|
Blacks make Cincinnati unlivable
The black community of Cincinnati in their relation to the city as a whole increasingly resembles the Palestinians in relation to Israel, though, of course, without the bombs. The basic black strategy—if it could be called that—seems to be to make Cincinnati unlivable through a total rejection of any common civil existence with white people, a rejection that includes continual racism charges, impossible-to-meet racial demands, racial boycotts of major public events, and racial violence. Thus, according to the Cincinnati Enquirer:
Two consecutive nights of violence last weekend at the Black Family Reunion resulted in a flurry of negative images of Cincinnati splashed across the national media and a fresh wave of talk in Greater Cincinnati suburbs about the state of downtown.As a result of these and many similar events over the last couple of years, the Enquirer reports, whites have eschewed the city. This is becoming easier to do as the surrounding suburbs, largely in response to the urban black mayhem, have acquired more and more of the amenities of city life—shopping, upscale restaurants, coffee houses, and so on. “We haven’t gone downtown except to go to Reds games for a long time because everything is here,” says the president of a suburban homeowners association. “We believe in staying local and supporting everything local.” Posted by Lawrence Auster at August 27, 2002 09:01 AM | Send Comments
Sounds just like South Africa. I have spent considerable time in Johannesburg, which has deteriorated considerably since the end of civilised rule in 1994. The whites and the business communities in Jo’burg have moved to the northern suburbs, in particular Sandton. Sounds as though the same thing is happening to Cincinnati, and ultimnately to the country as a whole. But unlike white South Africans, who to a depressingly large extent have done the “chicken run” to Australia, the US, and Europe, where will the 215 million or so European Americans go when the proverbial sh*t hits the fan? Posted by: William on August 27, 2002 10:59 AMThis is the ongoing tragedy of the white West—they just keep retreating to relatively safer and more civilized areas, which eventually will also be overrun, instead of drawing a line and just saying no. In this connection, a correspondent wrote to me about this post: “Your analogy is precise with the Palestinians. The results in Cincinnati are analogous because the police are doing exactly what the Israelis did in the beginning……..nothing. The reason New York City has virtually no racial problem now is because Mayor Guiliani and his police chief had a zero tolerance policy. ‘F**k around with us or get violent, and we will lock you up, no matter what Al Sharpton or the ACLU does.’ “If Israel would jail anyone who threw rocks at soldiers, (which can kill), there would have been no Intifada. That is why you have an Intifada in Cincinnati and not in NY, except when Dinkins was Mayor.” I replied: “The tragedy of modern life is that so many of the horrors that occur are completely unnecessary, and have been permitted only by the failure or refusal of modern people to oppose things that any rational, normal people would oppose. “One of the most profound statements ever made was Mrs. Reagan’s ‘Just say no.’ That simple idea is one half of the basis of civilization. Modern people don’t want to say no, so they end up in a jungle.” Why don’t modern people want to say “no”? I have noticed a glaring lack of courage, of self-confidence, among our people that prevents them from taking a stand against barbarism. It’s almost as if they’ve lost the will to live. It’s easy to just pack up and move to Australia. But believe me, the same thing will happen there in due course. So instead of constantly ceding territory to the barbarians, I would love to see us re-conquer it. Unfortunately, I think this is going to require the kind of tactical decisions that most conservatives and patriots, weakened as they are by cowardice and vestigial ethics, are unwilling to make right now. Posted by: William on August 27, 2002 12:02 PMI think it is true that liberalism ultimately becomes a positive pursuit of personal death, and this unprincipled concession of all life to the inscrutable other is the beginning. It seems to me that this is one theological reason why Hell must exist. Evil wants death for everyone including itself. If it can’t take us all with it, at the very least it can do itself. Hell is the denial of even that partial victory to evil: it has to live eternally with itself and its complete failure. Traditionalism is the affirmation of life. Posted by: William on August 27, 2002 1:30 PM |