M Winther
2015-06-20 10:37:36 UTC
The recent Charlestown church massacre of black people, perpetrated by a
white male, brings up the race question again. What is the nature of
this obnoxious evil? First, let's look at the data. This is FBI:s
homicide statistics for 2013 (http://tinyurl.com/p639hq8 ).
Number of homicides with white victim and black offender: 409.
Number of homicides with black victim and white offender: 189.
The black percentage of the population is approximately 13%.
The white percentage of the population is approximately 78%.
Thus, Blacks are accountable for 68.4% of black-white interracial
homicides despite being only 13% of the population. With this data we
don't need the exact population number in the U.S. to calculate the
likelihood to commit interracial homicide, because we can simplify and
say that there are 13 black persons and 78 white persons living in the
"mini-USA" where the homicide relation remains the same. Thus, 13 black
people commit 409 interracial homicides and 78 white people commit 189
interracial homicides. So in the mini-USA Blacks commit 31.5 interracial
homicides per person whereas Whites commit 2.4 interracial homicides per
person. Thus we get the relation, which is valid for USA today: a black
person is 13 times(!) more likely to commit interracial homicide than a
white person.
The over-representation of Blacks in interracial homicide is truly
daunting. Today's intellectuals have a solution to this, however.
Typically, we must neutralize hatred by elevating forgiveness as ideal
and stop seeing people as "other". An obvious conclusion is that black
people, especially, should stop thinking in terms of out-group and
in-group. As long as Blacks remain defensive about their group
affiliation they will continue killing white people.
It is the formulation of an intellectual seated in an ivory tower,
safely removed from reality. The truth in the matter is that homicide is
*largely* an effect of innate aggression which the criminal personality
is unable to control. It has its roots in the archaic psyche of man.
Central to archaic man is the theme of emancipation of the ego from the
serfdom under the unconscious. In Fiona Lloyd-Davies documentary,
Congolese soldiers say: "When we rape, we feel free". Killing and raping
remain the most prominent rituals whereby temporary ego emancipation is
achieved. That's why, in historical pagan societies, the murderous
ritual was institutionalized as the blood sacrifice. But it remains
equally thematic today, in the way Boko Haram and IS are attacking
civilian villagers in a rampage of rape and murder.
When analysing the interracial murder statistics in the U.S., we must
primarily understand it as expressions of archaic man, and not as
airy-fairy sociological effects of group segregation. In fact, if Blacks
and Whites had lived more isolated from each other, then the interracial
crime statistics would abate drastically. The notion that a person prone
to murder shall become a decent and loving person just by adopting the
notion of racial inclusivity is ludicrous. In fact, disidentification
from white man is wholesome for black people, and vice versa, because
individuation requires that one remains true to one's own nature.
Otherwise disidentification risks taking a concrete expression in the
form of hatred and murder. This is evident from the fact that different
ethnicities and cultures are wholly capable of respecting each other as
long as they live remote from one another. But when they mix, social
trust is drastically reduced. This has been verified by recent research
at the universities of Copenhagen and Aarhus, according to which
"interethnic exposure underlies the negative relationship between ethnic
diversity in residential contexts and social trust."
(http://asr.sagepub.com/content/80/3/550 ).
In Sweden the phenomenon of "white flight" is very pronounced. When
non-European immigrants exceed 4% in a housing area, the Swedes start to
move out, according to a dissertation (2015) by Emma Neuman at the Linné
university, Sweden (http://tinyurl.com/ojqhnpo ). Had people been
allowed to acknowledge differences, however, the problem would be less
pronounced. Due to the effects of political correct propaganda racial
awareness is today unconscious. Thus, it becomes infected with archaic
fear and mistrust.
Race is all about social status. It doesn't matter that most white
people today reject the notion of race, because they act differently.
Evidently, when many black people move into a white housing area, it
gives rise to the phenomenon of "white flight". Blacks have, on average,
lower social status than Whites. What contributes to their lower status
is that they are less successful in society. In USA, 1 in 3 black males
will go to prison in their lifetime (http://tinyurl.com/nscux8j ). In
Sweden, the majority of the black community is unemployed. Such social
differences give rise to "racial awareness", whether or not
intellectuals produce articles about the irrelevance of pigmentation.
This is compounded by historical facts, i.e., that white civilization
thoroughly eclipses black African civilisation.
So race exists *socially*, regardless of the many intellectual evasions.
Arguably, this intellectual tendency of sweeping racial differences
under the carpet is counter-productive. If we lack a conscious concept
of differences, it will instead manifest unconsciously. The average
person will unthinkingly follow his instincts and avoid people who are
unconsciously perceived as different. It will only aggravate
segregation. On the other hand, if there is a conscious awareness of
racial differences, then personality remains in control of his
reactions:
"I am aware of the statistical facts about racial differences, which do
not speak in favour of Blacks, but I am going to take this man into my
employ anyway, because I am an upstanding citizen who looks to the
individual rather than racial belonging."
Otherwise, if the employer in this example had lacked a conscious
awareness of racial difference, following the political correct notion,
then he would unconsciously place the application at the bottom of the
pile. He would fall prey to the *unconscious* awareness of racial
differences, which manifests surreptitiously as negative feeling.
In my view, it would have been better if we reverted to the olden ways
of racial disidentification and segregation. Although this seems
oppressive and lacking in sympathy, there is no other alternative than
to accept that human beings partake of "dark nature", and that there is
no way out of this predicament. We have to accept that "social status"
is what counts (regardless of what people say) and that life on this
earth includes aggression and murder. The idea that we can remove dark
nature by adopting a forgiving sentiment in an ethnically mixed
environment is ludicrous. It's like saying that we should be able to
stop the greenhouse effect by composting kitchen refuse. Let's get real
and admit that evil is here to stay.
M. Winther
--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ***@netfront.net ---
white male, brings up the race question again. What is the nature of
this obnoxious evil? First, let's look at the data. This is FBI:s
homicide statistics for 2013 (http://tinyurl.com/p639hq8 ).
Number of homicides with white victim and black offender: 409.
Number of homicides with black victim and white offender: 189.
The black percentage of the population is approximately 13%.
The white percentage of the population is approximately 78%.
Thus, Blacks are accountable for 68.4% of black-white interracial
homicides despite being only 13% of the population. With this data we
don't need the exact population number in the U.S. to calculate the
likelihood to commit interracial homicide, because we can simplify and
say that there are 13 black persons and 78 white persons living in the
"mini-USA" where the homicide relation remains the same. Thus, 13 black
people commit 409 interracial homicides and 78 white people commit 189
interracial homicides. So in the mini-USA Blacks commit 31.5 interracial
homicides per person whereas Whites commit 2.4 interracial homicides per
person. Thus we get the relation, which is valid for USA today: a black
person is 13 times(!) more likely to commit interracial homicide than a
white person.
The over-representation of Blacks in interracial homicide is truly
daunting. Today's intellectuals have a solution to this, however.
Typically, we must neutralize hatred by elevating forgiveness as ideal
and stop seeing people as "other". An obvious conclusion is that black
people, especially, should stop thinking in terms of out-group and
in-group. As long as Blacks remain defensive about their group
affiliation they will continue killing white people.
It is the formulation of an intellectual seated in an ivory tower,
safely removed from reality. The truth in the matter is that homicide is
*largely* an effect of innate aggression which the criminal personality
is unable to control. It has its roots in the archaic psyche of man.
Central to archaic man is the theme of emancipation of the ego from the
serfdom under the unconscious. In Fiona Lloyd-Davies documentary,
Congolese soldiers say: "When we rape, we feel free". Killing and raping
remain the most prominent rituals whereby temporary ego emancipation is
achieved. That's why, in historical pagan societies, the murderous
ritual was institutionalized as the blood sacrifice. But it remains
equally thematic today, in the way Boko Haram and IS are attacking
civilian villagers in a rampage of rape and murder.
When analysing the interracial murder statistics in the U.S., we must
primarily understand it as expressions of archaic man, and not as
airy-fairy sociological effects of group segregation. In fact, if Blacks
and Whites had lived more isolated from each other, then the interracial
crime statistics would abate drastically. The notion that a person prone
to murder shall become a decent and loving person just by adopting the
notion of racial inclusivity is ludicrous. In fact, disidentification
from white man is wholesome for black people, and vice versa, because
individuation requires that one remains true to one's own nature.
Otherwise disidentification risks taking a concrete expression in the
form of hatred and murder. This is evident from the fact that different
ethnicities and cultures are wholly capable of respecting each other as
long as they live remote from one another. But when they mix, social
trust is drastically reduced. This has been verified by recent research
at the universities of Copenhagen and Aarhus, according to which
"interethnic exposure underlies the negative relationship between ethnic
diversity in residential contexts and social trust."
(http://asr.sagepub.com/content/80/3/550 ).
In Sweden the phenomenon of "white flight" is very pronounced. When
non-European immigrants exceed 4% in a housing area, the Swedes start to
move out, according to a dissertation (2015) by Emma Neuman at the Linné
university, Sweden (http://tinyurl.com/ojqhnpo ). Had people been
allowed to acknowledge differences, however, the problem would be less
pronounced. Due to the effects of political correct propaganda racial
awareness is today unconscious. Thus, it becomes infected with archaic
fear and mistrust.
Race is all about social status. It doesn't matter that most white
people today reject the notion of race, because they act differently.
Evidently, when many black people move into a white housing area, it
gives rise to the phenomenon of "white flight". Blacks have, on average,
lower social status than Whites. What contributes to their lower status
is that they are less successful in society. In USA, 1 in 3 black males
will go to prison in their lifetime (http://tinyurl.com/nscux8j ). In
Sweden, the majority of the black community is unemployed. Such social
differences give rise to "racial awareness", whether or not
intellectuals produce articles about the irrelevance of pigmentation.
This is compounded by historical facts, i.e., that white civilization
thoroughly eclipses black African civilisation.
So race exists *socially*, regardless of the many intellectual evasions.
Arguably, this intellectual tendency of sweeping racial differences
under the carpet is counter-productive. If we lack a conscious concept
of differences, it will instead manifest unconsciously. The average
person will unthinkingly follow his instincts and avoid people who are
unconsciously perceived as different. It will only aggravate
segregation. On the other hand, if there is a conscious awareness of
racial differences, then personality remains in control of his
reactions:
"I am aware of the statistical facts about racial differences, which do
not speak in favour of Blacks, but I am going to take this man into my
employ anyway, because I am an upstanding citizen who looks to the
individual rather than racial belonging."
Otherwise, if the employer in this example had lacked a conscious
awareness of racial difference, following the political correct notion,
then he would unconsciously place the application at the bottom of the
pile. He would fall prey to the *unconscious* awareness of racial
differences, which manifests surreptitiously as negative feeling.
In my view, it would have been better if we reverted to the olden ways
of racial disidentification and segregation. Although this seems
oppressive and lacking in sympathy, there is no other alternative than
to accept that human beings partake of "dark nature", and that there is
no way out of this predicament. We have to accept that "social status"
is what counts (regardless of what people say) and that life on this
earth includes aggression and murder. The idea that we can remove dark
nature by adopting a forgiving sentiment in an ethnically mixed
environment is ludicrous. It's like saying that we should be able to
stop the greenhouse effect by composting kitchen refuse. Let's get real
and admit that evil is here to stay.
M. Winther
--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ***@netfront.net ---