Injusticeline is a website which appears to have developed a new and bold explanation of why blacks are more than eight times more likely than whites to be convicted criminals, and why this and related statistics have gone virtually unreported in the major media. In particular, while the obvious explanation for the crime-rate disparity is that blacks commit far more crimes than whites, and the obvious explanation for why the major media have not mentioned these stats is that their liberal bias does not incline them to give ammunition to those who question the Great Liberal Axiom which states that all men -- along with women, and very possibly dogs, sheep, worms, plants, turds and children -- are created 'equal', the bold new explanation offered by Injusticeline is actually the old and mendacious liberal one, dat ole Debbil racism, ie, that it is (white) 'racist' cops, 'racist' judges, 'racist' prosecutors and 'racist' juries who are responsible for the differential incarceration rates of blacks and whites. Accordingly, while the website's author claims to be a libertarian, the proffered explanation simply demonstrates a fact I have often observed before, to wit, that libertarians are no more able to deal with the ugly facts of race than are liberals or conservatives, all of whom are paralyzed with fear of being labeled with what might be called the present day's ultimate term of opprobriation, 'racist'.
Now it is worthwhile to point out that there are at least two small problems with the 'racism' explanation. The first is with the scientific principle called Ockham's Razor, or the Law of Parsimony, which says that an explanation cannot be deemed scientific unless it constitutes the simplest explanation in accord with the facts. And the explanation already mentioned -- that blacks commit a hell of a lot more crimes than whites -- is not only simpler, but is accepted by virtually everyone who knows the statistics, including black libertarian scholar and syndicated columnist Walter Williams, who has discussed this very subject in several of his columns. Of course, this explanation is unacceptable to liberals, since it contradicts the Great Liberal Axiom, a notion which is exceeded in ignorance and stupidity only by the liberals who believe it. Or perhaps it would be more correct to say that liberals believe it only in a sort of rarified intellectual sense -- in the same way, perhaps, as Catholics believe in the doctrine of transubstantiation without believing that they become vampires during Communion -- but would never believe it in the practical sense of thinking that it is perfectly safe to walk in the ghetto at night in the same way that it is perfectly safe to walk in most white neighborhoods. Indeed, most blacks have a much more sanguine attitude toward the reality of black life than white liberals -- after all, Jesse Jackson's fame rests not only on his ability to shake down corporations for contributions and his confession that he used to serve soup to whites in which he had spit, but also on his remark that if he heard footsteps behind him on the street, he would feel relieved to turn around and see the person he had heard was white.
The second problem with the 'racism' theory is at least as bad as the first. To explain, we observe that the ever-so-hardnosed liberals are forever making fun of 'conspiracy theories', and especially 'right-wing conspiracy theories' a la Hillary et al. So what is the 'hard-nosed' theory injusticeline is asking us to believe in order to explain the overwhelming disparity between white and black crime? Why, nothing less than the theory that 'racist' cops, 'racist' prosecutors, 'racist' judges and 'racist' juries are joined together all over America in something very much akin to a fantastic conspiracy to put huge numbers of blacks in prison. Or if it's not exactly a conspiracy, then at least it is a sort of race-based wink-wink/nod-nod immorality in which whites seek to further the interests of their own race by letting their own criminals go free while putting innocent blacks in prison. Are we dealing in fairy tales here, folks, or just with people who 'didn't inhale'?
Now I don't want to be unfair to liberals, so I am not going to say that it is race simpliciter which is the cause of black behavior. For example, the Men's Rights Association's flagship publication The Liberator has noted that a better correlation than race with criminality is mother-headed households (black illegitimacy is 70%); Prof Michael Levin has pointed out that IQ, when interpreted as a measure of the ability to foresee the consequences of one's actions, may also be better correlated with behavior (black IQ is 15 to 20 points below the white); and black libertarian columnist Prof Walter Williams has suggested in his book Blacks Against the State that most of what the government does 'for' blacks -- from affirmative action to welfare -- has the effect of destroying their independence and motivation, and leading them into the paths of decadence and failure. But even granting the truth of all these observations, the problem with illegitimacy, intelligence and similar categories is that they are largely invisible, while race is visible; so that race, tho perhaps not as efficient in a statistical sense in identifying the likelihood of desirable or undesirable characteristics in the individual, is nonetheless highly useful as a 'rule of dumb', ie, a rule where more precise information such as intelligence or birth status is not available. But in any event, the fact that there are other categories more efficient than race in identifying individual characteristics does not change the reality that there is a significant correlation between blackness and numerous unpleasant qualities, crime being only one. And it certainly does not change the fact of what color neighbors most of us would wish to have.
Now in passing it is worth remarking that there are of course other 'rules of dumb' such as income status, profession or sexual orientation, which also are useful (if less visible) as markers for individual characteristics (income status, for example, is a crude measure of intelligence); and people often use such rules as a basis for grouping themselves in addition to race. But what egalitarian liberals have done by their profound influence on government is to attempt to vitiate people's natural inclination to group themselves by calling this inclination 'prejudice' and 'discrimination' and outlawing it wherever possible. To this it may be added that, while self-sorting is in part an attempt which people make to segregate themselves from those with objectively undesirable qualities, it is also their way of sorting themselves into groups of others whom they are like; for it is generally true that people like to be with those whom they are like, a fact so profoundly true as to be embedded in our language via the common origin of both meanings of the term like. From this, then, we see clearly that the impulse to be with one's own racial kind stems from the deepest impulses of human nature, and not -- as liberals would have us believe -- from some immoral or foolish animus toward other races.
Injusticeline is dedicated to stamping out 'injustice'; and indeed, there is no one who could possibly oppose such a seemingly-noble purpose. But is it not more than a little unjust to accuse whites of a grand conspiracy against blacks based upon a theory that is not only unscientific and absurd on its face, but which paints whites as fundamentally immoral when it is whites who have developed the world's greatest civilization, while blacks have never developed a civilization worthy of the name (ancient Egypt was not a black civilization), have not been able to maintain the civilizations established for them by Colonial rulers, and continue to this day with such practices as tribal massacres, voodoo, slavery and cannibalism?
It's bad enuf having to deal with black criminality. But it's twice as bad having to deal with liberal ignorance, stupidity and denial.
* * Back to the Home Page of John "Birdman" Bryant, the World's Most Controversial Author * *