, when there are responsible people executing the responsibilities and duties of each branch.   John Adams said, “Only by balancing each against the other two could freedom be preserved.”.

The best example of a dysfunctional government is the one we have today.   The Legislative and Executive Branches are good at pointing the finger and giving the middle one to the other, but take little action.   When one is in violation of the Constitution and our laws and the other branches do not respond accordingly, holding the other accountable, then both or possibly all three are in violation, thumbing their noses at the…

View original post 375 more words

Obama: A Country Without Rule of Law ‘Will Not Succeed’

This is rich, coming from a man who picks and chooses what laws to follow and thinks he can change them at will. Now we know why he’s so completely adamant about ignoring all the laws that already existed when he gained the Oval Office – he wants to destroy the USA.

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot

During a town hall meeting at a summit with the Washington Fellowship for Young African Leaders, President Obama explained to a young African student that to succeed, a burgeoning country required a system of laws.

He explained:

Regardless of the resources a country possesses, regardless of how talented the people are, if you do not have a basic system of rule of law, of respect for civil rights and human rights, if you do not give people a credible, legitimate way to work through the political process to express their aspirations, if you don’t respect basic freedom of speech and freedom of assembly … it is very rare for a country to succeed.

Obama made his remarks as critics have denounced his “lawlessness,” particularly through his 2012 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) order, his decision to trade five Taliban detainees at Guantanamo Bay for Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, and his…

View original post 96 more words