ALAN writes:

 A Progress Report from St. Louis

December, 2014:  Black female, 16, shot and killed by black thug, 21, two blocks from the Catholic high school that I attended in 1964.

December, 2014:  Black thug smashes windows at “Nu Fashion Beauty” store to steal “hair extensions”.  This was a repeat performance:  One day in 2006, the two doors and large glass windows at that store were completely boarded up.

This is called “breaking down barriers,” a cultural trend vigorously promoted by Liberals, Progressives, Anarchists, Feminists, Do-Gooders, and the Socialists and Communists who call themselves “Catholics.” The point of “breaking down barriers” is to get what you want.  Blacks understand this perfectly.  That is why they “break down barriers” in the form of inconvenient windows at “Nu Fashion Beauty” and other beauty supply stores, shoe stores, and electronic entertainment stores throughout St. Louis. It is a new and improved way of shopping.

Quintessential black culture:  A store owned and run by blacks that caters to blacks is targeted for theft repeatedly by blacks.  How does that improve my old neighborhood? I want to know.   

The “Nu Fashion Beauty” store is one block from where parents took their children to enjoy pony rides at Triangle Park in the 1950s-‘60s and one block from a children’s playground at Minnie Wood Park, where residents have worked hard in recent years to improve it and the neighborhood around it.  This is in the “Dutchtown” neighborhood of South St. Louis, which was all-white in the years before “breaking down barriers” was invented.

“Breaking down barriers” is Orwellian code for capitulation to Communism by way of Fabian gradualism.  The Fascist Left is behind all such sloganeering and has been hard at work for decades to break down our resistance to the idea of “breaking down barriers.”

The concept “private property” is a barrier.  Our ability to say “NO” is a barrier to those whose goal is to control us or erase us.  The walls and doors of our homes are barriers to such people, as are the borders of our nation.  That is why there is militant refusal to enforce border and immigration laws.

The ultimate goal of “breaking down barriers” is:  What is yours will become mine – i.e., the obliteration of private property, a goal of the Communist Manifesto.

Acquiescence to the idea of “breaking down barriers” is why Americans today are more receptive than ever to the Socialist propaganda that government can, will, and should solve Americans’ personal, moral, and cultural problems;  why Americans are less likely to resist Socialist projects called “public/private partnerships”;  and why cell phones were marketed as aggressively as they were over the past two decades:  To train Americans to help erase the traditional distinction between what is public and what is private.

Your mind is a “barrier” to those who aim to control you or erase you.  That is why electronic entertainment is marketed aggressively to parents, teachers, and schools:  To anesthetize whatever potential for conceptual thought children might otherwise possess, and thus preclude any resistance they might express to what the Fascist Left has in store for them and for all of us;  and why there are television screens or incessant rock “music” in every public and semi-public place in America today:  To erode the invisible walls (the “barriers”) that sustain your identity and the integrity of your mind over and against the Zeitgeist of pop culture, a culture of filth and deliberately-lowered standards promoted relentlessly by government and large private corporations in corrupt alliance with that government – i.e., to erode whatever capacity you might still have to preserve the sanctity of your mind, to think your own thoughts, and to say “NO” equally firmly to Do-Gooder Nanny Government and to the decadent Zeitgeist of Leftist anti-culture.

January, 2015:  Young black thugs shoot and kill two other young black thugs, in the same block where one of my classmates lived in 1963 and around the corner from a store where a man was shot to death in 2013 by a black thug protecting a woman engaged in stealing cookies.

January, 2015:  Black thug shoots black woman; her body is found in street two blocks from where three blacks were knifed by other blacks one night last summer, and one block from where I lived in 1965 in a tranquil, all-white neighborhood with a grocery store in business for decades at one end of the block and a corner tavern at the other.

February, 2015:  Black student, 16, attacked by group of other black students.  This, in the same high school my mother attended in the 1930s, where there was no such mayhem because all the students and the neighborhood were white.  She may have been targeted because she was an honor roll student, i.e., because she worked and achieved.  If so, this is an example of what Ayn Rand called “hatred of the good for being the good”—i.e., pure, undiluted evil.  Her attackers did not want to take what she has (a mind and talent) but to drag her down to their level of decadence.  Doubtless thousands of similar examples could be provided by other decent black families.

February, 2015:  In mid-afternoon, two black thugs punch and rob 65-year-old white woman outside store in shopping area south of St. Louis to which many thousands of whites have moved in recent years to get away from the blacks in St. Louis.

February, 2015:  In broad daylight, black thug, 23, points gun at two police officers and is shot dead in return.  Sob-sisters and black race agitators lose no time in placing teddy bears at a “memorial” for the thug.  This also is in “Dutchtown,” two blocks from where another black thug shot and killed a United States Marshall in 2011, two blocks from a bank robbed repeatedly by blacks, and two blocks from where a black thug broke into a woman’s apartment in 1999 after she complained about loud music, tied her up, beat her, and then shot her in the head and back, killing her, and one block from the Catholic Church where I was an altar boy half a century ago in another universe

A news photograph showed 21 people standing in that block after the incident; none of them look to be older than 30 and most are black.  A picture like that in that location in 1959 was impossible. All the residents were white, they did not look like Teletubbies, the crime rate was below average for neighborhoods in St. Louis, and 23-year-old white men did not get shot dead because they did not point guns at police officers.  In 1959, Gregorian Chant could be heard in that church.  Today, the “music” of “hip hop” can be heard on the streets around it.

The most evil thing about all these incidents is not that they were perpetrated by black predators; they are simply doing what they do best.  Anyone who expects better from them is an idiot. The most evil thing is the spineless response to such crime and mayhem by feminized white men and do-gooders.  They trip over each other in their determination not to hurt the feelings of the black predators and parasites who have ruined this once-peaceful neighborhood.

Their evil consists in the very conceptual framework in which they have been taught to think and speak about such matters.  With rare exceptions, they swallow the premises and vocabulary approved for them by the Fascist Left.  (I use the term “the Fascist Left” in the same sense as Paul Johnson used it in his 1977 book Enemies of Society.)

“The neighborhood looks better than it ever has,” a restaurant owner said in 2013 about the area in which the incidents recounted above were perpetrated.

Observe the modern mind absorbed in concretes. “It looks better than ever,” he chirped in response to a PC reporter’s attempt to whitewash the neighborhood’s descent.  Such people point to new sidewalks and new housing and new trees as proof the neighborhood is “coming back.” I submit that this is willful blindness or learned stupidity or both.

The proper question regarding such a neighborhood is not how it looks but how it is. What about its moral fabric?  An iron moral code is what made Dutchtown clean and safe in the 1950s, a code of conduct understood and shared by all its residents, the element carefully evaded by people today who can imagine only what they can see.  They cannot see beyond what is “new.” They are dazzled by the “now” and oblivious to what was there even within living memory. They are blind to what is long-established and worth defending and preserving or restoring, not because it is old but because it is valid and proper. Instead of restoring that iron moral code, feminized white men now agree to place iron bars on their homes and businesses where none were needed in the 1950s.

This is contemptible cowardice. It is proof of moral rot.

But even on the basis only of concretes, that restaurant owner speaks nonsense. His restaurant stands within walking distance from the mayhem described above and on a street where, during a walk last November, I counted another restaurant closed, a corner service station vacant, one storefront boarded-up, another vacant, and a building left vacant when the company that had occupied it for many years moved out of St. Louis.  A corner house three blocks away is a model of decay, standing vacant and with its windows boarded-up for the last ten years.  A public high school down the street was closed nine years ago and stands today like a giant tombstone.  Further down the street is the building of a Christian Protestant Church that was closed and is now a mosque, and a vacant Baptist Church building with all its ground-level windows boarded-up, an ugly sight no one living there in 1965 ever saw or could have imagined.

He says what he knows is not true in an attempt to attract more customers to his restaurant in a neighborhood in deep decay. It is a fine restaurant. My mother and I stopped there many times in the 1960s-‘70s.  It was built by Germans in a neighborhood that was predominantly German a hundred years ago. This is how it was then:

         “South St. Louis provided a ‘way of life’ in neighborhoods that were orderly, clean, and pleasant.  The residents were a hard-working generation and their houses represented an investment and a source of pride.  Neighbors were judged by how well they maintained their homes and yards.  Most families were of German origin and they were intent on preserving the unity of the family.  …There was a starchy quality, modesty prevailed, and brashness was resented.  Pride was paramount and it was reflected in family, home and the neighborhood.  Residents worked in their gardens, painted regularly, scrubbed the stone steps and even cleaned the sidewalks, alleys, and streets.  …They strove for self-improvement, independence, savings, home ownership, and the privacy of family life.

        “…These were the qualities that gave South St. Louis neighborhoods their special character and distinguished the area.  Outsiders and residents alike regarded South St. Louis as a conservative community.

         “…Front, side, and backyards were well kept and windows were spotless and bright.  Neighborhoods were safe, stable, clean and attractive…”

       [ Malcolm C. Drummond and Walter L. Eschbach, Down By The Gravois: The Photography of Richard Gruss.  South St. Louis, 1900 Through the 1920s, Harland Bartholomew and Associates, 1976, pages 31, 45 ]

It was still that way in the 1950s when that neighborhood was not “inclusive”.  When I was a boy, I never heard that word. No one in my family or among our acquaintances could ever have been stupid enough to imagine such a word had any sensible meaning. After I grew up, I still never heard it. Only in the late 1980s did “inclusive” begin to appear in the speech of Americans who had been processed through the assembly line of Leftist slogans in schools, colleges, and universities.

If anyone had said to the residents of Dutchtown in 1959, “You are bad people because your neighborhood is not inclusive!  There are no Somalians, no Bantus, no Hmong, no Bhutanese, no Muslims, no Halal grocers, no minarets, no welfare offices, and no Zanti misfits,” they would have laughed him out of the neighborhood—properly.  That is because they could see and think straight.

“If we accommodate all those aliens,” they would have said, “then our neighborhood would no longer be our neighborhood.” Precisely:  Self-immolation. (And today:  Our country soon will no longer be our country.) Americans in 1959 had not been brainwashed to absorb Communist-inspired anti-concepts like “inclusion”, “openness”, and “tolerance.” Such ideas would have seemed absurd to those people — because they are absurd.

Most of today’s Dutchtown residents are sufficiently ignorant of morality and history, sufficiently impervious to thought, and sufficiently preoccupied with their techno-gadgets and diversions to swallow such anti-concepts without much prodding, oblivious to the realization that they are weapons in the Marxist campaign to “break down barriers”—which means:  To destroy American identity, heritage, and sovereignty.

Where is their righteous anger in response to the evil of black thuggery like that described above? Where is their anger toward the white “Liberals” who brought those blacks there and the stupid white “Conservatives” who acquiesced in the suicidal rearrangement of that neighborhood?

Lawrence Auster, writing in 2010, stated:

 “With a tiny number of exceptions, blacks as a race have made zero contributions to the advance of civilization, and are incapable of making such contributions.”  [ “NASA’s foremost purpose: to increase Muslim self-esteem”, View from the Right, July 5, 2010 ]

Mr. Auster was too kind.  It is not nearly that good.  The blacks in Dutchtown have contributed nothing but destroyed much.  The qualities that white men and families valued in Dutchtown 50-100 years ago are precisely those that blacks hate:

Not self-improvement, but laziness and loitering

Not savings and independence, but dependence on welfare handouts

Not home ownership, but rental apartments (to neglect or trash)

Not family life, but hatred of the responsibility to support a family

It is also no accident that “Nu Fashion Beauty” is not “New Fashion Beauty.” This is typical of blacks’ contempt for rules and preference for whims.  They prefer their own whims in spelling in place of traditional rules, Ebonics over English, goofy names for their children, raucousness over restraint, profanity over propriety, and license over responsibility.  They prove every day that they hate rules of any kind. That is their privilege. But those are some of the reasons why white men once had enough sense to enforce segregation laws. They are excellent reasons to do the same today.

Sensible people like the Japanese and Koreans must laugh at the astonishing stupidity of American whites who are suckers for suicidal ideas like “inclusion” and who allow black savages to ruin their schools, neighborhoods, and cities and then congratulate themselves for “celebrating diversity.” Truly, I live today among tribes of Eloi who accept guilt that they have never earned and apologize for the achievements of their ancestors.

On the day I completed these notes, I happened to be standing on a busy street in downtown St. Louis at four o’clock on a sunny afternoon. I noticed a car parked across the street in a traffic lane. The driver was a young black male. Three police cars were also there. There was no incident and he offered no resistance.  They spoke to him briefly and then placed him in handcuffs. I was shocked — shocked!

— Comments —

Robert writes:

I am 71 years old. I lived through the civil rights revolution, and at that time I found MLK’s visions of nonviolence and peaceful coexistence inspiring.

No longer. The uncountable acts of savagery by blacks and their defense by the Negro leadership have made me a white nationalist and a segregationist. I would go so far as to break up the U.S. into white, black, Hispanic and other homelands.

The U.S. is about to descend into Hell. I hope to die before it happens.

George W. writes:

Alex writes:

Robert, you are voicing what is happening to many whites in the country who have witnessed events from the 1960s to present. Most whites to date have not made the leap to white nationalist yet, they are too busy washing the SUV and keeping their streets clean. They are willfully ignoring the coming storm bearing down on them. I grew up in Chicago and have witnessed the complete destruction of my old neighborhood and high school due to black invasion and crime. The biggest problem we have is whites who will not recognize that blacks do not want integration. A simple question to ask whites is: When whites are a minority will blacks and browns do everything they can to uplift whites, keep a level playing field, have White History Month? I can tell you from listening to black talk radio in Chicago that you, myself, and whites generally will not be invited to the dance.

Feb. 16, 2015

David J., who is black, writes:

Whew! What a beating of black Americans from the commenters in this thread, but it is a deserved critique. Whenever I come across such criticisms, my self-dignity and racial solidarity naturally incline me to interject with the often used adage that, “Most of us are not thugs, savages, and miscreants.” Indeed, such a statement is statistically correct and soundly logical (apart from the 70% illegitimacy rate). However, another aspect reveals itself and puts a damper on this reality.

Though mostly decent and non-criminal in their individual lives, blacks as a community exhibit a great moral flaw in that they continually excuse, paper over, or even justify the glaring dysfunctions of the lower orders. Notice that blacks often mobilize in heated defense of the worst of their population: the obvious thug Trayvon Martin, lying whore Crystal Mangum of Duke lacrosse fame, strong-arm robber and police attacker Michael Brown with his embarrassing family, perennial social misfit Rodney King, ad nauseam. An old saying goes, “To permit is to participate.”

How often do we champion tough, relatively effective criminal laws like Stop-and-Frisk, Stand Your Ground, and capital punishment to rein in our underclass’s misbehavior? Where is our national movement that unequivocally admits to the enormous social problems that black crime poses? Instead, we, as a people, become angrier when other races respond to black dysfunction, rather than for the dysfunction itself. White flight, de facto segregation, de jure segregation (painful though it is for me to admit), school suspensions, welfare reform, heavy police surveillance, and racial profiling serve as unpleasant responses to the dangers inherent in close proximity to the left side of the Negro bell curve (I’m tired of always using the word “black” and refuse to use the execrable term “African American.”). Yet, they truly set off the ire of the usual suspects of Organized Blackness like the NAACP, Nation of Islam, New Black Panthers, Congressional

Black Caucus, Jesse Jackson et al (Sharpton). I am reminded of Lawrence Auster’s words of wisdom that a community is known by the people who publicly represent and speak for it.

It is frustrating. From my end, I realize that there is nothing that can be done about it. The David J.’s, Tommy Sotomayor’s, David Carroll’s, and Thomas Sowell’s of the world are simply too scarce, too mistrusted, too far from the mean, and too underfunded to make any non-trivial impact on the rest. CNN, ABC, and other major media outlets defer and give voice to their token Negroes who only rehash the liberal-approved narrative of total black innocence and unrelenting victimization by whites (or by a brown-skinned “white Hispanic” named George Zimmerman).

Furthermore, for the sake of self-interest, I must admit that what mainly concerns me is the future of my life and family. I cringe at the thought of legally enforced segregation. As the salutatorian of a majority white high school, an honor graduate of a predominately white university, and an engineer at a white-owned corporation, I intuit that racial segregation will virtually destroy everything that I and my M.B.A.-possessing wife have worked to achieve and earn. For instance, for which black-owned chemical company can I work that can compete with the economies of scale of the white counterparts? Why would I consign myself or future children to an all-Negro neighborhood or school with the attending unsolvable, soul-crushing problems? In short, why would I support my demise?

I am too knowledgeable of human biodiversity and too endowed with social intuition to desire such a policy. For this reason alone, I am glad that strict white nationalists are as popular and well received in the white community as Clarence Thomas, Ben Carson, and I are in the black community.

Thus, I shall continue to support race-neutral policies (including opposing Affirmative Action, Section Eight, and so forth) and espouse the “Citizenism” of Steve Sailer. Though, I do have a principled exception: the U.S. immigration policy ought to be trimmed down and favor white immigrants in order to maintain them as a majority. Whites are the indispensable facet of the United States for whom there is no replacement.

Please follow and like us: