https://dennisdale.com/2021/10/18/standards-disparity-and-equilibrium
White American and black American culture have always been largely distinct.
In what way?
Until recently, as a matter of course, the European Christian “white” cultural standard determined the nature of our society and law.
Please explain and define this standard.
It had to, just as any nation and society has to have a similar basis.
What other nation had to do what on a similar basis?
In the time since critical theory working through media propaganda has moved heaven and earth to invert this reality
What is critical theory and what reality are you referring to?
Black criminality and mediocrity are cited as proof of the dysfunctional nature our society–not, God forbid, the dysfunctional nature of black American society.
How is black American society dysfunctional?
Critical race and associated theory operate by identifying the white European origins of what is normative in our society and casting them as unnatural, transgressions against a universalist order with no basis in ethnicity–or reality.
Please expand on this.
Something that has never existed anywhere and the appeal of which is hard to see, if you’re not invested in the destruction of this particular society and order.
What has never existed anywhere?
This model assuming a vague, lost Eden to which we would, will, naturally default once the unnatural order of “white supremacy” is removed (somehow as durable as it is unnatural) applies throughout progressive theory
White supremacy comes from Western imperialism and military supremacy, does it not?
Men, having created the modern world relieving women of the demands of reproduction that nature saddled them with, are now being thrown under the bus for their trouble
How are they thrown under the bus?
white Europeans, having created the modern world, are now to be thrown under the historical bus
Can you give an example of this?
The difference between black and white culture has always been the true source of the racial disparity in incarceration, as undeniable now as it is unmentionable. Like the definition of family, also distinct between white and black, a culture’s definition of the criminal is essential. A savage beating taken as a serious violent crime in all but the most degenerated white communities is nearly routine in the black hood. The disparity in violent crime rates must in fact under-reflect the disparity in violent behavior between white and black
If you are saying blacks are more violent, are you saying it is because of their race or culture?
If you are saying it is culture, what produces this culture?
The tension created by police enforcing white cultural norms in black environments has always been the ultimate source of black rage against police and the legal system; in addition to the stress of laboring under white standards of justice, it’s seen as an insult.
What are white standards of justice?
Who is insulted by what?
BLM and the movement to defund the police is from one angle the struggle for preeminence between white and black value systems, and is producing two partly separate systems of justice, one white one black, under the guise of eliminating police brutality.
What is a white value system?
What is a black value system?
What are these two separate systems of justice?
If the result was merely driving police and attendant white norms out of black neighborhoods, as is happening, it would be bad enough, but the fact is we cannot segregate, even without the progressive left’s determination to prevent it.
Why can't you segregate?
So the effect is a two-tiered system establishing black norms for black people but not white norms for white people, who in fact are stranded in this new order.
What is the difference between white and black norms?
In an all-white context there is no pressure on authorities to adopt the black standard; a white criminal is just a criminal.
What is this black standard?
The movement against “mass incarceration” on the other hand, driven to reduce black prison terms at all cost and led by elected officials and district attorneys, means that in an all black environment a criminal is not necessarily a criminal. In conflicts between white and black actors, the white party is held to one standard–often impossible to meet–and the black to another.
What are these different standards whites and blacks are held to?
The truth is a wholly black “America”, left to its own devices, would eventually settle into a system with harsher laws and customs.
What harsher laws and customs do you have in mind?
Chaos can’t go on forever. In our perverse environment, where we cannot acknowledge the true problem, that natural process is prevented from happening.
What is the nature of your "perverse environment"?
What is the "true problem"?
What is the "natural process" to which you refer?
What prevents this natural process from happening?
Black America’s culture of the criminal is sustained by this unnatural order of things.
What is the nature of this unnatural order?
The ongoing, enforced misunderstanding of that criminal culture as the result of the law and order it opposes is the mechanism by which law and order is being eroded.
Can you reword this sentence?
The two competing standards, white and black, cannot co-exist
What are these competing standards?
eventually one or the other has to give or, as is planned for us, a third way establishing a sort of racial privilege for blacks must–ironically just what they contend we have regarding whites.
I first thought of this years ago, when listening to the classic Wu Tang album 36 Chambers, when this piece of flotsam surfaced, in the random fashion lyrics appear in rap songs:
“…then Bernhard Goetz what he deserves”
I realized Goetz, the half-Jewish New Yorker who raised a national scandal when he shot four black thugs about to mug him, had done nothing so much as adopt the same ethic as those very rappers, the celebration of which the lyrics here interrupt to condemn him. That ethic holds that the weaker party in a fight can avail himself of a weapon. No gangsta would condemn another for using a gun against four assailants; he wouldn’t call it cowardly and he wouldn’t call it criminal. The right to use a weapon when otherwise at a disadvantage is a core value of the gangsta worldview; it’s even somewhat defensible, when the alternative, for an average black boy in the hood, is to be bullied, often literally to death.
Bernhard’s crime was not in defending himself but doing it while white, and against blacks. What the Wu Tang rapper should have said was that the gangsta form of justice is proprietary, for me and not thee, white boy.
Blacks are becoming supra-citizens, enjoying not-yet explicit legal privileges denied whites. Non-black non-whites appropriate some of this license by mimicking the narrative–carefully, and often with a tributary nod toward black supremacy. A latino can easily take advantage of the police racism narrative built up to elevate blacks, and the media system, with the automatic efficiency that a culture of something has over a conspiracy of something, accepts but assigns it a lower level of hysterical amplification, and the paler brown pays a tribute, like lesser mafiosi “giving a taste” to the Don. When Al Sharpton shows up in solidarity with a given non-black anti-white grift, the paler browns are “kicking up”.
Chicago DA Kim Foxx advanced the cause of black-values-for-black people when declining to prosecute the combatants in a deadly shootout, citing “mutual combat“. Notably, whites aren’t allowed the mutual combat excuse when fighting among themselves, and definitely not if engaged even in defensive combat against black aggression. Only the clearest example of self defense, at least for the moment, will excuse the cursed white who raises a hand to a blessed black.
Remarkably, despite the shootout in Chicago in which over a hundred shots were fired and a stolen vehicle crashed and set ablaze (a totally unnecessary and stupid attempt to destroy evidence, apparently) in a residential neighborhood, the DA’s derelict prosecutors recognized no right of the public to reasonable security. Instead they made the remarkable calculation that if no offense is committed by either criminal party against the other (when blacks are involved), no crime was committed. In the old order the warring factions would be recognized, at least, as entering into a criminal conspiracy with their “mutual combat”, like illegal dueling, without the honor that leaves innocent third parties out of it. “The people versus” the criminal is a dead phrase.
A black boy who recently shot up his classroom after getting beat up wasn’t characterized in the media as a “school shooter” but a bullied teen. Indeed the case wasn’t typical of a “school shooting”, but of black mayhem. Fortunately the bully was black (of course); had the shooter’s bully been white he likely would be a hero and the school picketed. The fact is the shooter adopted the gangsta ethic, and as a black boy he’s allowed to. Needless to say, if all parties were white or, God forbid, the situation involved a white shooter and black bullies (and many school shootings do, as in Columbine, where the shooters sought out jocks and blacks), the media line would bear little resemblance to the one we see.
In this environment redemption too looks different depending on the shade of your skin. An NBA executive thus loses no position in broader society at the same time he gains credibility by revealing a murder he committed as a sixteen year-old. Despite being convicted of the crime the issue never came up; the “white” society said to be obsessed with criminalizing blacks and thus holding them back was incurious, and now can only congratulate him for what would appall them if they found it out about a white man.
In Oregon an aspiring rapper invoked his privilege by hitting on a man’s girlfriend in his presence, The white man refused to recognize that privilege so the would-be Jay-Z started a fight and was shot and killed by the white guy. As Andrew Anglin pointed out, it all looked very much like “mutual combat”; the local district attorney, sensing opportunity, has decided to feature it as white supremacy, citing the long history of lynching black men for interest in white women.
But “mutual combat”, difficult enough for whites engaging with aggressive, tougher and more reckless blacks, is not legally possible for white people. We are to be caught between a rock and a hard place.
Into this wonderful future we go.
Are you saying blacks, who remain a minority in America, now have unofficial racial privileges over whites?
If so, how did that happen, and who was responsible?
MY REPLY TO ALEX
What is this "ruling religion" to which you refer?
Is the desire of the white race to survive measured by its ability to ask themselves and answer the following questions correctly?
1. What would be a better "ruling religion" for Americans to have other than an integrated moral and legal political system governing under a one-party theocracy?
2. Wasn't the First Amendment based on 2:256 of the Koran?
3. Didn't the White House Koran belong to Thomas Jefferson?
4. Didn't Jefferson read the Koran or did he just keep it in his library unread?
5. Didn't Jefferson draft the Virginia Statute on Religious Freedom?
6. Didn't the Virginia Statute on Religious Freedom subsequently become the First Amendment?
7. Doesn't the First Amendment guarantee free speech and freedom of belief?
8. Who or what is responsible for the erosion of the constitutional rights of Americans?
a) Americans themselves
b) the deceased Founding Fathers
c) their constitution which Americans do not care to follow
9. Is the reason why Americans themselves cannot enforce their constitutional rights against their government because their government is corrupt and Dissidents incompetent and divided?
10. Is the reason why Dissidents are incompetent and divided because they lack shared moral values enabling them to work together?
11. Is the reason why Dissidents are unable to organise because they lack shared moral values that would facilitate co-operation between honourable, organised and influential men?
12. If the reason why Americans white and black lack shared moral values is because they have mostly been badly parented by their unmarried mother in fatherless homes, then why not reimpose minimum standards of sexual morality which 24:2 of the Koran would impose by treating unmarried parents as sex offenders?
13. Is Conservatism kaput because Christianity is kaput?
14. Is Christianity kaput because it suffers from having a defective scripture that did not even come from Jesus, let alone God?
15. Is Christianity not only kaput but cursed by God because of its idolatry and blasphemy?
16. Don't American Christians know that the Ten Commandments forbid idolatry and blasphemy?
17. Don't Americans know that idolatry is the worship of anything that isn't God?
18. Don't Americans know that blasphemy is anything that would offend God if He exists including bowing before idols?
19. Don't Americans know that Jesus was convicted of and crucified for blasphemy when he said his papa was God and Christians have been worshiping Jesus for 2000 years?
20. Don't Americans know that the Doctrine of the Trinity associated with the most powerful churches in the world requires compulsory idolatry and blasphemy ie the worship of Jesus as the co-equal of the supreme and eternal Abrahamic God who created the Universe?
21. Don't Americans think that if God exists, He would be offended by being worshiped as the co-equal of a deceased Jew convicted of blasphemy?
22. Don't Americans think that if God exists and is offended by the idolatry and blasphemy of three global Christian empires that he He would punish Christians for their idolatry and blasphemy?
23. Isn't America a Christian country?
24. If America is a Christian country and God is offended by the idolatry and blasphemy of Americans, shouldn't Americans expect punishment from God?
25. Even if God does not exist, wouldn't the reason of honest and reasonable men be offended by the idea of Christians worshiping a deceased Jew as the co-equal of the supreme and eternal Abrahamic God who created the Universe?
26. Doesn't the concept of idolatry mean that only two religions - Judaism and Islam - are acceptable to God if He exists?
27. Aren't the Torah and Koran believed to be the Word of God by Jews and Muslims respectively?
28. Isn't it the case that the New Testament is only the word of mortal and fallible men of dubious provenance proclaiming an absurdity?
29. Isn't Christianity an absurd religion being the religion of antisemites who worship a Jew?
30. Didn't Washington say "We must with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion"?
31. Isn't it true that five of the Founding Fathers rejected the Trinity?
32. If you are a gentile who rejects the Trinity but still believe in the Abrahamic God, aren't you in fact proto-Muslim?
33. Is it not the case that five of the Founding Fathers were proto-Muslim?
34. Isn't it the case that the American Republic was founded on Islamic principles?
35. Isn't time for America to return to to its Islamic principles as the Founding Fathers in fact intended?
36. Do you think the Jefferson Bible is Jefferson speaking to Americans from the grave telling them that the New Testament is not a sound basis to base your integrated moral and legal political system but Secular Koranism would be?
No comments:
Post a Comment