Erick Erickson Disappoints on Honest Discussion About Race #Redstate #ErickErickson

We all know that progressives and leftists have a hair-pin trigger regarding racial questions.  Say the wrong word, express the wrong sentiment, and you face severe social ostracism and professional ruin.  Any implication that black people are different from other races, other than in skin color, results in paroxysms of outrage and moral posturing.  However, this knee-jerk reaction is not limited to left wing moonbats; many conservatives suffer from this neurological malady as well.  In my opinion, Erick Erickson of Redstate.com is one of them.

Erickson still insists that the GOP made a mistake in not removing Steve Scalise from his committee position.   This in spite of Scalise's total exoneration of false accusations of racism.  To refresh your memory, Scalise spoke at a Civic Organization many years ago, along with other speakers, on such benign topics as neighborhood watch, how to give CPR and (for Scalise) a tax bill winding through the Louisiana legislature.   Unknown to Scalise, the  hotel meeting room where he spoke was used later that day by an alleged white supremacist group, thereby infecting Scalise with racism by osmosis.  In truth, the dubious attempt to slander Scalise is a typical act of Democrat bad faith.  It's called "guilt by association," an old and unethical strategy to smear one's opponents.  Erickson, however, appears too obtuse to see through it.

Now Erickson has found a new soapbox on which to pose and posture, that of  Dave Agema, a Republican congressman from Michigan.  Dave Agema republished a post from American Renaissance, an online newsletter that I link to (see left sidebar), that has caused liberal Republicans and faux conservatives like Erickson to hyperventilate and do a convincing imitation of the Southern Poverty Law Center.   The article was unflattering to criminal blacks.  Hell, TRUTH is unflattering to criminal blacks.

The article that Agema linked to was written by a public defender, a self-described liberal Democrat.  The article is called Confessions of a Public Defender.  The author describes the behavior and attitudes of blacks that he has represented at trial, as well as those of other racial groups he has served.  His descriptions and conclusions are highly credible and believable, especially if one has read Colin Flaherty's recent book, White Girl Bleed a Lot.

Erickson is now advocating that Agema be removed from his committee post for republishing that article.  His post "The Question on Dave Agema is Not Difficult," tells why.  Ironically, the post is right above another Erickson post titled  "New York Times Endorses Thought Crimes."  Hypocritical much, Erick?

Honest discussions about race are likely to put blacks in a bad light (all those nasty crime statistics, mob violence, incarceration rates, knockout games and such).  Therefore, anyone who wants to discuss black dysfunction will be slandered from here to Hoboken.  Black people, after all, are only white people with dark skin -- a notion that I abandoned after the O.J. verdict in 1995.

To be sure, there are many black people who think and act civilly and intelligently, and are a credit to society.  However, the black underclass is a major problem for society, and those problems should be discussed openly, not suppressed for partisan political reasons.

Erickson states:

On his Facebook page Agema asserts the inferiority of blacks, that they cannot control their impulses, and that they cannot reason.

Erickson is wrong.  Agema did not assert "inferiority," and the comment on impulse control and reasoning ability is that of the public defender who is quoted, not Agema.  The public defender wrote:

However, my experience has also taught me that blacks are different by almost any measure to all other people. They cannot reason as well. They cannot communicate as well. They cannot control their impulses as well. They are a threat to all who cross their paths, black and non-black alike.

I do not know the solution to this problem. I do know that it is wrong to deceive the public. Whatever solutions we seek should be based on the truth rather than what we would prefer was the truth [Emphasis added for Erickson's benefit].  As for myself, I will continue do my duty to protect the rights of all who need me.

Possibly one of the dumbest things Erickson wrote in his hit piece is the assertion that

The Party of Lincoln should abide no person who cites Klansmen and no person who asserts that black citizens are inferior.

Such egregious moral posing and posturing is truly reprehensible.   With Republicans like Erickson, who needs Democrats?  However, let us see what Lincoln actually did say about blacks vs whites:

I have no purpose to introduce political and social equality between the white and black races. There is physical difference between the two which, in my judgment, will probably forever forbid their living together upon the footing of perfect equality, and inasmuch as it becomes a necessity that there must be a difference, I, as well as Judge Douglas, am in favor of the race to which I belong having the superior position.

And Lincoln also said this:

Our republican system was meant for a homogeneous people. As long as blacks continue to live with the whites they constitute a threat to the national life. Family life may also collapse and the increase of mixed breed bastards may some day challenge the supremacy of the white man.

Lincoln's comments were truly outrageous.  We should strip him of his Party credentials as well.  And give a big horse laugh to Erick Erickson, whose ignorance of history (and race) is appalling.

The New Mind Control: Use the Word "Nigger" and Your Life Is Ruined

Actor Tim Allen has a point.  The use of the term "N-Word" is just as offensive as the term it represents, the word "nigger."

The word "nigger" is at least 200 years old (probably more), and didn't start out as an ethnic slur or insult.  Blacks themselves invented the word.  It is derived from the word "Niger," meaning black.  There is an African nation by that name, and also one named Nigeria.  Mark Twain used the word repeatedly in his fictional tales of blacks and whites in the antebellum South.  Although his fiction subtly advocated racial equality, it has been condemned by modern blacks for the use of a word that was not at all offensive at the time that Twain used it.

"Nigger" is only a hateful word by context.  It is not inherently hateful in and of itself.  However, the left has instituted unofficial speech codes into our society, so that if you use the word "nigger" in any context, be it semantical, historical or literary, you have broken an unofficial rule that carries great consequences.

Those consequences are social and professional ostracism.  Paula Deen is only the latest example in a long line of wrecked careers and lives.  She admitted she used the word thirty years ago after being assaulted by a criminal black man.  Her publisher and various department store chains immediately dropped her cookbooks and her television cooking show was canceled.  Ridiculous.

Note:  I do not advocate the careless use of the word "nigger," especially as a racial insult.  If you google the word and select "images," a ton of really offensive images are displayed.  However, use of the word does not turn any black into a pillar of salt.  So why are we so racially hypersensitive to the biggest group of screw-ups in human history?  (If you doubt me, look up crime statistics by race, illegitimacy by race and percentage of prison inmates by race.)

What blacks need is the unvarnished truth about themselves, and a great deal of societal pressure to clean up their act.  Instead, we have been programmed to do double back flips in order to never, ever offend any black, anywhere, for any reason.  They are the "sacred other," the Tribe of Dali Lamas among us, and anything less is sacrilegious, an apostasy that can never be overlooked or forgiven.

This semantical tyranny must stop.  I'm with you, Tim Allen.

Jared Taylor's Open Letter to Eric Holder: Explains a Lot About Black Behavior and "Racism"

Jared Taylor has accepted Eric Holder's public invitation for a new discussion on race, and has asked Holder for a face to face discussion.  He won't get it of course.  Liberals are not interested in defusing black racial animus but only in organizing, rationalizing and focusing it into a potent political force for socialism.  This they have done and will continue to do.

However, Taylor's letter makes some points on blacks that are worth repeating here, because knowing the true facts of the racial divide cannot do harm, and may do good, if only to encourage non-blacks to arm and defend themselves.

His first point is on black crime:

I would imagine you used statistics from your own Justice Department to show that blacks are at least seven times more likely than people of other races to commit violent crimes, and that young black men are the most dangerous people in America. I hope you explained that Americans will be suspicious of blacks for as long as they continue to commit so many crimes. This may be unfortunate for law-abiding blacks but the fault is not with the police or with neighborhood watchmen; it is with other blacks.

This is correct.  It is why profiling of blacks is necessary for our own safety and survival.  Young black men like Trayvon Martin are the largest contributors to violent crime in America.

His second point is that a bias against blacks does not in itself constitute a "hate crime," and does not invalidate the right of anyone, including an open "racist," from defending himself against a black attacker:

This is not an academic question, Mr. Holder. I hold unorthodox views on race and have expressed them publicly. Does this mean that if I am attacked by a black and have to defend myself with lethal force you will investigate me? What if it could be proven that I am the wickedest racist in America? Does that mean I have forfeited my right to defend myself against a black attacker? I hope you understand my dismay, but this is very clearly the logic of your investigation: that I will lose very important rights if I have views of which you disapprove.

Finally, Taylor mentions the horrible truth of which no one in society dare speak, that of IQ differences between the races, which is undoubtedly the major cause of black dysfunction:

Finally, on an entirely different matter, you seem to think that blacks and whites are precisely equal in ability and temperament, and that if there are any differences in outcome between the two groups, it can only be due to white “racism.” In the interest of the honest discussion you want, I invite you to reflect on the fact that American blacks have an average IQ of 85 whereas whites have an average of 100. I also invite you to consider the huge body of evidence that suggests this difference has a substantially genetic cause.

Because of this natural variability in IQ, blacks, as a group, are not going to equal the achievements of other racial groups, not anytime soon.  Maybe after another 500 years of interbreeding with other racial groups and the enlargement of their accessible gene pool, or through scientific achievements in genetic engineering, but most certainly not in our lifetimes.  Their dysfunction is most assuredly not the result of irrational non-black racism, and any policy initiatives that are based on that myth will not solve any problems and will more than likely make them worse.

Read the whole essay at this link.

Solving the Problems of Race in America

Following the brouhaha over Ron Paul's old newsletters, I want to clarify my position on some points and make some tentative suggestions for improving racial disparities in America.

1.  Races do vary in many ways.  Some of us are better at higher math, some of us are better at sinking three-pointers outside the line.  There is no harm or foul in acknowledging these differences, as long as we understand these are tendencies, not universal laws.  Everyone is an individual and should be judged by his own abilities and attitudes.  Everyone should be allowed to pursue his goals and achieve as much as his talents and ambition will allow.  On the other hand, no one should be given a free pass or supplied with a standing excuse for destructive behavior.

2.  IQ is an important factor in higher SAT scores and academic achievement.  Research shows that blacks, as a group, have the lowest average IQ of all racial groups:  85, compared to 95 for hispanics, 100 for whites and 105 for Asians.  This, more than any other factor, explains the failure of blacks to achieve SAT scores as high as whites or Asians.  It explains the lack of blacks in higher math, physics and other demanding disciplines.  It is no one's fault, it just is.  However, some pertinent observations:

• By acknowledging this reality, I take no joy or pleasure in it, nor do I wish to use it as an excuse to bring back segregation or to assign an inferior citizenship status to blacks or anyone else, or to engender hostility towards blacks or anyone else.
• I WISH this IQ business weren't true.  I WISH blacks could enjoy the same level of achievement, productivity, success, prosperity and happiness as any other racial group.  I would be DELIGHTED if someone could find a solution to the problem by sometime tomorrow.  However, reality is something of an ass, as it doesn't care a damn about my preferences...or yours.  It just keeps on being reality.  It's a lot like the IRS, if you want to know the truth.
• I do not believe that DENIAL will have any bearing on the problem of IQ disparities by race.  I do believe that honest discussion could lead to possible solutions.  Is there any way to improve the IQ of blacks?  If not, is there any way to work around the problem, by offering trade school education to those for whom college is not an option?  How high an IQ is needed for (1) graduating high school, (2) graduating college, (3) becoming a doctor, lawyer, accountant, computer programmer, auto mechanic, fry cook, musician, etc?  The idea is to find the optimum training and employment that will maximize an individual's earning potential and give him or her the best chance for a successful life.  The forceful introduction of individuals into careers for which they are not suited (i.e., affirmative action, racial norming, racial quotas) harms both the unqualified (by setting them up for failure) as well as the qualified persons forcibly replaced (by denying them opportunity).
• Another training point would be to (1) recognize potential trouble before it happens and (2) take steps to prevent it.  Things to avoid:  drugs, drop-outs, gangs, crime and unwed pregnancy, resisting sudden impulses that lead to trouble.  How people fall into these traps, how to plan your life to avoid them.
• I believe that we should acknowledge black dysfunction, e.g. fatherless households, illegitimacy, school drop-outs, unemployment, alcoholism and drug use, crime and in general, a really bad attitude.  Next, we should find ways to alleviate this dysfunction, possibly by (1) the shame factor, assigning blame where it belongs, on blacks themselves, for making bad life choices, (2) providing some kind of training or schools that teach civilizational skills, e.g. working cooperatively with others, social skills such as manners, personal space, tact; employment skills such as arriving at work on time, getting out of bed when you'd rather not (per Woody Allen's dictum that "85% of success in life is in just showing up.")  Also, we should stress the importance of delayed gratification, the necessity of patience and persistence while learning the skills one needs to achieve a better life.   What we should NOT do is provide blacks with the ready-made excuse of "white racism" as the source of their problems, since that excuse is neither true nor useful in solving the problem.

Those are my thoughts on the thorny problem of racial stress in America.

Update:  Ron Paul's assertion that "blacks perpetrate crime all out of proportion to their numbers" has again been proven true.  Heather McDonald, writing in the New York Post three days ago, in an article called "The Real Outrage," noted:

Nearly every day, the police experience a reality that is kept assiduously out of public awareness: the overwhelming disproportion in crime. In 2009, for example, blacks, who are 23 percent of the city’s population, committed 80 percent of all shootings, according to reports filed by the victims and witnesses. Whites, who are 35 percent of the population, committed 1.4 percent of all shootings.

 It is time to openly discuss the problem of black crime and to seek solutions.  Self-censorship accomplishes nothing.  It is time to tell the truth.


Update:  Lawrence Auster of View From the Right discussed IQ and cultural influences back in 2008.  That article has a lot of bearing on my post above.  Auster points out a highly pertinent interview with Arthur Jensen, who discussed intelligence testing in a two-part interview in American Renaissance in 1992, here and here.