BLACK IN AMERICA: Uncomfortable truths, Pornographers of Race and Moving Forward

PREFACE:  

The discourse around race in 2020 is myopic to the extreme. The BlackLivesMatter narrative dominates the cultural airwaves and any deviation results in accusations of racism and white supremacy. 

This essay is no exception, even though almost the entire bibliography is from black intellectuals, such as The Great Thomas Sowell, Shelby Steele, Walter Williams, Coleman Hughes, Jason L. Riley, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, John McWorther, Glenn Loury, Carole Swain, Thomas Chatterton Williams and Kmele Foster.

  

In fact, several large parts of this article are stolen and retold verbatim from these towering intellectuals, and my role here is mostly that of an aggregator of data. 

I hope this will cause reason for pause for critics who will reflexively presume that my motivation is grounded in a negative image of black people. 

  

PART I: The History  

As the current anti-racist movement, spearheaded by BlackLivesMatter, has its origins in America, and is exported to Western Europe, I will focus my attention on the US. America also has the best known history of racism, exemplified by the fact that the mere mention of the word “slavery” recalls connotations associated to the evils committed by White Americans until 1865, when the practice was outlawed by the 13th Amendment. 

This, despite the fact that slavery has been a universal in most societies in human history for millennia prior to the creation of America, and for centuries after – from The Persian and Ottoman Empire to modern day Libya.  

In fact, what makes America unique and, in many ways, morally superior, is the lengths to which it went to end the malignant practice; A brutal civil war, costing the lives of over 600, 000 of her citizens, majority of whom were white.  

This was the price America as a nation paid to right its moral sins.  

Of course, the racist oppressions of blacks did not end with the abolition of slavery, and policies such as Red Lining, Jim Crow and voting suppression continued to be practiced, reducing blacks to second class citizenships, and were in place until a century after slavery ended.  

The freedom that had led to America becoming the most powerful and prosperous nation on earth wasn’t afforded to blacks, and they stood outside, looking in at their own country, as it amassed enormous levels of wealth and strength.  

But, at the height of the Vietnam War, something truly unique in human history started happening:  

America was forced to confront her own hypocrisy. The claim of fighting for the freedom of a people 8, 000 miles away, while not extending those same freedoms to people at home, became the first seam that opened, swiftly unravelling the entire enterprise that had been in place until then.   

Lead by mighty people like Medgar Evers, John Lewis, Bayard Rustin, James Farmer, Rosa Parks and, of course, Reverend Martin Luther King Jr., The Civil Rights Movement held up a mirror to the hypocrisy and duplicity of segregation, anti-constitutional voting practices and the plight of blacks.  

This movement gained support from white citizens who had become disillusioned with the promise and ideals of America, having seen her betrayals in practice.  

Simultaneously as the Civil Rights movement was ongoing, a new force entered the Zeitgeist; That of Anti-Americanism, and subsequently, Anti-Westernism.  

For this faction, the ideals of America were not moral positives that had been inaccessible for people of different race, but they were themselves immoral and needed tearing down. As Shelby Steele explains in his 2015 book “Shame: How America’s Past Sins Have Polarised Our Country”, this movement branded the American experiment as “characterological evil”. The fault was not in the exclusion of blacks and other minorities – rather, it was the inherent foundation of America that needed to be overthrown.  

Everything, from democracy to sexual responsibility, from the nuclear family to capitalism, needed to be torn down and, in its place, a new utopia erected.  

Where the Civil Rights movement had wanted entry in what they saw as an ultimately good society which had excluded them from participation, the Anti-Americanists believed that the project itself was malignant and must be discarded.  

Where Rev. King and his followers had practiced and preached non-violence, and aspired for his fellow black brothers and sisters to be part of the American dream, Malcolm X, Nation of Islam and The Black Panthers wanted to destroy the entire concept, and from the rubbles, build a new race-based society, still segregated but on the principle of black superiority, not inferiority.  

The Marxists being produced in the American Universities shared a common hatred for America. 

For them, there was no great society to join. The characterological evil of America was incurable, and until it was replaced with Socialism, the evil would continue.  

It is my contention that it was this narrative that won the culture war, even though the strides for equality were made by the former.   

This is the sentiment that is still permeating the West today, infecting the minds of students in colleges and universities across The West. 

PART II: The Narrative  

If you belong to the Kingian tradition, you will read a text such as The American Constitution or Bill of Rights and find it an ultimate – a super-ideal to aspire to.  

Where misdeeds have occurred, it has been because America did not live up to her own ideals – such as all men are created equal – and must be condemned from this vantage point.  

However, if your foundation is in the vein of radical leftism, or Nation of Islam, the ideals described in those texts are the problem, and need discarding & replacing with new texts.  

As mentioned, I believe that today’s anti-racist movement have their origins in the latter ideology, and we are now facing a cultural battle between those who believe America & The West are fundamentally good, versus those who are convinced of its inherent, incurable evil.  

Emboldened by people best described as pornographers of race – whether it’s Ta Nehisi Coates, Ibram X Kendy, Shaun King, Ava Duvernay, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Michael Eric Dyson, Robin di Angelo, Michelle Alexander or Nikole Hannah Jones in America, or Akala, Ash Sarkar, Owen Jones, David Lammy, Munroe Bergdorf or Aaron Bastani in the UK – these race-hustlers will spread endless lies & propaganda, emotionally blackmail their audiences and use their perceived victimhood as a battering ram to acquire power – and make no mistake, power is their ultimate goal.  

Their narrative can be summarised as follows:  

1.     Racism is the main obstacle for non-white people to succeed in the West.  

2.     Disparities between races, whether in wealth, income, prison population, or upper echelons of corporates / government hierarchies, is evidence of this racism.  

3.     Anyone who disagrees with any element of this narrative is himself motivated by racism  

Thus, an un-winnable game is established, and clear lines between the anointed and the sinners are drawn. Woe befalls any and all who do not submit to the doctrines of these enlightened puritans.  

I will present the claims on which the narrative is based, and counter with facts to expose the truth – regardless of how uncomfortable or politically incorrect it may be.  

The foundational claim of the anti-racists today is that disparities between the races is because of racism. This claim is the most stubborn and persistent, despite having been debunked over and over again in the last century, and no one has done a better job than The Great Thomas Sowell.  

The reason why it persists with as much fervour and velocity as when it was first introduced, is because debunking it requires complex, multi-faceted breaking down of many subjects and elements, whereas asserting it is as simple as stating a blanket, one-size fits all explanation.   

Disparities in wealth? Racism!  

Disparities in prison population? Racism!  

Disparities in income? Racism!  

Disparities in presence of blacks in top positions within governments or corporations? Racism!  

In reality, however, each single topic requires research, studying and dissecting analytics and data. 

These are complex subjects, which demand expertise and years of time consuming, painstaking erudition and exploration. That’s why a one-word answer, such as “racism” is so convenient – it spares the proponent of having to do any actual work.

  

Before breaking down each point individually, let’s establish some facts: 

 

1.     Disparities are not evidence of anything but disparities. They don’t explain themselves – and there are endless number of reasons behind gaps between people.  

2.     At no point in human history, in no place on earth, has two demographics had parity. Expecting people with different cultures, values, histories, practices, backgrounds, average ages, abilities or skills to achieve equal results is delusional.  

3.     Facts do not adhere to ideologies. One’s worldview must be guided by truths, regardless of how inconvenient they may be – not the other way around.   

With this in mind, let’s breakdown the arguments, one by one.   

Claim #1: Disparities between blacks and whites is evidence of systemic racism

Perhaps the most persistent and common argument of all, most recently popularised in the viral video “Systemic Racism Explained”, this assertion is often considered a knock down argument for racism.  

The reality, however, is far more complex.   

The first thing to notice is that, although the wealth gap is this large, the income gap is nowhere near as extreme. Let’s plant a flag here for a second, and return to this point later.   

Another critical factor is that the median black American is 10 years younger than the median white American. Most common age among whites is 58 years old. Among blacks, it’s 27 – less than half! This is a crucial detail – younger people, regardless of race, are far less likely to have the experience and work history to have advanced in their careers to be in leadership positions, where they can demand higher salaries and accumulate wealth, to pass on.  

The third determining factor, and one which I will return to repeatedly throughout this video, is the composition of the family.  

Here’s Barack Obama explaining:  

“...if we’re honest with ourselves, we’ll admit that what too many fathers also are is MISSING – missing from too many lives and too many homes.   

You and I know how true this is in the African American community. We know that more than half of all black children live in single parent households. (*It’s actually almost 70%*)  

We know the statistics: That children who grow up without a father are five times more likely to live in poverty and commit crime, nine times more likely to drop out of school, and twenty times more likely to end up in prison. They are more likely to have behavioural problems, or run away from home or become teenage parents.”  

Now let’s aggregate these three facts:  

1.     The income gap between white and black Americans isn’t nearly as drastic as the wealth gap  

2.     The median Black American is ten years younger than the median white American  

3.     Almost 70% of black children grow up in single parent households, significantly increasing the probability of a life in crime, abandoning their own children, and not acquiring the requisite educations, skills or experience to attract top employers.  

As promised, let’s return to the income vs wealth gap.  

In their 2007 study “Conspicuous consumption and race” economists Kerwin Charles, Eric Hurst and Nikolai Roussanov looked at spending patterns between races over a 16-year period. What they discovered is nothing short of extraordinary.  

They noticed that Blacks and Hispanics are up to 30% more likely to spend money on “visible goods” – cars, clothes and jewellery. They explain this by a culture of striving for social status.   

Nielsen data shows that black women are 14% more likely to own a luxury vehicle and 16% more likely to purchase custom jewellery in the last year – and these differences are unconditional to wealth!  

Now, if you have a group with 1/10th of the wealth of another group, would you think it more or less likely that they spend their income on such items? What do you think is more advisable?  

The fact that spending patterns between blacks and whites is so significantly different, and then taking into consideration that wealth is accrued over time, by saving and investing instead of spending, the true explanation for this disparity becomes much clearer.  

Conclusion: This is a prime example of actually looking at underlying factors and going into details, in order to understand a complex issue, rather than just asserting a non-quantifiable claim such as “racism”, thinking that it explains something, when it does nothing of the sort.  

Looking at data and statistics of things such as spending patterns, median age, family composition, school dropout rate, investment behaviours etc. is far more honest than blaming it on an abstract, non-explanatory term like “RACISM”.   

Those making this assertion have long gotten away with it, without ever being challenged on their claim. How is it down to racism? How much of the disparity is down to racism? Where is this racism practiced to such an extent that it prevents 14% of the population to accrue wealth? Are there specific laws, practices or policies that the proponents can point to? Or do they just wish to say the word “racism” and fold their arms, thinking they’ve provided a reasonable explanation?  

But there’s something that is even more sinister about this claim. It tells black people that their financial success is not in their own hands, while simultaneously blaming it on white people who are not racists. This results in the fact that the accusation ends up existing in the ether, with neither party able to do anything about it.  

Claim #2: The Police are targeting, shooting and killing blacks disproportionately  

One of the most pernicious and deliberately misleading lies, which would have been so easily avoided had people not reflexively reacted against each killing – whether it was George Floyd or Breonna Taylor – and not automatically assumed that it was race based.  

Unfortunately, emotional reaction is much easier and more rewarding than honest, fact-based conversation.   

The most comprehensive study ever done on this topic was by Roland Fryer, himself a black academic, in his 2016 paper “An Empirical Analysis of Racial Differences in Police Use of Force”.  

Fryer concluded that the facts do not support the BlackLivesMatter narrative; Police is actually slightly more likely to use lethal force when the suspect is white. 

More surprising, however, is that the likelihood of force, including lethal force, increases for black suspects if the officer is black or Hispanic.  

In 2018, a separate paper titled “Is there evidence of racial disparity in Police use of deadly force?”, by Dr. Joseph Cesario and colleagues, looked at police shootings over a two-year period, between 2015 to 2016, and made three definite conclusions:   

·       There is no evidence of systematic anti-black disparities in overall fatal shootings  

·       There is no evidence of systematic anti-Black disparities in fatal shootings of unarmed citizens.  

·       There is no evidence of systematic anti-Black disparities in fatal shootings involving misidentification of objects as weapons.   

Great news, surely? Not so. These facts threaten the existence of the institutions and people who have made their entire careers based on the false notion of black victimhood by the hands of the police, as well as a dishonest media whose viewership / readership and clicks is contingent on not reporting the truth, but to cause sensational uproars.   

In 2019, there were 55 unarmed people shot by the police. 14 were black, 25 were white. The likelihood of being shot by police when unarmed is as high as being struck by lightning.   

It is also important to note that being unarmed does not equate to being harmless – the vast majority of shootings occur when the victim charges at an officer, who may lose his gun in a struggle and make the suspect more dangerous to the officer, as well as his or her surroundings.  

The best example of this is the shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, which spawned the BLM movement, and the narrative of “Hands up, don’t shoot”.  

The claim has been that Officer Darren Wilson shot Michael Brown, as the young, black man had his hands up in the air, pleading with his eventual executioner not to shoot.  

In reality, however, nothing of the sort happened. Witnesses, white and black, as well as the Brown family’s own coroner conducting independent autopsies, all concurred that Brown charged after Officer Wilson’s weapon. This has been verified and corroborated by multiple sources, independent experts and forensic examinations, which is why the Grand Jury – three of whom were black – exonerated Officer Wilson.   

In other words, the entire BLM movement is founded on a lie – at no point did Michael Brown raise his hands or said the now famous slogan “Hands up, don’t shoot”.   

The rioting and lootings in Ferguson, as well as across America, almost exclusively in black neighbourhoods, could have been avoided and the livelihoods of thousands of black owned businesses could have been spared, had honesty, instead of false propaganda, won the day. Instead, these communities are still, six years after the fact, suffering and many businesses are nowhere nearer recovery.  

Similar arguments can be made for all the famous cases on which these movements, as well as charlatans like Al Sharpton and Ta Nehisi Coates, are profiteering on.  

The killing of George Floyd by officer Derek Chauvin was a reprehensible and evil act, which has been condemned by the entire world. Floyd has become the latest symbol of black oppression by American law enforcement.  The truth, however inconvenient, is that there has been no – zero – arguments laid forward to back the accusation of this having been a racial crime.  

In fact, four years earlier, police in Dallas killed a 36-year-old, mentally ill white man called Tony Timpa, in the exact same way. What’s perhaps even more disturbing about the Timpa case is that it was he himself who had called the police to come and get him.  

Floyd became international news, Timpa is practically unknown.  

The case of Breonna Taylor is incredibly disturbing. While sleeping in her bed next to her boyfriend, the police conducted a no-knock search into her apartment believing it belonged to someone else. Taylor’s boyfriend, fearing it may be intruders, fired shots at the officers, who shot back, and during the exchange, one officer was wounded, and Taylor was tragically killed.  

This happened on the 13th of March 2020.   

On the 12th of March 2020, a young white man named Duncan Lemp, was killed by Montgomery County Police Department’s SWAT team during a no-knock raid. Lemp, who seemingly was a member of the far-right group 3Centimeters, did not shoot at the police and had no weapons on him when shot.   

Breonna Taylor’s case has become international news, Lemp is practically unknown. 

 

The case of Tamir Rice, a 13-year-old black boy killed by police when playing with a toy gun, is indescribably tragic. The same thing happened to Antonio Arce, a 14-year-old white boy. Tamir Rice became international news, very few people even know of Arce.  

The same can be said of Daniel Shaver, Andrew Thomas, Dylan Noble, James Boyd, Brandon Stanley and Mary Hawkes – all killed in eerily similar ways to the likes of Alton Sterling, Trayvon Martin and Sam DuBose.   

You’ve heard of the latter, not of the former.   

This is what Coleman Hughes calls “Coverage Bias”. The News Media and Race Vultures profiteer on fabrication and maximising divisions. The sole reason for the existence of NAACP is to focus on black victimhood. If this does not exist, they will manufacture it.  

Policing in America  

The reality of policing in America is more oblique than the narrative claims. Law Enforcement operate in a country of 330 million inhabitants, and 270 million guns. This is the only country on earth of which this can be said. Every single encounter – whether it’s a seemingly innocuous traffic stop, shoplifting, even littering, comes with the potential of ending in armed conflict.  

Add to that the fact that a police officer is shot every single day in America, a third of whom fatally, and the reality of policing in the world’s third most populous country becomes clearer and more desolate.  

  

This is not to say that there are no rotten eggs, or even that the system does not need reviewing and changing.   

  

Practices such as Qualified Immunity and No-Knock searches, and institutions such as The Police Unions, should be questioned and reviewed.  

  

But what is clear is that the American Law Enforcement is not systematically racist. 20% of American Law Enforcement is constituted by blacks, Hispanics and other minorities, many of whom are Chiefs of Police. This is just not reconcilable with the notion of a racist institution.  

  

Claim #3: Disparity in Prison Population proves racism  

  

This is an argument best exemplified in Michelle Alexander’s book “The New Jim Crow”, which has achieved an almost Biblical reverence within the anti-racist movement of 21st Century.  

  

Unfortunately for Alexander and her proponents, debunking her claim takes only a few seconds. In her book, Alexander has included a deluge of statistics and sources, showing how blacks in the American prison population are over-represented, by looking at the demographics of the country.   

  

However, there’s not a single study – not one – that shows crime rates by population! This is an astonishing omission, undoubtedly intentional, as it will immediately deflate her entire thesis.  

  

The claim itself is a logical fallacy. Claiming disparity by looking at population demographics, instead of crime statistics, assumes that all ethnic groups commit crime at the exact same rate. In reality, however, different demographics break the law at vastly different levels.  

  

To demonstrate the flaw in this methodology, imagine Demographic X constituting 10% of a country’s population, but committing 0% of crimes.  

According to Alexander’s logic, we should still expect Demographic X to make up 10% of the prison population! This is illogical at best, dishonest at worst.  

  

When looking at prison population compared to crime statistics, the data is disheartening.  

Black people are approximately 14% of the population in America yet commit around 50% of all homicides. This can be broken down further, to paint an even more disheartening picture;   

  

It’s not the women, or the children or the elderly committing the murders – it’s overwhelmingly done by young, black males aged 15-35. In other words, about 4% of the American population commit 50% of all murders.   

  

Let me repeat that: 4% of the population commit 50% of all murders.  

 

The main cause of death for black men aged 1-14, 15-24, 25-34 and 35-44 is... other black men. This cannot be said about any other demographic in America... 

  

You will find similar, or even more demoralising figures, when looking at violent crime, armed robbery, auto-thefts and even classically white-collar crimes, such as counterfeiting, fraud and embezzlement.  

 

In her book, Alexander makes the claim that Ronald Reagan’s War on Drugs was designed to bring back Jim Crow laws through the back door. This is similar to the theory put forward by Ava Duvernay in her Oscar nominated film “The 13th”.  

  

However, as Heather Mac Donald has noted, in 2006, Blacks were 37.5% of 1, 274, 600 prison inmates in State prisons, which house 88% of the country’s inmates. If you were to remove drug prisoners from this population, the percentage of black prisoners would drop to.... 37%. Half a percentage point.   

  

The prison population demographic is not disproportionately black – the demographics are in proportion to the rates of crime committed by different groups.   

 

Asian Americans are 5.9% of the American population, but make up only 1.5% of the prison population. Did Reagan and company have a pro-Asian agenda that would particularly benefit people from Communist China?  

  

Another argument often put forward is that of America being a Prison Industrial Complex. Proponents point to Private Prisons, run for profit, as a clear indication of how America is capitalising on mass incarceration, majority of whom are black. What they leave out is that Private Prisons make up less than 9% of all prisons in America.  

  

How about State Run prisons, which constitute 80% of all prisons in America? As Coleman Hughes has pointed out, each state has their own laws and different way of running things. Add to that the fact that many of these states are run by black elected officials, and the claim that this is a racist system starts falling apart.  

  

In reality there is no such thing as “The Prison System” – there are more than 50 different systems, each with their own idiosyncrasies, practices and laws. Therefore, just looking at the prison population as a single totality, and drawing any conclusions, is deeply flawed.  

  

One of the worst, yet most common, defences may sound like this: 

  

“Yes, maybe black Americans do commit a higher rate of crimes. But that’s because of 400 years of oppression and racism, as well as poverty caused by such practices!”  

  

This argument is not just inaccurate – it borders on racism!  

  

First, let’s look at why it doesn’t hold up to scrutiny:  

  

During the height of racism and discrimination, when Jim Crow laws, Red Lining and state-sponsored racism were practiced, Black American crime rates were nowhere near the numbers we see today. That alone debunks the claim that it is racism or slavery that caused such behaviours (unless someone wishes to claim that America is more racist today, than before The Civil Rights movement made such enormous strides – but then they have an insurmountable burden of proof).  

  

How about other groups who were subjected to racism, and suffered from poverty? From Coleman Hughes’ article “Black American Culture and The Racial Wealth Gap”:  

  

Starting with the California Alien Land Law of 1913, fourteen states passed laws preventing Japanese-American peasant farmers from owning land and property. These laws existed until 1952, when the Supreme Court ruled them unconstitutional. Add to this the internment of 120,000 Japanese-Americans during World War II, and it’s fair to say that the Japanese were given no bootstraps in America. Nevertheless, by 1970 census data showed Japanese-Americans out-earning Anglo-Americans, Irish-Americans, German-Americans, Italian-Americans, and Polish-Americans. For Asian-Americans on the whole, an analysis of wealth data from 1989 to 2013 predicted that their “median wealth soon will surpass the white median level.” 

If wealth differences were largely explained by America’s history of favouring certain groups over others, then it would be hard to explain why Asian-Americans, who were never favoured, are on track to become wealthier than whites. 

In the same article, Hughes also takes on the assertion that slavery is a cause for black poverty, as well as white wealth, by pointing out that the Southern States that practiced slavery are today markedly poorer than their Northern Counterparts, who didn’t indulge in such actions. The exact same trends can be observed in Brazil, where “…formerly abolitionist Southern region has been and continues to be wealthier than the formerly slave owning Northern regions”.  

Or how about the state-nation of Singapore, which was raided by Portuguese colonisers, and later by British settlers – yet today, it is wealthier than both European countries.  

  

Or how about Jewish Americans?  

 

The most persecuted people in history were not spared anti-Semitism in America, targeted by the same KKK as Blacks, subjected to restrictive real-estate covenants preventing Hebrews from living in particular neighbourhoods, not to mention the influences of Henry Ford, Walt Disney and Charles Lindbergh on the culture, which cannot be trivialised.  

  

Add to this the Pogroms and, of course, the Holocaust, and one cannot reasonably make claims that the Jewish people had any privileges afforded them.  

  

Yet, Jewish Americans are today one of the most successful ethnic groups in America.  

  

And finally, if it is in fact racism that is preventing blacks from succeeding in America, then what would explain the enormous success of black immigrants?  

  

Already in the 1970’s, when racism was more prevalent than today, Black Americans from The West Indies were out-earning African Americans by 58%. These people had the same history of slavery as the African Americans, they often came to America with nothing but the clothes on their backs, yet within one generation, they were out-earning even some white groups.  

 

Today, according to Nielsen’s report “Increasingly Affluent, Educated and Diverse; African American consumers – The Untold Story”, Caribbean immigrants earn on average 30% more than black Americans. 

  

Racism and slavery are no reasonable explanations.  

  

But as mentioned, the argument is also racist. It says that black people can’t help but be criminals, because of their history of oppression. Insinuated within the argument, is the idea that blacks have been deterministically programmed to be criminals by white oppression and have no personal agency to help themselves. 

 

If you blame black crime on determinism programmed into them by white people, then you have to explain why the majority of black people don’t commit crime? And you must explain why the overwhelming majority of those who do are young men, who did not experience slavery, Jim Crow or Red Lining? And why do black women not commit crime anywhere near as much?  

And you have to explain how Slavery, which was abolished in 1865, and Jim Crow, which ended with the Brown vs Board of Education ruling in 1954, or discrimination based on race, which was made illegal with the ratification of the Civil Rights Act in 1964, is causing children to kill their contemporaries over sneakers? 

Conclusion: If you agree that black people are as capable, intelligent and worthy as whites, you must apply the same standards of expectations and levels of responsibility on them. The paternalism, and reducing black people to the lowest common denominator – the only ethnic group with whom The Left do this – must stop. 

As long as Progressives keep making excuses for the worst behaviours of blacks, and claiming it is white people’s faults that blacks commit violent crime at a disproportionate rate, and reducing black people to their worst qualities, more blacks will suffer the consequences.  

It is estimated that 93% of all black murders are committed against black victims. Similar figures can be shown for most crimes – perpetrator and victim are overwhelmingly same race – and the more The Left make excuses for this pathology, instead of focusing on the victims, the less likelihood there is for any advancement. 

Claim #4: America is a structurally racist country 

One can be forgiven to be confused by this claim, as its advocates rarely define their terms, or differentiate between individual racism and structural racism. 

This claim is also sometimes known as “Systemic Racism” or “Foundational Racism” and is often backed up with arguments of “implicit/unconscious bias”. 

The first way to challenge this argument it to ask its proponents to define their terms in specifics; which specific system, law, policy, official practice or guideline is unequivocally discriminatory against a race? 

To their enormous credit, the makers of the viral video “Systemic Racism Explained” do actually try to provide two specific examples for this argument: 

1.     Mortgage practices, claiming banks don’t lend money to black people. 

2.     Bad schools in bad neighbourhoods. 

Let’s dissect each individually, to see if there are any facts backing these up. 

#1 Discriminatory mortgage practices: 

One problem with this, which the makers of the video must have been aware of, unless they did absolutely no research, is that this practice was made illegal in 1968, with the introduction of the Fair Housing Act, and if any bank was shown to break this law, they would be liable to multimillion dollar lawsuits. 

For 52 years, there has been a law in place that specifically make illegal such practices – the exact opposite of systemic! 

Problem number 2 is that promiscuous lending practices was precisely what caused the 2008 financial crash – banks approving mortgages to anyone, even illegal immigrants, regardless of whether they could afford it or not. Subprime loans, such as NINJA – no income, no jobs – were wildly practiced and anyone applying for a home mortgage, would be approved. How is this relevant? 

Because recessions tend to hurt black and minority communities far worse than they do white or affluent communities. So, if the makers of the video wish to propose implementing conditions which will replicate the 2008 Housing Crash, then they’ll have to explain why the inevitable recession will not be seen as “racist”... 

Banks are only interested in money – whether it comes from blacks or whites. It would be completely illogical for them to discriminate against qualified customers, because of their race. So, until and unless the advocates of this claim are able to present evidence that qualified black citizens are being rejected loans, for some strange reason, or wish to argue that banks should loosen their lending practices and offer loans to unqualified individuals, simply because they are black, there is no reason to take this claim seriously. 

#2 Bad schools in bad neighbourhoods: 

Certainly most unwillingly, the makers of this video have made a textbook argument for Conservative policies of Charter Schools and School Choice – the only proven remedies for black students in poor schools. 

This policy is directly opposed by the NAACP and The Democratic Party, despite overwhelming evidence of its efficiency, because – as Jason L. Riley points out - these people are more focused on job retention for teachers than the success of students. Add to this an enormously powerful teachers’ union, who have made the cost for schools to fire bad teachers to over 350, 000.00 dollars, resulting in even paedophile teachers not being fireable, then it is quite clear that the problem lies with the Left-leaning blocs, and not the pro-market parties. 

School choice and Charter Schools are the best possible solution for black students. But if the NAACP themselves are opposing it, then the school situation in America can hardly be accused of racism. 

The video talks about how schools in poorer, crime ridden neighbourhoods are bad for students. But it never mentions a word about why these neighbourhoods are poor or, more importantly, who is committing the crimes. It’s not racists. 

But there is also another major problem with education within the black community. 

“Acting White” 

“I got there and immediately found out that I could read better than anyone in the school. My father’s example and mother’s training had made that come easy. I could pick up a book, read it out loud, pronounce the words with proper infliction, and actually know what they meant. When the nuns found this out, they paid me a lot of attention. One even asking me, a 4th grader, to read for the kids in the 7th grade. When the kids found this out, I became a target. It was my first time away from home, my first time in an all-black situation, and I found myself being punished for doing everything I was taught was right. I got all A’s and was hated for it. I spoke correctly and was called “a punk”. I had to learn a new language, simply to be able to deal with the new threats. I had good manners, and was a good little boy, and paid for it with my hide.” 

Kareem Abdul Jabbar, “Becoming Kareem”

 

Barack Obama, Michelle Obama, Jay Z and Oprah Winfrey are just some of the successful black individuals who have talked about the phenomenon of “Acting White”. 

This is not just an anecdotal claim. It is not, as professional race-pimp Michael Eric Dyson claims in his book “Is Bill Cosby Right?”, an Urban Legend. It is a fact that has been established in over a dozen scholarly ethnographic studies. 

Mention it to a group of black youths, and they will immediately be able to explain it: 

Being good in school, talking standard English, hanging around white kids, doing homework and striving to do well academically, not wearing low hanging trousers or over-sized T-shirts... 

Perhaps the most conclusive evidence for this phenomenon is chronicled in the research of John Ogbu, Professor of Anthropology from University of California Berkley, in his ground-breaking book “Black American Students in an Affluent Suburb”. 

Ogbu and his team of researchers were invited by the black residents of Shaker Heights, Ohio – an affluent Cleveland suburb, to examine the black and white achievement gaps in their community. Roughly a third of the town’s residents were black and the school district was divided equally along racial lines. 

Yet the black kids trailed behind their white counterparts in every measure; test scores, grade point averages, placement in high level classes and college attendance. Black students were receiving 80% of the D’s and F’s. 

Nationwide, black scores on SATS and other standardised tests are far lower on average than those of whites. 

By the end of high school, the average black student is several year behind white kids in reading and maths. 

The usual explanation of this is “Class and inequality” 

“Blacks don’t perform as well as whites because they come from a lower socio-economic background, and their schools have fewer resources” goes the argument. 

What Ogbu found is that this problem transcends class and persists even among the children of affluent black professionals. 

“None of the versions of the “Class & Inequality” argument can explain why black students of similar social class and backgrounds, residing in the same neighbourhood, and attending the same school don’t do as well as white students” wrote Ogbu. 

Even when adjusting for socio-economic backgrounds, one still sees that black students at every class level perform less well in school than their white counterparts. 

Ogbu and his team of researchers were given access to parents, teachers, principals, administrators and students in the Shaker Heights School District, which was one of the country’s best, and he concluded that black culture, more than anything else, explained the academic achievement gap. 

The black kids readily admitted that they didn’t work as hard as whites, took easier classes, watched more TV and read fewer books. “A kind of norm of minimum effort appeared to exist among black students” wrote Ogbu. The students themselves recognised this, and used to explain both their academic behaviours and their low academic achievement performances. 

Due to peer pressure, some black students didn’t work as hard as they should and could. 

Among their black friends, it was not “cool” to be successful or “to work hard” or to “show you’re smart”. 

One female student said that some black students believed it was cute to be dumb. Asked why, she said it was because they couldn’t do well, and they didn’t want anyone else to do well. 

Ogbu found that black high school students avoided certain attitudes, standard English and some behaviours because they considered them “white”. They feared that adopting white ways would be detrimental to their collective racial identity and solidarity. 

Unfortunately, some of the attitudes labelled “white” and avoided by the students were those that enhanced school success; enrolling in honours and advanced placement classes, striving for high grades, talking properly, hanging around too many white students and participating in extra curricular activities that were populated by whites. 

“What amazed me was that this kids who come from homes of doctors and lawyers are not thinking like their parents. They don’t know how their parents made it! They are looking at rappers in ghettos as their role models, they are looking at entertainers. The parents work two jobs, three jobs, to give their children everything, but they are not guiding their children.” Ogbu told the NY Times in 2002. 

Another critical area the video gets completely wrong is the claim that, as affluent areas and poor areas invest significantly different sums through property tax into the school systems, it leads to an enormous discrepancy between schools in such neighbourhoods. 

This claim dodges a plethora of policies implemented by States and Federal Government, such as Title 1 created in 1965, or George W. Bush’s “No Child Left Behind” initiative, to combat such discrepancies, along with a multitude of other federal and state programs. 

“These actions accomplished precisely what was intended: helping equalise the funding of poor and affluent districts” according to Andy Smarick in his book The Urban School System of the Future: Applying the Principles and Lessons of Chartering. 

  

As of 2004-2005 school year, America’s highest poverty district had per student revenues virtually equivalent to the nation’s lowest poverty districts, Smarick continues. 

In conclusion, the viral video “Systemic Racism Explained” is misleading and inaccurate in the arguments the makers put forward; 

1. Discriminatory lending practices are illegal and have been since 1968 – making it the exact opposite of “systemic”, and 

2. The school districts in poor neighbourhoods are not less funded than those in affluent neighbourhoods. 

So, if neither argument holds water, what does explain the current disparity between whites and blacks?  

Can we talk about Culture? 

One does not feel at ease when dubbing a destructive culture “Black”, as it suggests racialist inferiority. But there’s not a single person who wouldn’t know what is referred to when topics such as Gangsta Rap, “Snitches get Stitches”, Gang violence, Acting White, “Bitches & Hoes”, Glorification of Drugs (particularly cannabis) and drug dealing and dedication to anti-social behaviours are brought up. 

Though they have an avalanche of whataboutery’s at hand - “All mass shooters are white!”, “White people use drugs as much as blacks”, “Who glorifies guns more than the NRA”, “Italian Mafia and their code of Omerta is the same as Snitches get Stitches” etc. - the Progressives and the Race-hustlers are not fooling anyone when the subject of “Ghetto Culture” is discussed. 

The battle rap scene is exclusively built on who can brag about having most guns, who can most cleverly describe murdering his opponent, who has most credit in the street, who has spent most time in prison, who has dealt most drugs, who has stabbed most people, who has slept with most girls and so on. 

White battle rappers are often ridiculed for being studious, coming from two parent households, not having the black experience, not being “street” and never having served time. 

The audience, also predominantly black, cheer vociferously as each bar trumps the next in how to best stab, beat up or murder one’s opponent. 

Gangsta rap, a multi-billion-dollar industry, plays on the same theme. For sure, artists like Jay Z and Lil Wayne have an enormous white following. But the difference between white fans and black fans is that white kids nod along to the music, whereas black kids see their lyrics as a blueprint for life. 

Rappers with a background in drug dealing are dime a dozen – The Notorious B.I.G, Tupac, Jay Z and 50 Cent are just some of the few names having talked about their past endeavours as pushers, earning street cred for their histories. 

This may seem trivial to many viewers, but a 2008 Pew Poll showed that 71% of blacks agreed that rap has a bad influence on society. 

When someone like Michael Eric Dyson praises rap and calls its opponents “racists”, he is in fact in the minority view in the black communities. 

Any culture that not only endorses, but positively encourages drug dealing, thug life, gang violence, anti-social behaviours, and re-affirms victimhood mentality, racial separationism and the philosophy of society being structured against the progression of a people based on their race (despite its artists  being the perfect evidence of the opposite) will produce disciples who believe it to be true. 

Rappers have, at their best, been a beacon of light, shining on the injustices in society and their own communities. Tupac’s “Dear Mama”, maybe the greatest rap song of all time, is a heartfelt tribute and celebration of a single mother, herself once a crack fiend, raising two children on welfare while his “coward father” was missing. 

The theme is ever-present in hip hop. From greats like the aforementioned Jay Z, to Juelz Santana, the pain of missing fathers is one rappers know their black audiences will relate to. 

Sociologists, anthropologists, psychologists and criminologists concur – the absence of a father figure is one of the most detrimental threats to a child’s future wellbeing. From psychological challenges to rates of school dropouts, poverty, criminality, teenage pregnancy, drug abuse – absent fatherhood is far more decisive than any policies enacted by public officials. 

Anthropologist Margaret Mead said: The Ultimate test of any culture is whether it can successfully socialise men to willingly nurture their children. 

This is an uncomfortable truth, because it places the responsibility on blacks, rather than blame on whites – and is for this very reason rejected by race hustlers who profiteer on promoting racist conspiracy theories. 

Don Lemon, the very progressive host of CNN Tonight, had an uncharacteristic moment of honesty, when in 2013, he agreed with former Fox News personality Bill O’Reilly about absent fathers, and even said O’Reilly didn’t go far enough in his criticism. Lemon proceeded to offer 5 things Black people should adhere to, to succeed in society: 

Number five. Pull up your pants... 

Sagging pants, whether Justin Bieber or No-name Derek around the way, walking around with your ass and your underwear showing is not OK. 

Number four is the n-word... 

By promoting the use of that word when it's not germane to the conversation, have you ever considered that you may be just perpetuating the stereotype the master intended acting like a n***er? 

Number three. Respect where you live... 

Start small by not dropping trash, littering in your own communities. 

Number two, finish school... 

You want to break the cycle of poverty? Stop telling kids they're acting white because they go to school or they speak proper English. 

Number one, and probably the most important, just because you can have a baby, it doesn't mean you should... 

Studies show that lack of a male role model is an express train right to prison and the cycle continues. 

"So, please, black folks, as I said if this doesn't apply to you, I'm not talking to you. Pay attention to and think about what has been presented in recent history as acceptable behaviour. Pay close attention to the hip-hop and rap culture that many of you embrace. A culture that glorifies everything I just mentioned, thug and reprehensible behaviour, a culture that is making a lot of people rich, just not you." 

If even black ultra-progressives are willing to discuss culture, then why is it verboten and even racist for non-blacks to do so? 

Can we have an honest conversation about culture? 

  

PART IV: Pornographers of Race 

“The vision of the anointed is one which ills such as poverty, irresponsible sex and crime derive primarily from ‘society’, rather than from individual choices and behaviour. To believe in personal responsibility would be to destroy the whole special role of the anointed, whose vision casts them in the role of rescuers of people treated unfairly by ‘society’.” 

“Vision of the anointed”, Thomas Sowell

 

Today, there is a mass-market in lying to black people that they are all victims, while simultaneously demanding self-flagellation from white liberals, who are all too willing to bow down and subject themselves to the proverbial whip. 

The demand among corporations and institutions to earn their anti-racist badges is seemingly endless, and the charlatans willing to supply these anti-scientific, anti-empirical services are popping up left and right. 

People like Robin di Angelo, Ibram X Kendy, Michael Eric Dyson and Nikole Hannah Jones in the US, and Akala, David Lammy and Munroe Bergdorf in the UK, are just some benefactors of this scam movement. 

Their entire raison d'etre is contingent on keeping black people down and oppressed. Like a charity designed to combat a disease on the verge of eradication, these con-artists risk losing their careers the moment black people in their respective countries stop thinking of themselves as oppressed. 

Unfortunately, the Woke Zeitgeist infecting practically every major corporation, university and public institution ensures that these talentless liars are guaranteed continued profits for selling their snake oils. 

It is in their interest to convince black people that they are victims, that they’re systematically oppressed, and that white people are the enemy. 

They make their fortunes on sowing divisions, tearing down bridges and exaggerating differences between races. 

Take di Angelo for example: She used to charge 12, 000 dollars for a two hour seminar telling white people that they are racists, and those who say they’re not are especially racists (the main thesis in her bestseller “White Fragility”, which the great John McWorther recently dubbed “one of the worst books ever written” - a sentiment echoed by Douglas Murray and Matt Taibi). As The National Review recently pointed out, her product is in the same spirit as pet rocks and branded water; a completely useless service which, thanks to genius branding and opportunism, makes fortunes for the merchant, while offering nothing of actual value to the shopper. 

You may question why my tone has shifted to be much more adversarial in this segment. It's because I view these charlatans with particular disdain for three interconnected reasons: 

1.     Their hatred for Martin Luther King and The Civil Rights movement’s vision 

2.     Their hatred for America and its fundamental principles 

3.     The disastrous consequences of their ideas, particularly for black people 

Each indictment needs individual unpacking. 

1.     Hatred for Martin Luther King and The Civil Rights movement’s vision: 

Go back and watch the most famous speech in history – Dr. King’s “I have a dream” address. It’s easy to forget that the line which garnered the most rapturous applause was the now immortal: “I have a dream where my daughters are judged on the content of their character and not the colour of their skin.” 

Dr. King’s vision was to strive for a colour-blind society, where an individual’s colour is irrelevant, and her character is the only determining factor. 

Dr. King loved America, and its fundamental principles of individual liberty and personal responsibility, and wanted these ideals afforded to black people, as they had been to whites. His goal was to tear down those barriers arbitrarily raised between blacks and whites, so his people had the same opportunities and freedoms as their white counterparts. 

Shelby Steele, in his book “Shame: How America’s past sins have polarised our country”, argues  that the great sin of America was that of “relativism” - this capricious exclusion of non-whites from the greatest project of freedom and liberty ever conceived by man. 

The American Constitution and Bill of Rights were the ultimate goals, and from Frederick Douglas to Dr. King, the hope for black civil rights movements had always been access to these very ideals. 

They understood that freedom was nothing but an absence of obstacles impeding efforts, and wanted nothing but a fair access to competition based on merit, not exclusion because of race, gender or class. What they did not ask for was positive discrimination – receiving charities, where they had once been subjected to oppression. 

As Frederick Douglas, in his landmark essay “What shall be done with the slaves if emancipated?”, said: 

Our answer is, do nothing with them; mind your business, and let them mind theirs. Your doing with them is their greatest misfortune. They have been undone by your doings, and all they now ask, and really have need of at your hands, is just to let them alone. They suffer by ever interference, and succeed best by being let alone. 

These ideas and aspirations are exactly antithetical to the pornographers of race, and their flock of sheep. 

They vehemently reject these ideas, as their entire project is to repeat the crime of relativism, only reverse the victims and oppressors. 

They do not believe in colour-blindness and actively mock anyone saying they practice it – even though it is widely spread. They are obsessed by race, and anyone who doesn’t share their obsession is deemed racist. 

Where King and The Civil Rights movement strived for equality, freedom and meritocracy, the race hustlers yearn for forced diversity, affirmative action, white flagellation and race-based politics. 

Where King hoped for colour-blindness, these pimps demand stratification of society solely based on colour. 

Where King believed that America was a fundamentally great country, these charlatans think it’s an inherently malignant project that needs tearing down and from the ruins, build a new country where one’s race determines her social status. 

Jason Riley notes: 

“When you want racially gerrymandered voting districts, when you want racial preferences in higher education, when you name your group BlackLivesMatter, you don’t want a post-racial society!” 

2.     Their Hatred of America and The West 

Why is it that an organisation purporting to be fighting against racism reports in their manifesto that the nuclear family must be abolished? 

Why does Ta Nehisi Coates, who’s entire thesis is that black Americans will always be oppressed while simultaneously earning millions in book sales, royalties and speaking engagements from that very system, not take stock of his life or at least bank account? Why can’t he acknowledge that the country he hates so much has allowed him to become one of the wealthiest black men in history? 

Why is it that Ilhan Omar escapes from Somalia to come to America, become a member of congress and still wish to tear down the system which allowed for this to happen? 

Why is it that these individuals can amass enormous fortunes and power by preaching to black people that they could never amount to anything in the same country where they have become so prosperous? 

What is this cognitive dissonance? 

In “Shame” Shelby Steele argues that the liberal progressives won the culture war in the 60’s, which gave them control over not just the language, but the social narrative. 

As mentioned, the core of their ideology is “The Characterological Evil of America” - that sin is innate in the American idea, and the only way to atone for this is to disassociate oneself from every principle that allowed America to flourish. 

Disassociation is the first step in cleansing oneself from the evils of America. The second is an endorsement of the politics of anti-Americanists. 

Diversity quotas, wealth distribution, multiculturalism, anti-meritocracy, affirmative action – regardless of the actual outcomes of these policies, which do far more damage than good to the people they’re supposed to help. 

 

As Milton Friedman, the Nobel Prize winning economist, said: 

“One of the great mistakes is to judge policies and programs by their intentions rather than their results.” 

The Great Thomas Sowell expanded on this idea in his 1993 book “Is Reality Optional”, when he said: 

“Much of the social history of the Western world, over the last three decades, has been a history of replacing what worked with what sounded good.” 

 The greatest and most tragic irony is that the pursuit of “righting the wrongs of the past” handicaps blacks far more than any other race, and the proponents commit the same crime of relativism as those they claim to oppose. 

Nowhere is this more apparent than in the college admission practices. 

In the 1930’s, a qualified black student would be denied access to elite universities for the crime of being black. His rejection was not down to merit – but relative to his race. The progressives of today, claiming wanting to right the wrongs of the past, are again relativizing admissions, by granting entry to non-qualified black students with SAT scores which white students would never be accepted with. 

The truth is that this is not actually an attempt to help black people at all – it is merely a self-gratulatory procedure by liberal schools to signal the virtue of “diversity” and disassociate themselves from the sins of the past. The Black student is nothing but a token for their cleansing of sin, and his academic success is completely irrelevant, as long as the school’s class photos advertise different colours. 

For what is diversity programs but cosmetic policies with which corporations and institutions can point to and say “Look at us! Look how non-racist we are!”? 

And as this virtue signalling continues, and school administrators polish their halos, blacks still dropout of higher education at rates higher than any other demographic in America. 

But that doesn’t matter. As long as these institutions and corporations can point to their commitment to diversity and Affirmative Action, and get their anti-racist badges, they will continue to endorse such policies. 

The reluctance to adapt to the data, and the blasphemy of questioning Affirmative Action, is indicative. 

Another tragedy of this policy is how it denies blacks dignity. Clarence Thomas, the Conservative Supreme Court judge, in his autobiography “My Grandfather’s son”, describes the hurdles and humiliations that came as a result of being seen as a beneficiary of Affirmative Action. 

Here’s Shelby Steele’s excellent summary of this section of Thomas’ book: 

Clarence Thomas was born into a staggering number of disadvantages. His biological father abandoned him at birth. He was raised by an overwhelmed single mother in the urban poverty of Savannah, Georgia, where he knew “hunger with no prospect of eating and cold with no prospect of warmth.” Until his mother finally relinquished Clarence and his younger brother to her own parents for raising when Clarence was nine, his young life had been marked primarily by parental abandonment, near starvation, educational deprivation, and the general chaos, dislocation, and humiliation of deep poverty. 

His grandfather, whom he quickly came to call “Daddy,” was a man of great character and drive who believed utterly in the redeeming power of hard work. He set the boys to work, monitored their television viewing, disallowed their participation in organized sports (a waste of time), and ferociously insisted on the value of education. (He told them that if they died, he would take their bodies to school for three days just to make sure they weren’t faking.) He got them into the local Catholic school because he believed it to be more academically rigorous than the public schools. 

And despite all he had endured as a black in the South in the first half of the twentieth century, he taught the boys that America was rich in opportunities for blacks if they were willing to work. This was the milieu of honour, steely pride, and hard work that Clarence Thomas grew up in. It echoed Abraham Lincoln’s fabled journey from a humble Springfield, Illinois, log cabin to the White House. As an American boy, Thomas wanted into the better Catholic schools in Savannah, Georgia, not to “integrate” them but to compete with the best and hold his own. And he did. 

But then, with his admission to Yale University School of Law—surely the pinnacle of intellectual challenge that he had longed for—he underwent a fall, a sudden loss of innocence. At Yale he discovered that his faith in merit as the way to true equality was naïve and set him up to be the fool. From grade school through college he had succeeded academically “despite his race,” as his white teachers patronizingly put it. So when he realized that he was at Yale “because of his race,” he was crushed. Still, he was determined to wield excellence against bigotry, so he took the most rigorous courses on the lawschool menu—taxation law, corporate law, bankruptcy, and commercial transactions. He even took a class on taxation from a professor famous for flunking black students, and won the man over. But there remained the larger reality that he could not conquer. 

Yale University had no interest in Clarence Thomas the human being, the young man whose life was animated by the struggle not to be given equality, but to literally earn an irrefutable equality. Yale wanted only the black skin, not the human being within that skin, and certainly not that human being’s longing for an unqualified Equality. Clarence Thomas became depressed at Yale and seriously considered transferring to law schools in the South, where his worst threat would be old-fashioned racism—racism, unlike Yale’s liberalism, that at least did not ask blacks to be grateful when they were being patronized. But there was no money to pick up his life and transfer to another school, and his wife had become pregnant with their first child. A Yale law degree would be his fate. And it would not be a good fate. 

Thomas soon found his Ivy League pedigree to be tainted by affirmative action. He interviewed for jobs with law firms in New York, Washington, and Los Angeles and got nowhere. His interrogators did not believe that he was as good as his own grades indicated. They assumed his presence before them was explained by racial preferences, not by talent. It was as if they were saying the pretence was over: Yale could afford tokenism, but they could not. So here affirmative action undermined the credibility of precisely the kind of person it claimed to be helping. 

Affirmative Action, diversity quotas and race preferential policies makes Black Americans a contingent people, at the mercy of white charity. The message liberals send is that Blacks cannot compete in society on their own merit and must be supported by the benevolent whites. 

Question any of these policies, and you will be brandished a bigot. Point to the fact that single parenthood in black households rose from 25% to over 70% during the same time The Civil Rights movement made such enormous strides, and maybe there is a correlation between this trend, and Lyndon Johnson’s “The Great Society” and “War on Poverty” initiatives, and you’re engaging in racist tropes. 

Point to the two areas where blacks had no charities or handouts – music and sports – and how they would not be denied, and became enormously successful solely on their merit, astonishing talent and relentless hard work – and you’ll be accused of reducing black achievement to trivialities. 

Go to a black neighbourhood and talk about hard work, delayed gratification, individual responsibilities, the values of nuclear family, staying in school – and any aspiration of a political career will end there and then. 

The most detrimental and deleterious conviction a person can have is the idea that she is a victim. Victimhood mentality is far more debilitating than any physical handicap. Indoctrinating an entire people that their path to success is cut off by forces outside of their control, is a heinous moral abomination, particularly as it more often than not comes from individuals who themselves are prime examples of the exact opposite. 

Recently, The National Museum of African American History and Culture released an article simply entitled “Whiteness”, in which they equivocate behaviours, principles and traits such as “Hard work”, “Individualism, independence and autonomy – individuals assuming to be in control of their environments”, “Family structure & The Nuclear Family”, “Emphasis on scientific method” and “Objective, rational linear thinking” and a list of other concepts to be “White” and any non-white person exhibiting such, have “internalised” whiteness... 

This is not just laughable - it’s corrupt and evil. What the museum is saying that practically every single precondition for success is a “White” thing, and should therefore not be expected of black people. There is no other way to describe the stupidity and cruelness of such teachings. It’s evil, it’s corrupt and it’s racist. 

But the careers of race hustling charlatans are contingent on the lack of success of black people. If this demographic were ever to rise and flourish – as millions of them have! - the pornographers of race would no longer be able to sell their snake oils. 

For now, they persist with their propaganda, racism and lies, and laugh all the way to the bank doing so. 

White Privilege 

In his 1937 book “The Road to Wigan Pier”, George Orwell spends the third chapter to describe an average day in the life of coalminers in Lancashire, Britain. 

The coalminers, he noted, had lost most of their teeth by the time they were thirty years old. Almost all of them had black lungs by the time they were forty. Before their shift even started, these miners would have to crawl in tunnels half the height of an average adult man, for three and a half miles, sometimes up to four hours each way, in literally hellish conditions; 

Blinding darkness, a heat so unbearable that at times, wearing any item of clothing except one’s underwear would be impossible and coal dust so thick that you had to fight for air. And that was just the commute to and from a seven-and-a-half-hour shift. 

Their appearance was indistinguishable to that of someone twice, even three times their age. 

Orwell noted that, after just one day of joining these miners on their shift, his entire body, particularly his knees, would ache to the extent that he had to walk sideways for weeks after. 

As they helped build Britain and fuel its industrialisation, paying for it with every fibre of their being, often dying prematurely from lung cancer, these men would not be accused of having any privilege. Those of us who have emigrated to modern-day Britain are reaping the benefits created on the back of their labour. 

Living in the West today, regardless of race, means being the most privileged people ever in history. 

Privileges are an unavoidable fact of nature; 

Tall people have advantages over short people. Beautiful people have advantages over unattractive people. Athletic people enjoy privileges unattainable for obese people. 

But though such privileges are all around us, the concept of white privilege is not only non-existent – it's also a repugnant accusation. 

“It targets an ethnic group with a crime, by accusing an entire group of people of advantages, regardless of the individual constituents of that people”, as Jordan Peterson has remarked. 

It places blame on a person for the mere fact of the colour of their skin. As a society, we have come to acknowledge – through centuries of moral evolution, and millions of people paying with their lives for this revelation to be apparent – that such ideas are malignant. We have achieved a moral maturity, where anyone making assumptions based on the colour of a person is rightly brandished a racist. “White Privilege” is nothing but an arbitrary request for an exception to this universal policy. 

Racism exists. As long as human beings are around, there will be people who harbour hatred and bigotry against another people for innate qualities, such as race. 

The same is true about murder. And just as we can never eradicate murder from society, we will never be able to cleanse ourselves completely from racism. 

What we can do, however, is to discredit, disempower and devalue these ideas to such an extent that they have no authority or power in civil society. 

It is my contention that we have achieved this in The West to near perfection, certainly more than any society on earth. 

Look at what happened across the Western world the moment a black man was killed by a Police Officer in Minneapolis, Minnesota – a city most people in Europe can’t point to on a map; 

Mass protests in London, Stockholm, Manchester, Oslo, Madrid, people immediately taking to social media to “express their support” for BlackLivesMatter and condemning Officer Derek Chauvin, everyone posting a meaningless, inconsequential Black Square on Instagram to advertise their anti-racism, whites self-flagellating every opportunity they get to disassociate themselves from “The Racists”. No person of significance has come out in public and defended Officer Chauvin. Not one. Where is this epidemic of racism? 

Calling someone a racist is, second only to “child molester”, the worst thing anyone in The West can be accused of. Racism has no position of power on any level in society, including the corporate world. 

You find minorities in every stratum of Western Society. Compare this to an actually racist society, such as Apartheid South Africa, or even pre-Civil Rights America. 

The General Social Survey (GSS), run by the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago, contains vital knowledge about attitudes in American society and can be usefully tapped by media to an even greater extent than it already is. The GSS has been conducted for more than four decades — since 1972 — and scholars carefully craft questions and measures that allow it to reveal deep insights into long-term shifts in Americans’ attitudes, unlike snapshot polls. On matters such as race relations, it is considered a gold standard and furnishes perhaps the most precise record available. 

Today, they demonstrate an overwhelming shift in the public sentiment, and everyone knows this - no one hearing these results is actually surprised, if they are honest. 

Here are just some of the key findings of the article: 

 

 

 

In their 2016 paper A Portrait of African American and White Racial Attitudes, authors Maria Krysan (Professor in the Department of Sociology at University of Michigan) and Sarah Moberg (Doctoral Student at University of Michigan) report: 

“…since the mid-twentieth century when such questions were first included in national surveys, whites have shown dramatic increases in support for the principles of racial equality—things like support for equality in jobs, schools, and public accommodations. Along with the dramatic liberalizing of support for the principles of equality, questions of how much social distance whites prefer to keep from blacks, and the extent to which whites endorse negative stereotypes of blacks, also show clear evidence of improvement: fewer and fewer white Americans readily endorse statements that blacks are less intelligent and hardworking than whites; and fewer verbally object to interracial mixing in neighbourhoods and in marriage partners.” 

One also must question, if racism is as prevalent as the race hustlers want us to believe, then why do we see such a wave of hoax crimes? The Jussie Smollet is the most famous example, but far from the only one – From a black student in Virginia claiming three white boys cut her dreadlocks, and then admitting that she had made it up, to Bubba Wallace – a NASCAR driver – claiming there was a noose left in his garage, only for the FBI to determine it to be one of several such ropes placed sometime the year before in Talladega garages as door pulls, long before the garage was even assigned to Wallace. 

There are now several websites devoted to debunking these claims, and they are never short of material. 

But it doesn’t matter. Because the pornographers of race have one currency – White Guilt – and they will not let something as trivial as facts to relinquish their powers.  

No one has summed this up better than Shelby Steele in his aforementioned book, “Shame”. What follows is a total evisceration of this farce: 

The logic seemed so clear: now that the overwhelming wrong done to blacks had been acknowledged, the smart thing for us as blacks was to change the very goal of our protest against America from the achievement of freedom to the establishment of our entitlement. Our identity as a people who had taken charge of their own fate, and honourably fought for and won freedom against all odds, against even an often indifferent government, would give way to an identity grounded in aggrievement, on the one hand, and entitlement, on the other. 

This logic—coming out of the perception that whites were at last ashamed of America’s racist past—suddenly became the most powerful leverage American minorities had ever known. In fact, white guilt over the past was literally the measure of minority leverage. Freedom was good, but now we had the leverage to demand an actual equality of results. Even as a college student I felt the power of this idea. But there was a catch. The leverage we gained by relying on America’s sense of fallenness came at the price of taking on, and then living with, an identity of grievance and entitlement. I did not understand at the time that this was a fool’s bargain, a formula for self-defeat—that it drew minorities into a Faustian pact by which we put our fate in the hands of contrite white people. Very often they were honourable people who simply found it hard to live with history’s accusation that they were racist, people who wanted to shout: “Other whites, yes, but not me.” 

The problem was that, in taking this route, we relinquished considerable control over our own destiny. Rather than seizing as much control over our fate as possible after our civil rights victories of the 1960s, we turned around and looked to the government for the grand schemes that would result in our uplift. It was the first truly profound strategic mistake we made in our long struggle for complete equality. It made us a “contingent people” whose fate depended on what others did for us. Thus it relegated us to the side lines of our own aspirations. It left us pleading with the government, not for freedom, which we had already won, but for “programs” and “preferences” that would be a ladder to full equality. The chilling result is that now, fifty years later, we remain—by most important measures—in the position of inferiors and dependents. 

However, even as I first embraced this new idealism/ liberalism, I felt its paternalism to be far more maddening and smothering than anything I had known in full-out segregation. At least after the countless rejections I had endured growing up in segregation, there was no (or very little) psychological enmeshment with my oppressors. They didn’t expect me to show gratitude, and certainly didn’t concern themselves with what I thought or felt about them. Whites found their superiority in disregarding the humanity of blacks altogether. And, paradoxically, the absoluteness of this disregard left blacks to their own resources and to the possibility of a defiant, even profound, dignity. We would find ways to assert the fullness of our humanity no matter society’s dismissal of us. With the new post-1960s idealism/liberalism, our humanity was not demeaned; it was simply beside the point. In this liberalism, we were more important as symbols and tokens of white innocence than as human beings. 

3: The disastrous consequences of their ideas, particularly for black people 

Perhaps the most ardent proponent of reparations for slavery is Ta Nehisi Coates. In his widely celebrated Atlantic article “The Case for Reparations”, Coates proceeds to systematically go through all the governmental policies designed to help blacks – Affirmative Actions, Diversity Quotas, School Busing etc. - and demonstrate how they have all been disastrous failures that have harmed the black community and people, far more than they have helped. 

But then, for inexplicable reasons, Coates argues that there should be a new government policy – in the form of reparations – to help with black underachievement and poverty. 

The logic is questionable, to say the least. Leaving aside the moral question of asking people who never subjected anyone to slavery to pay people who themselves never suffered slavery, or the idea that a grotesque abomination like that can ever be atoned for through monetary means, any proposed benefits of such a solution runs against empirical data. 

When Lyndon Johnson stood on that podium at Howard University in 1965 and declared his “Great Society”, with equal outcomes, not just equal opportunities, as an ultimate goal, he set in motion a culture of government programs and charities aimed at helping the black and minority communities, with consequences far worse than any ardent racist could have dreamt of. 

According to Walter Williams, Professor of Economics at George Mason University, blacks married at a higher rate than whites in the 1940’s. 

Today, after government incentivised black women to have children outside of marriage, they marry at half the rate, and divorce twice as much as their white counterparts. 

In their book “Mismatch: How Affirmative Action Hurts Students It's Intended to Help, and Why Universities Won't Admit It”, Richard Sander and Stuart Taylor break down how black students are shoehorned into schools and programs they are not qualified for by merit, and the disastrous consequences of such practices, only so that the institutions in question can proudly proclaim how diverse they are. 

Black Students who are in the top 10% of math students in the entire country, get accepted to MIT – a notoriously demanding Ivy League university – to meet their diversity quotas, and find themselves to be at the bottom 10% of the classes. As the lessons are at such an advanced level, aimed at students within the top 1% of the nation, black students who are unfortunate to have been accepted merely as tokens, cannot complete the courses and either drop out, or switch to less demanding majors. 

A report by the Higher Education Research Institute (2010) indicated that 24.5% of White students and 32.4% of Asian American students who entered college intending to major in a STEM discipline completed a STEM bachelor’s degree within four years. By contrast, just 15.9% of Latino students, 13.2% of Black students, and 14.0% of Native American students who intended to major in a STEM field completed a degree in STEM within four years of enrolment. 

In 1965, Daniel Patrick Moynihan published his ground-breaking report “The Negro Family: The case for national action”. As he conducted his research, he saw that the single parent household in black communities were rising precipitously, from single digits to 25% by the time his report was published. Today, that number is over 70%. One of the key criteria on which any scientific theory is evaluated is its predictive prowess. Judged on this standard, Moynihan’s report is nothing short of the work of a prophetic genius. If this trend continues, he argued, blacks will be overrepresented in: 

·       Gang violence 

·       Poverty 

·       Low Academic Achievements 

·       High dropout rates 

·       Crime statistics 

·       High incarceration rates 

Yet, the pornographers of race will still only blame such trends on a non-descriptive, vague concept of “racism”. 

Jerome Hudson, of Project 21 Black Leadership Network, reports: 

Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty produced a reality that is horrifyingly different than the one he probably hoped for. Instead of providing a mere safety net for families in need, it effectively replaced the virtues of work and self-reliance with an avalanche of welfare programs nurturing the poor. These welfare programs foster defeatism, disincentivize two-parent homes and set ablaze an American underclass now seemingly trapped in a never-ending cycle of poverty. 

Compare the following statistics: 

From 1940 to 1960, when racism was not only rampant, but legal and had social authority, the rate of black poverty fell from 87% to 47%. But after Lyndon Johnson initiated his War on Poverty and The Great Society programs, black poverty barely declined – from 32% in 1970 to 28% in 2011. In other words, before government got involved, black poverty fell 40% in 20 years. But after governmental intervention, the rate nearly halted, and fell only 4% in 31 years! 

As President Reagan proclaimed in 1988 “We declared a war on poverty, and poverty won.” 

Despite the mountains of evidence to the contrary, and the millions of lives destroyed, the race hustlers are still demanding further government programs for black people. One can’t help but to remember the old definition of insanity... 

There’s also a false belief that politicians of colour will serve their fellow blacks more efficiently in socioeconomics than whites, and only if there were more publicly elected black officials, things would improve. 

Again, this claim is never measured against reality. 

First, there are almost 9, 000 black elected officials, at local, state and federal level, in America today. In 1965, there were no blacks in the U.S. Senate, nor were there any black governors. And only six members of the House of Representatives were black. As of 2019, 52 House members are black, putting the share of black House members (12%) on par with the share of blacks in the U.S. population overall for the first time in history. 

Black crime and incarceration rates spiked in the 1970s and ’80s in cities such as Baltimore, Cleveland, Detroit, Chicago, Philadelphia, Los Angeles, and Washington under black mayors and black police chiefs. Some of the most violent cities in the United States today are run by blacks. 

(“Please stop helping us”, Jason Riley) 

Though he has an almost sanctified standing among liberals today, Barack Obama provides a perfect rebuttal to the claim that black politicians deliver positive outcomes for black people. Nowhere is this more apparent than his position on school choice. 

Survey after survey informs us that black Americans overwhelmingly support school choice, either through voucher programs, charter schools or a combination of both. Charter schools in particular, have produced results nothing short of miraculous when compared to state run schools. In his 2011 book “Class Warfare: Inside the fight to fix America’s schools”, journalist and lawyer Steven Brill gives the example of Eva Moskowitz, a former New York City councilwoman, who now runs the Success Academy Charter Schools: 

Success Academy Harlem I, which selects students by lottery, shares a building with PS149, one of the city’s better traditional public schools. Both schools serve kids from the same racial and economic background in classes that have approximately the same number of students (the charter school’s class sizes are slightly larger). But the similarities end there. In 2009, 29 percent of students at PS 149 were performing at grade level in reading and 34 percent were at grade level in math. At Harlem 1—literally across the hall—the corresponding figures were 86 percent and 94 percent. Ninety-seven percent of Harlem I’s students passed the state exam that year, ranking it in the top one percent of all New York state public schools. 

Is it therefore much of a surprise that some surveys show up to 78% of Black Americans support school choice for their children? And that the likelihood is higher if the person answering the survey is from a low-income household? 

But not President Obama. Despite sending his own two daughters to private schools, President Obama spent his eight years in office trying to shut down school voucher programs in Washington DC, which had been implemented by George W. Bush. Why? Because most of these schools aren’t unionised, and The Teachers’ Union is one of the most powerful political benefactors of the Democratic party. It turns that Obama too, was a politician, who answered more to special interest groups than people who happened to have same skin colour as him. 

The most empirical example of the benefits blacks would enjoy from the abandonment of Affirmative Action comes from State of California. In 1996, California passed Prop 209, which gutted Affirmative Action overnight.  

As always, there were doomsayers who predicted that this would set blacks and minorities back several decades, that this would lead to larger divisions between whites and blacks, that this would cause a new wave of segregation and so forth. In reality, the exact opposite happened.  

Again, from Stuart Taylor and Richard Sander’s book “Mismatch”: 

·       The number of blacks entering UC as freshmen in 2000 through 2003 is, on average, only 2 percent below pre-209 levels, and black enrolment jumps when we take into account transfers and lower attrition. 

·       The number of Hispanic freshmen is up by 22 percent over the same period, and again more when we include transfers. 

·       The number of blacks receiving bachelor degrees from UC schools rose from an average of 812 in 1998–2001 (the final cohorts entirely comprised of pre-209 entrants) to an average of 904 in 2004–2007 (the first cohorts entirely comprised of post-209 entrants). For UC Hispanics, the numbers rose from 3,317 to 4,428. 

·       The number of UC black and Hispanic freshmen who went on to graduate in four years rose 55 percent from 1995–1997 to 2001–2003. 

·       The number of UC black and Hispanic freshmen who went on to graduate in four years with STEM [science, technology, engineering, and math] degrees rose 51 percent from 1995–1997 to 2001–2003. 

·       The number of UC black and Hispanic freshmen who went on to graduate in four years with GPAs of 3.5 or higher rose by 63 percent from 1995–1997 to 2001–2003. 

By 2013, Mississippi had the most elected black officials of any state in America, and was still home to one of the country’s poorest black population. 

Michelle Alexander and Ava du Vernay have yet to revise their thesis and offer any Mea Culpas, after Eric Holder spent eight years as US Attorney General. 

As Thomas Sowell has noted in several essays and books, there is no correlation between a group’s political power and their socioeconomic welfare. Today, Asian Americans and Indian Americans are the two most successful ethnic groups in the country, yet one would be hard-pressed to name two politicians descending from South East Asia. 

The evidence that black politicians deliver any added progress to the black electorate is non-existent. Yet, pornographers of race are still obsessed with the idea that there needs to be more black people in public office. 

Methods 

On Monday 20th July, John McWorther appeared alongside Michael Eric Dyson on Morning Joe at MSNBC to discuss Robin diAngelo’s book “White Fragility”. McWorther, brilliant as always, elaborated on why the book is not just a bad guide for white people, but how it belittles and infantilises black people. 

Two things stood out, however, from Dyson’s remarks. 

One was his performance – repeatedly referring to white people as his “brothers and sisters”.  

This is the same man who, when he found himself incapable of presenting arguments against Jordan Peterson in a Monk Debate, decided to continuously attack the Canadian professor by calling him a “Mean old white man”. 

Dyson plays the bridge-builder when it suits him but does not ever hesitate from attacking white people for the crime of being white when he feels threatened. 

The second interesting element was his argument. Dyson, a master of sophistry, has built his entire case on inequality between blacks and whites. 

This essay has already explained why this is flawed logic, and I won’t elaborate further on this topic. But the question I would ask Dyson why he only compares blacks with whites? Why not discuss the inequalities that exist between blacks and Indian or Chinese Americans? Those are significantly wider – so why not focus there? Or why not even focus on black Americans vs Black immigrants, from places such as Nigeria or The West Indies? 

Because it would demolish his thesis, that America is a racist country and it is racism that stands in the way of blacks succeeding, rather than culture. 

There have been more Africans voluntarily migrating to America than there ever were slaves imported. These groups accrue wealth and prosper at orders of magnitude higher than black Americans whose ancestry go back centuries. In the 1980’s, it is estimated that there were about 800, 000 black immigrants in the US. Today, that number is 4.2 million – a fivefold increase. 

Why, if the country is as steeped in racism as The Left claim, do these people voluntarily come and stay in the US? 

59% of Nigerian and 47% of Kenyans immigrants earn college degrees in America. For Black Americans, that number is 23%. 

Let me repeat a paragraph stated earlier in this essay: Already in the 1970’s, second generation West Indians were out earning black Americans by 58%, despite an arguably more brutal history of slavery, and subject to whatever “systemic racism” practiced in America. Today, first and second-generation immigrants from Nigeria and Ethiopia have 30% higher income than black Americans. How do the pornographers of race explain this? It cannot be down to racism – systemic, structural or otherwise. 

The sufferings from Slavery, Jim Crow, Redlining and such evils are not genetically inheritable. 

No black American under the age of 54 – which is to say more than 70% - experienced legal, systemic or even societally approved discrimination. Already in the 1970’s, racism had become a taboo in larger society. That is not to say that it didn’t, and indeed still doesn’t, occur – but it most certainly did not have the debilitating hold over black Americans as prior to the efforts of The Civil Rights Movement. 

What will it take to deny this? One has to make the claim that Martin Luther King, Bayard Rustin, Harriet Tubman, Thurgood Marshall, Ella Baker and Rosa Parks achieved nothing, broke no barriers. This is an insult against the single greatest freedom movement in the history of America. 

In his 1990 book “The Content of Our Character”, Shelby Steele offers a different – and highly controversial – explanation. 

“I think they choose to believe in their inferiority, not to fulfil society’s prophesy about them, but for the comforts and rationalisations their racial “inferiority” affords them. They hold their race to avoid individual responsibility. Their margin of choice scares them, as it does all people. They are naturally intimidated by the eternal tussle between the freedom to act and the responsibility we must take for our actions.”

 

Though this may come across as a brutal theory, Steele explains how this mentality came to be. Having been barbarously victimised for centuries, black Americans found power for the first time in America in the 1960’s by highlighting their victimhood for the world to see. By exposing the hypocrisy and evil of the treatments they had endured, they saw for the first time ever, how this rhetoric opened doors previously closed to them. 

It was the rhetoric of victimhood that freed them from their chains – both literal and, later, proverbial – and tore down the barriers that had been erected to keep them out. 

Today, though they are nowhere near as victimised as their ancestors, black Americans and their paternalistic self-appointed guardian angels – Robin diAngelo being the best example – still revert to this discourse, as though it is the only way to gain more power. So many black Americans are still convinced that the only path to success is playing the victimhood card. 

But, as the barricades preventing them from such power have been torn down – and they have been torn down! - we find ourselves in an eternal stalemate. As these people cry “racism!”, society at large asks “Where?”, in a sincere effort to root it out and eradicate it. But the responses are rarely, if ever, anything more than prevarications, cries of wolves that were never there. 

How else to explain the desperate, and so often laughable, attempts to manufacture racism of things such as: 

• Obesity 

• Wine 

• Tipping 

• Veganism 

• 2+2 

• Chess 

• Milk 

• Roads 

• Jogging 

• Women 

• Band Aids 

• Math 

• Soap 

• Hiking 

• Biological sex 

• Knitting 

• Cycling 

• Air 

• Toy Story 4 

• Traffic Signs 

• Classical Music 

 

The list can go on and on.  

Picture the following scene: 

In a forest located in heaven, three men are sat by a campfire: the soul of a man once a slave, joined by the ghost of another black man who died just before the triumphs of the Civil Rights Movement. Completing the trio, a modern-day anti-racist, dead from the exertions of protesting. 

They reminisce about their lives back on earth, the hardships and torments they went through. 

The slave explains: 

We got whipped to shreds, beaten senseless, worked 16 hours / day in the scorching hot sun without pay, picking cottons with our bare hands. We were fed a piece of bread or, when the Master felt generous, a bowl of porridge. Our children were ripped from our arms the moment they could perform the most menial labour and sold to other slave owners. If we were ever to attempt escape, we would be hung from our necks and left in trees for every other slave to see. Our women were raped, our humanity denied – all for the crime of being black! 

The soul of the man who died in the 1960’s picks up the baton: 

Things did get better for us, but we still had challenges. We were not allowed to drink from the same water fountains or sit in the same eateries as the white man. We were denied home loans, prevented from working in any meaningful jobs. They raped our women too and the police would beat us with impunity. Our voting rights, guaranteed by the constitution, was taken from us. We were denied our dignity, our freedoms, our humanity – simply because we were black. 

Not wanting to be outdone, the modern-day anti-racist joins in with peculiar enthusiasm: 

I know exactly how you two feel, we had it bad too! We would see milk in supermarkets! People would claim to see us as individuals, instead of as blacks! There are people to this very day who still play chess, for crying out loud! People who drive on… [fighting to hold back tears]… who… who drive on roads! White supremacy is literally EVERYWHERE! 

It may seem distasteful to humourize this – and it is – but the ludicrousness of today’s anti-racists demand ridicule. When actual racism is in such short supply that one has to dub milk and knitting as forms of racial bigotry, then maybe things aren’t as bad as they think…? 

Mindreading 

The race hustlers, lacking actual racists to fight, have invented a new language to justify their existence. This language doesn’t demand positive evidence for their accusations, but relies on claims of mindreading from the accusers. 

How else can one explain concepts like “dog whistle” or “speaking in code”? 

The race hustlers need merely to ascribe racism to any innocuous comment, and the burden of evidence is suddenly on the accused to prove that he is not a racist. 

These pornographers of race assume to be able to read one’s mind, know one’s motives and anyone challenging such assertions is either racist, or a fellow traveller with such. 

This is an un-winnable game, a heads-I-win, tails-you-lose tactic. Why are we, as a society, indulging in it? 

The word “racism” has lost all its meaning. The evil of racism was not in the word itself, but in the act of viewing someone inferior because of the colour of their skin. This is what made racism heinous – to judge an individual or an ethnic group based on inherent characteristics. 

Today, however, racism can be anything and everything. Except, of course, an act a non-white person can commit. 

You question the idea of open borders? You’re a racist. 

You think capitalism can be or has been a force for good? You’re a racist. 

You think there’s more to George Washington and Thomas Jefferson than just having been slave owners? You’re racist. 

You think maybe we shouldn’t judge history from our contemporary moral vantage point? Racist. 

You think the main priority for black people should be ending black on black crime and restore the institution of the nuclear family? You are Hitler. 

So, what now? Well, if people, who carry no racial animus whatsoever, are endlessly accused of racism and bigotry, then what? When conversations cannot be had? Where can they turn? Could they possibly turn to a demagogue who is the ultimate enemy of such people, regardless of whether he himself has any redeeming qualities?  

As Shakespeare (a “dead white man”, according to SJWs) wrote: 

’Tis better to be vile than vile esteemed 

When not to be receives reproach of being, 

And the just pleasure lost, which is so deemed 

Not by our feeling but by others' seeing. 

For why should others’ false adulterate eyes 

Give salutation to my sportive blood? 

Or on my frailties why are frailer spies, 

Which in their wills count bad that I think good? 

No, I am that I am; and they that level 

At my abuses reckon up their own: 

I may be straight though they themselves be bevel; 

By their rank thoughts my deeds must not be shown, 

    Unless this general evil they maintain: 

    All men are bad and in their badness reign. 

PART V: A Path Forward 

As most people, I saw the video of the brilliantly talented singer Leona Lewis, describing her experience in a shop in Kensington, London. She describes how a shopkeeper in a furniture store followed her and her father around, and treated them as thieves, arguably because they were black. 

Though the shopkeeper described is most likely a bigoted person, my takeaway from the video differs to most who reacted to it.  

What I saw was a strong, beautiful woman explaining how she had recently bought a home in one of London’s most expensive areas, thanks to the well-deserved success she is enjoying. She has built herself a career, where she is admired worldwide, and has the power to communicate to millions of people. And I was reminded what an amazing country I live in, when a talented individual is rewarded accordingly, regardless of her race. And how sad it was that she let a bigoted, small, insignificant shopkeeper affect her that much. 

The black conservative radio host and author Larry Elder tells a story of learning Countee Cullen’s poem “Incident” in school and coming home to recite it to his mother. 

Once riding in old Baltimore, 
Heart-filled, head-filled with glee, 
I saw a Baltimorean 
Keep looking straight at me. 
 
Now I was eight and very small, 
And he was no whit bigger, 
And so I smiled, but he poked out 
His tongue, and called me, 'Nigger.' 
 
I saw the whole of Baltimore 
From May until December; 
Of all the things that happened there 
That's all that I remember. 

His mother’s reaction? 

Larry… What a darn shame that he let something so trivial to spoil his vacation. 

The lesson is a powerful truth: The way to deprive bigots of any power is to show that their racism has no effect on you. The moment this is done, such people lose every sense of power they have over you and are exposed to everyone, especially themselves, as the weaklings they are. 

The idea of black victimhood, which is being propagated ad nauseum, is antithetical to the advancements of an individual. As explained, the greatest tragedy of all this is the effect it has on black people and their communities. 

Black youth should aspire to become Professors of Economy (Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, Glenn Loury), Authors (Ralph Ellison, Maya Angelou), Brain Surgeons (Ben Carson), Linguists (John McWorther), Human Rights Activists (Ayaan Hirsi Ali), Contributing editors (Coleman Hughes), Entrepreneurs (Kmele Foster, Daymond John), TV Icons (Oprah), Greatest Athletes of all time (Serena, Ali, Jordan), Oscar winning film directors (Steve McQueen), Consultancy Tycoons (Janice Bryant Howroyd), Music Moguls (Quincy Jones, Russel Simmons, Dr. Dre) or even Presidents (Obama). 

These are not unachievable goals – the blueprint has been set already. Denying this to black youths is a grotesque sin.   

And nothing will prevent them to achieve anything remotely close to success, if they continue to identify themselves as victims. 

Final:

 

At the age of 12, in a small town in Sweden, I was viciously attacked by two somewhat older neo-Nazi skinheads with steel toed boots, who proceeded to beat me senselessly. 

Throughout my childhood, I was called a “svartskalle” – a racial epithet reserved for non-black immigrants in Sweden with dark hair. As a former refugee, I was bullied for not speaking the language, for my looks and my cultural practices. 

While todays so called “anti-racists” proudly proclaim to be fighting against racists who are not really there, I still bear the scars – both physical and emotional – from my encounters with racism. 

To top that off, I would come home to an abusive father, who would pick up from where the bullies and the racists left off and continue to beat me and my siblings on a daily basis. His weapon of choice was the radio cord. 

I believed in victimhood – for myself and, through my pain, for others I sympathised with. As an ardent socialist, I would argue against the evils of The West, capitalism, colonialism and slavery. 

I was a social justice warrior before social media. 

But as I grew up, I wasn’t getting anywhere in life. Complaining and protesting may have fed my victimhood complex, but it did nothing to allay my actual hunger. 

I was broke, on the verge of losing my home and with no prospects of a career on the horizon. Diagnosed with depression, I started seeking remedies and came across self-development material. At the same time, I started developing an interest in entrepreneurialism and visionaries. 

I read biographies of some of the most successful people in the world. One attribute, above all, was a constant – they all wholeheartedly believed they were masters of their own fate. In fact, in his book “10X”, Grant Cardone, with an estimated net worth of 300m USD, goes as far as to say that even if someone hits you with his car, blame it on yourself! 

As my mentality shifted, from that of being a victim at the mercy of others, to this conviction of having ownership of my own fate, my reality adjusted accordingly. Without boasting about my achievements, what I can promise, what I can guarantee – is that the moment anyone adopts this mentality, their life will improve tremendously. 

If there is a formula – a secret ingredient – to success, this is it. For shame then to the people who wish to deny black people any semblance of this, just so that they can have a cause on which to build their careers. 

Even if all white people were to vanish from America overnight, nothing would improve in the lives of black people – because their problems are internal and cultural, not racial. 

Unless and until we acknowledge this, and are willing to have an honest, if difficult, conversation, nothing will change. 

  

  

  

  

SOURCES: 

https://ukdataservice.ac.uk/get-data/themes/education.aspx (School children in UK) 

https://www.ozy.com/around-the-world/the-most-successful-ethnic-group-in-the-u-s-may-surprise-you/86885/ (most successful ethnic groups in US) 

https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/conspicuous-consumption-and-race-who-spends-more-on-what/ (Trends and patterns in spending) 

https://www.nielsen.com/us/en/insights/article/2018/black-impact-consumer-categories-where-african-americans-move-markets/ (Trends and patterns in spending) 

https://www.forcescience.org/2019/08/researchers-find-no-racial-disparity-in-police-deadly-forceand-thats-just-the-beginning/ (No anti-black disparities in Police Shootings) 

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1948550618775108 (Roland Fryer: No anti-black disparities in Police Violence) 

https://legalinsurrection.com/2020/06/reminder-hands-up-dont-shoot-is-a-fabricated-narrative-from-the-michael-brown-case/ (Hands Up – Don't Shoot = LIE) 

https://www.insidermonkey.com/blog/7-richest-most-powerful-ethnic-groups-in-america-653720/7/ (Most successful ethnic groups in US) 

https://www.cleveland.com/letters/2019/10/root-causes-of-shaker-schools-racial-gap-were-poorly-explored-in-article.html (Shaker Height Study) 

https://quillette.com/2018/07/19/black-american-culture-and-the-racial-wealth-gap/ (The racial gap in wealth – Coleman Hughes) 

Is Reality Optional and Other Essays – Thomas Sowell, Published November 1st, 1993 by Hoover Press 

https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2018/2018117.pdf - Black dropout rate 

Robert Balfanz, John M. Bridgeland, Mary Bruce, and Joanna Hornig Fox, Building a Grad Nation: Progress and Challenge in Ending the High 

School Dropout Epidemic—Annual Update 2013, a report by Civic Enterprises, the Everyone Graduates Center at Johns Hopkins University School of 

Education, America’s Promise Alliance, and the Alliance for Excellent Education, February 2013, 

https://nmaahc.si.edu/learn/talking-about-race/topics/whiteness - “Whiteness” - The National Museum of African American History and Culture 

https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=S0201&tid=ACSSPP1Y2018.S0201 African American Age demographics 

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/01/24/key-facts-about-black-immigrants-in-the-u-s/ Key facts about black immigrants in the US 

https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2015/04/09/chapter-1-statistical-portrait-of-the-u-s-black-immigrant-population/ Black Immigrants income 

https://journalistsresource.org/studies/society/race-society/white-racial-attitudes-over-time-data-general-social-survey/ Racial attitudes since the 1970s 

https://www.city-journal.org/html/myth-criminal-justice-racism-10231.html Heather Mac Donald 1 

https://www.city-journal.org/html/criminal-justice-system-racist-13078.html Heather Mac Donald 2 

https://www.stlouisfed.org/~/media/files/pdfs/hfs/essays/hfs-essay-1-2015-race-ethnicity-and-wealth.pdf The Demographics of Wealth; How Age, Education and Race Separate Thrivers from Strugglers in Today’s Economy 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/jason-riley-the-other-ferguson-tragedy-1416961287 (The Other Ferguson Tragedy, Jason L. Riley, WSJ) 

https://www.nber.org/papers/w11334.pdf (Acting White, Roland Fryer and Paul Torrelli) 

https://www.prb.org/usattitudestowardinterracialdatingareliberalizing/ (White attitudes against blacks) 

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/01/24/key-facts-about-black-immigrants-in-the-u-s/ (Black immigrants) 

https://www.cato.org/blog/african-americans-speak-themselves-most-want-school-choice (School choice) 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703909804575123470465841424 (charter school performances) 

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/01/24/key-facts-about-black-immigrants-in-the-u-s/ (black immigrants in the US) 

https://www.prb.org/usattitudestowardinterracialdatingareliberalizing/ (US Attitude towards interracial dating) 

https://assets.press.princeton.edu/chapters/s9910.pdf (White racial attitudes over time) 

https://news.gallup.com/poll/1687/race-relations.aspx#2 (Race relations in America) 

https://www.ozy.com/around-the-world/the-most-successful-ethnic-group-in-the-u-s-may-surprise-you/86885/ (The most successful ethnic group in America) 

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/01/24/key-facts-about-black-immigrants-in-the-u-s/ (Key facts about black immigrants in the US)