THE Daily Mail has photos of the events today in Baltimore, where 15 police officers have reportedly been injured and a national state of emergency has been declared due to looting and rioting in response to the death of a 25-year-old black man, who was denied proper medical attention in police custody. “Protesters” can be seen throwing rocks at a commuter bus, smashing police cars and slashing firehoses being used to put out a fire. Bear in mind that much of this is being done in front of television and news cameras. The family of Freddie Gray has publicly pleaded for the rioting to stop and many other blacks have condemned it, while Jesse Jackson, in his speech at Gray’s funeral, incited rage and envy among the city’s black population, thereby essentially supporting the rioters. One of the leaders of the rioters is Malik Shabazz, former chairman of the New Black Panther Party, reports WND.

A commenter at The Baltimore Sun writes:

At Camden Yards tonight, they will sing alternative lyrics at the seventh inning stretch:

Take me out to the riots
Take [me] out with the crowd
Get some new Jordans and maybe Le Brons
And hit CVS for some free darvons

Yes it’s loot, loot, loot while it’s dark out
and start a few fires for fun
Cause it’s all–over–tomorrow
for this race card game.

UPDATE: Police Commissioner Anthony Batts gives the sort of statement that also should have come from Obama:

“I am extremely disappointed at what has happened in this beautiful city tonight,” said Batts. “I am disappointed that we could not be more responsible in an embarrassment that we have nationwide in our community. This is not protesting, this is not your First Amendment rights, this is just criminal acts doing damage to a community that is challenged in some ways that do not need this and do not need to be harmed in the way that we have today.

[…]

Batts applauded one mother who was seen smacking her son after seeing him take part in the violence and chided parents whose children were involved. “I wish I had more parents who took charge of their kids tonight,” he said.

A senior center and a $16 million nursing home that was under construction were among the buildings destroyed by fire last night.

— Comments —

David J. (who is black) writes:

I give up! I can no more defend the indefensible and am so beside myself with anger that I can barely express my thoughts clearly. A significant portion of black Americans are hopeless cases, unfit for civilization, rational laws, and societal order. Whites must understand that many blacks want no peace or reconciliation, but are pro-criminal and anti-police to their very core.

Notice that the notorious Bloods and Crips street gangs, who are responsible for a large fraction of the murder, drug-dealing, and theft in Baltimore’s slums, are actually being heralded as peacemakers during the present riots in Baltimore! On the radio this morning, I made the mistake of tuning in to the Tom Joyner radio show only to hear Elijah Cummings, a typical jackleg Negro politician, commend these gangbangers for their supposed peacekeeping efforts! Are you serious? Only last week, they were shooting, robbing, and dealing, and now a Congressman and his liberal enablers at CNN are lauding them for their newfound concern for the community! Representative Cummings also decried the media for calling last night’s looters and arsonists “thugs.” Oh, how insensitive it is for whites to call destroyers of property and creators of mayhem the T-word (i.e., the new N-word)! Again, numerous blacks are pro-criminal and anti-police.

Where was the march of similar size against the much more frequent black-on-black crimes or against the high gang activity in the city’s neighborhoods? Where were Jesse Jackson, the Congressional Black Caucus, or the Good Honorable Reverend Pastor Bishop Doctor Deacon (and adulterer) Jamal Bryant before that menace to society named Freddie Gray died of spinal injuries?

I also made another mistake this morning: I logged on to a black news website called The Root. On it, I read that the demonstrably inept current mayor, Stephanie Rawlings-Blake, “…was given lukewarm applause when she was recognized in the audience. Rawlings-Blake has been criticized for her focus on business development and most recently blaming the problems of poor blacks on ‘out-of-wedlock births.'” Got that? Incompetent though she may be, Madam Mayor has at least tried to rejuvenate this rusted, dilapidated town by endeavoring to attract (white) businesses and encouraging residents to form families in a more civilized, moral manner.

On the other hand, the website also states, “Former Mayor Sheila Dixon, considered more of the people’s mayor, received two thunderous standing ovations filled with outbursts of: “We love you, Sheila!” and “We need you, Sheila!” Jumping Jim Crow, Batman! Let me get this straight: the former lady mayor who was shamefully removed from office for embezzlement of government funds receives a heroine’s welcome from adoring citizens, but the current lady mayor with a (fading) modicum of decency garners only a tepid response. Again, much of the black community is pro-criminal and anti-police.

By the way, isn’t it interesting that, in spite of a black Democratic mayor, majority-black city council teeming with Democrats, and a black police commissioner, Baltimore’s Negro community still harps endlessly about institutionalized racism, societal indifference, and systemic neglect? I laugh in the very face of such thinking!

Is there any wonder why certain folks are calling for re-segregation?

Laura writes:

For the latest on the looting, as of 5:30 p.m. Tuesday, see details at The Daily Mail.

Bill R. writes:

I applaud David J.’s frank analysis of Baltimore. It cannot be easy for him, as a high-functioning black who appears not only anxious but able to contribute to a high order of civilization such as that of whites, to see on display once again what is, has been, and will be for eons to come, the qualitative and behavior norm of his racial brethren. [See comment below.] For what it’s worth, I could hope for a different qualitative norm for my own people, as well, at least when it comes to their views on race and their insistence on continuing to riddle themselves with racial guilt, for most of them would, I think, still be opposed even to the re-segregation David J. mentions at the end of his piece. Blacks at least do not burden themselves with guilt they do not deserve. On the other hand, neither do the wisest whites; nor do the wisest whites call for re-segregation, for segregation implies an attempt at racial separation within the same territory and under the same political jurisdiction. One problem (among many) with mere segregation, however, is that it leaves the problem still in your midst while attempting to wall it off. But it takes a heavy hand and a will to use it in order to make that wall effective against Negroes and, in spite of what some would say about whites constantly looking for ways to oppress non-whites, the truth is most whites would rather not see the use of such a heavy hand. They don’t like it. They’re too compassionate and civilized to like it. At that point, then, if whites are still to share the same territory with blacks, the heavy hand will have to be dispensed with. That, however, only leads in time to another uncompassionate outcome, and we saw it Monday night in Baltimore. Heavy-handed segregation is dispensed with and blacks move in to cities whites have built (for obvious reasons), and proceed to destroy them while whites foot the bill, clean up the mess, restore some temporary semblance of order, and then move even further away. No. What is needed for the different races is different territories and different governments altogether. Celebrated whites from Abraham Lincoln to Albert Schweitzer have recognized this, as even do a great number of ordinary whites who are, as yet, still incapable of consciously admitting it to themselves (while nevertheless behaving as if they had). It was, of course, one of the most disastrous, short-sighted, obscene, and outrageously stupid acts in the entire history of my race, that was responsible for bringing these two utterly disparate races together in the first place. But, at this point in history, whites, by way of trying to apologize for what a handful of long-dead whites did many generations ago (when every other race and culture on the planet was doing it as well, by the way, and had been for millennia), have already footed enough of the bill for black pathology, and all it has served to do, as we saw for the umpteenth time again Monday night in Baltimore, is send that pathology through the (burned out) roof.

Laura writes:

Everyday large numbers of blacks congregate in public places in this country and Africa and do not loot or riot. Rioting and looting are not the norm for blacks. You could just as easily say that steady work in a million humble jobs is the norm for blacks, because this is more common than rioting or looting. But black communities are prone to rioting for things as different as basketball victories and court verdicts. One doesn’t need to be a “high-functioning black” to recognize that it is wrong. There were many people interviewed in Baltimore, just ordinary black people, who thought it was wrong. The problem is, they weren’t the ones willing to use force. Given that this significant minority in black communities is willing to use force, it so often overcomes the opposition of those who are peaceful. If the government announced that it would shoot all looters on sight, which has been historically an effective way to prevent this kind of destruction, we would wake up in the morning and be overcome with guilt if a few looters were killed. At this point, we are not going to use that heavy hand and we are certainly not going to impose formal segregation or separation. It would take much more destruction to force Americans to choose from one of these options. In the meantime, it is blacks who suffer the most from the rioting, as we can see with all that was destroyed in Baltimore, including pharmacies, a nursing home and senior center. It’s not civilized compassion, as Bill says, that keeps whites from exerting leadership and using a heavy hand. It’s self-love. If they gave a damn, they would protect peaceful blacks from the race hustlers and the looters and the gangs. If they gave a damn, Obama, with his fanning of racial grievances, would be a public defender or a state assemblyman, not the president of the United States.

The only hope for blacks is the only hope for us all in this world of suffering and woe, which will never be a utopia, and that hope is to be part of a true Christian social order, a Catholic society in which the rights of God are recognized and the reality that the soul does not die is affirmed by the entire social structure so that the lowest criminal knows of hell. However, given that there are natural differences, neither good or bad in themselves, between the races, there is nothing wrong with blacks seeking or whites seeking to develop their natural strengths, and counter their natural deficiencies, in societies that take this nature into consideration, in societies that are made for them. But I don’t think it is necessary or possible or good to completely separate from one another.

Paul writes:

The reality of Baltimore is occurring everywhere as a result of black people. Yes, black people. No one else is to blame. If they can’t get themselves straight after fifty years of intense effort by an ever-more oppressive Kafkaesque government, then they never will. I don’t have a proposed remedy except to keep praying.

 Laura writes:

The New York Times reports that black gangs directed rioters to Chinese- and Arab-owned stores.

And, President Obama blames the riots on the “feign[ed]” concern of Americans for violence and poverty in black communities:

Basically, this is further incitement to violence, coming from the president of the United States. If white America has consigned blacks to violence and poverty for decades, if it has gone so far as to fake concern, then it is truly evil. Rioting and lotting are indeed justified. Obama’s words condemning the criminality of the looters were essentially denied.

However, Obama suggests that criminality is caused by environment. If that is true, then racist indifference for the poor has an environmental cause too. If humans are simply products of their environment then there are no grounds to condemn anyone for feigned concern or for looting and people have no control over their destinies. He can’t have it both ways — saying some are controlled by their environment and others are not.

Black Americans are just pawns in this game. Ultimately, there is nothing good in it for them. To be absolved of all responsibility for one’s actions is dehumanizing.

Bill R. writes:

Laura has a view of race and racial differences that, I would say, is considerably more fluid and optimistic than mine (“optimistic,” I should say, only in the relative sense of one who has the desire to avoid the need for racial separation).

Laura writes, “It would take much more destruction to force Americans to choose from one of these options.” I disagree. And it would be rather hard at this point in time to imagine America suffering more destruction than she already is and has. I do not advocate, by the way, for choosing between segregation and separation. I said that there are many problems with segregation. I will add that I don’t believe in it. I believe it’s proven to be a failure. But racial separation is natural. It is the way the races were to begin with and how and why they evolved differently, and why bringing together has had all the adverse consequences so often attendant upon unnatural things and combinations.

I mentioned in my piece the racial views of Abraham Lincoln and Albert Schweitzer. Both men are renowned for their compassion, including toward Negroes. Albert Schweitzer devoted his entire life, in fact, to helping them and lived daily among them. One had experience with American blacks, the other with African blacks. They lived an entire century apart. For all this, however, the conclusions they came to about Negroes were not unalike. Lincoln said, “I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will for ever forbid the two races living on terms of social and political equality.” In addition, of course, we know that Lincoln advocated strongly for racial separation, for blacks to be removed entirely from America. Furthermore, I think we would do well to remember that Lincoln made these observations generations before the Left got their hands on the problem and made it exponentially worse. Over a century after Lincoln’s words, Noble Laureate Albert Schweitzer had this observation and warning, “[Negroes] have neither the mental or emotional abilities to equate or share equally with White men in any functions of our civilization… [W]henever a White man seeks to live among them as their equals, they will destroy and devour him, and they will destroy all his work… Never fraternize with them as equals. Never accept them as your social equals or they will devour you. They will destroy you.”

Laura wrote that, “Rioting and looting are not the norm for blacks.” Perhaps I should have been more clear. I was referring to the general propensity of Negroes to destroy what whites had built, precisely what Albert Schweitzer said, and what we ourselves in America have seen over and over again. My guess is, Albert Schweitzer would not have been surprised by the events in Baltimore, or cities like Detroit and other places that, after being left to the care of blacks have, within a generation, taken on the appearance of apocalyptic wastelands. My guess is, the only thing that might have surprised Albert Schweitzer is the behavior of whites, and the ability of some of them to see with their own eyes the very kind of destructiveness he predicted, yet still manage to convince themselves that these two races can live together peacefully, constructively, and to each other’s mutual benefit.

Bill adds:

When I speak of blacks “destroying what whites have built,” I don’t think, by any means, that such destruction always occurs because of malicious intent, such as riots and looting. I think a lot of it is simply the consequence of Negro neglect, which, in turn, is a product of their intellectual and temperamental inability to maintain it, and that’s not their fault. They are, however, as you point out, intelligent enough to know what is wrong, and therefore intelligent enough to know that is it wrong to blame their neglect and lack of ability — and all the poverty and social dysfunction that goes with it — on white oppression and racism.

The other point I would like to make is in regard to your comment about the ordinary blacks that were interviewed who thought the rioting was wrong. Maybe I didn’t see the same ones you did, but the ones I saw left me rather unimpressed. The impression I kept getting was one of where the person would start out with a sort of obligatory, de rigueur denunciation of the violence only to have it serve as a prelude for the real point they wanted to make, which, of course, all had to do with “understanding” the reasons for the rioting and the violence. In other words, a denunciation of the violence followed by what was, more or less, a justification for it. However, I would add that I don’t think this insincerity, even if it was the rule, derived from the nature of Negroes so much as the nature of the Leftist racial propaganda they’re daily imbued with in our corrupt society. On that note, the interview that really said it all for me was the one I saw on Fox News, where the reporter went up to a fellow he figured was a safe bet to approach being that he was in a suit and tie, and found out the guy was a city councilman who, when the reporter asked him about the retreating police, proceeded to tell the reporter about this deal that had been brokered with the police that involved the latter backing off as long as the protests remained peaceful. As I recall it, the reporter had just been reporting on looting he was witnessing as the police were engaged in this retreat and he asked the councilman if “peaceful protest” included the looting of liquor stores, to which the councilman replied, “This conversation is no longer productive,” and turned away. Of course, if this councilman had really cared at all about his city, or, for that matter, as you pointed out, the peaceful and law-abiding blacks that lived in it and will be the most to suffer from the mess the police were retreating from, that looting would have meant a lot, and information about it would have been both valuable and productive.

April 30, 2015

David J. writes:

As usual, Bill R. and Alan have done excellent jobs at describing the intractable racial problems in Baltimore and Beyond. Another realization that can be gleaned from the Baltimore Riots is the utterly passive, torpid mindsets of American blacks, from the leadership to the laymen. In several recent interviews, black activists, city residents, and politicians have complained about the issues of poor schools, distrust in police, loss of jobs, and many “abandoned buildings.”

The “abandoned buildings” excuse keeps getting repeated in their comments, as if the buildings themselves were causative instead of symptomatic of the city’s problems. The interviewed folks make it appear as though the vacant places spring from the ground as does vegetation or fall from trees as do fruits, as if the buildings grow legs, take life, and menacingly chase down local residents in the same vein as Tokyo’s Godzilla monster.

In truth, a building remains vacant because the previous occupant has left and no new purchaser or renter has yet come forth to take claim. It is then often boarded up to keep out vagabonds, drug addicts, and squatters. Such sights remain common in Americans cities that have been demographically and politically overtaken by blacks. Baltimore and Detroit epitomize this phenomenon with staggering effect. What frustrates me is the apparent inability or unwillingness of the interviewees to recognize that the buildings lie dormant because the black residents are allowing them to be so! Why don’t they buy or lease the buildings, fix them up, and turn them into profitable places of business or residence? Such is done all over the world.

In fact, as a South Carolinian, I can attest to this reality. Before the bipartisan approval of NAFTA, my state’s landscape was peppered with many textile manufacturing plants. We called them “cotton mills.” After the enlightened minds of America’s two-party system gave unqualified support to free trade (and who among us can question their wisdom?), textile manufacturers gleefully left for cheaper labor in foreign lands and abandoned those huge, red-bricked mills. What are whites doing in response? Complaining passively? Not by a mile. Instead, real-estate developers are converting the mills into trendy apartments, condos, and other commercial properties, one of which now houses the South Carolina State Museum! In Columbia’s Vista neighborhood, empty flour mills and train depots have been turned into banks, grocery stores, fancy eateries, and hip galleries.

To some people, an empty building is a potential source of revenue. To others, it is an immovable source of never-ending social woe.

This entrenched passivity reminds me of a scene from Spike Lee’s magnum opus, Do the Right Thing. In it, three black bums in an urban ghetto are lazily sitting on a sidewalk in front of a corner store. One of the men marvels at the fact that, until very recently, the store had been an unoccupied building for decades. However, a year earlier, a Korean man had arrived, purchased or leased the place, and converted it into a profitable convenience store, even though he and his dutiful wife could barely speak English and comprehend little of American culture. The black gentleman then looks at his two fellows and painfully concludes, “Either Koreans are geniuses or you Negroes are just plain dumb!” Of course, I have cleaned up this quote a bit so as not to offend the readership of this blog. You can imagine the epithets that the man really used.

Why are Baltimore’s locals seemingly sitting back and allowing places to remain empty? For what or whom are they waiting? The most troubling aspect of this situation is that even the black politicians and community leaders– who you would think have more intelligence, business understanding, and capability — hold this same miserable view! The city is almost entirely in their political and economic control. Yet, the Negro leaders exclaim to CNN and Fox News reporters, “Look, white people, at these boarded, vacant buildings! See how they bestride the narrow town like a Colossus, while we petty victims of slavery, Jim Crow, Reaganomics, and institutionalized racism walk under their huge legs!”

From top to bottom, American blacks lack the belief that they are in any way “masters of their fates.” The fault is never in themselves, but in the (white) stars.

Laura writes:

It is not realistic to expect blacks to purchase and rehabilitate abandoned buildings on any significant scale. That’s not their thing, for a variety of reasons. It is realistic to expect whites and black leaders to stop seeing these abandoned or derelict buildings as proof of black victimhood.

Bill R. writes:

Laura writes:

In related news, Ted Cruz attacked Obama’s public statements on the riots today, rightly calling them incendiary and inflammatory. It’s a relief to see a politician at last say this kind of thing about Obama’s statements on race.

Please follow and like us: