What, in liberal society, can whites do to protect blacks?

In response to a reader who said I was “creepy” for “miss[ing] the glaring fact that it is black women and children who suffer most from Western society’s refusal to police blacks,” I wrote:

The reality is, blacks will always suffer the most from black violence. What can whites do about that? The best thing whites can do about that is the same thing that they need to do to protect themselves from black violence, which is to reinstate white leadership of society and a culture of traditional morality … To many people, those ideas sound uber creepy.

There is, in brief, no “non-racist,” “non-creepy” way that whites can protect themselves OR BLACKS from black violence.

Serendipitously, on the same day that the above exchange occurred, Robert Weissberg published a piece in which he laid out the problems authorities recurrently run into when they try to protect blacks from black violence. Namely, the black community doesn’t want such protection; it resents such protection and calls it racist. The black community would rather suffer from black violence, than have white police clamp down on black criminals.

So what are whites supposed to do? Should whites get bent out of shape about black violence against blacks when, as soon as police take the measures necessary to protect black communities from black predators, the inevitable result is angry black protests calling the police racists?

Weissberg writes:

Unfortunately, an all-too-familiar scenario afflicts these neighborhoods, a seemingly endless cycle of counter-productive depravity. It begins with a particularly grievous BoB [black on black] triggering incident, for example, innocent school kids killed in a gang-related shootout, a college student home for the holidays stabbed for being in the wrong 7/11 at the wrong time, or a teenager murdered for his designer sneakers. Outrage soon follows—friends and neighbors rally to demand something be done to end the senseless killing, local ministers sermonize about yet one more life tragically cut short, and family members weep for the fallen at the well-attended funeral. City Hall promises a crack-down and police respond by stepping up patrols, anti-gang unit are mobilized, undercover agents are dispatched, suspicious types are stopped and frisked, roadblocks keep gangs out, surveillance cameras are installed, “quality of life” crimes are targeted to deter more serious offenses, tipster hotlines are instituted, and all the rest.

Arrests soar and judges make examples of the worst offenders. It works—crimes drop, businesses, many of which are black owned or run, are again filled with customers. Mothers once more take their children shopping and let them visit playgrounds. But, sooner or later, a contentious race-infused incident occurs—a routine traffic stop goes awry, a prominent local minister is arrested for disorderly conduct, or the police mistakenly shoot an innocent person who appears to be pulling out a non-existent gun. Think Rodney King. The local “community” now erupts with the familiar cries of police brutality, racial profiling, stereotyping, and white racism. The “No Justice, No Peace” placards are taken out of storage, demagogues call for a federal investigation, and the politically savvy mayor takes to the streets to cool the outrage. Boycotts are threatened; black state and national legislators demand that heads roll. Community activists begin wailing about the staggering black-male incarceration rates (“the prison industrial complex”). Police and firefighters prepare for riots. The police prudently back off, ignoring petty crimes like public intoxication and waiting for any lawbreaking to escalate into deadly violence. Crime levels, true to form, return to “normal,” until another deadly BoB incident involving innocent bystanders begins the process anew.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at December 16, 2009 10:06 AM | Send