An excerpt from ‘Too Hateful to Handle,’ Unamusement Park’s soon-to-be-released first book. It is based on a post from April 2011. BTW the formatting is way better in the book.

Pulitzer Prize-winning black journalist Leonard Pitts Jr. demands an answer: “I asked you a question. … I asked how, given its documented biases against black people, I can trust the justice system” (Lawrence Journal-World). I, too, demand an answer: how, given his documented biases against white people, can I trust Leonard Pitts Jr.?

Ed. — We’ve met Leonard Pitts Jr. twice by this point in the book.

I mean, he fell pretty hard for Dorfman and Schiraldi’s fake study of “minority overrepresentation as perpetrators” (Seattle Times):

Black crime against whites is underreported? On what planet? Study after study and expert after expert tell a completely different story.

For instance, there’s “Off Balance: Youth, Race and Crime in the News”

Maybe he should have read the studies before he wasted “his rich and uncommonly resonant voice” on an argument “so utterly, abysmally, stupidly, self-servingly wrong.”

Ed. — This study is covered in an earlier section of the book.

But all right, let’s give him another chance. “Documented biases” in the justice system — let’s hear it, Leonard. Example number one: “A 2000 Justice Department study finds the justice system to be racially biased.” Yeah, I heard about that (New York Times):

‘Pervasive Disparities’ Found In the Federal Death Penalty’

In the first comprehensive review of the federal death penalty since it was reinstated in 1988, the Justice Department has found significant racial and geographical disparities, say officials who have seen the report.

In 75 percent of the cases in which a federal prosecutor sought the death penalty in the last five years, the defendant has been a member of a minority group, and in more than half of the cases, an African-American, according to the report, which officials said the Justice Department would release on Tuesday.

“It’s troubling,” said an administration official who has reviewed the data. “The president has expressed concern about the problem, and this backs that up.” Another administration official described the report as “disturbing.”

Notice what’s missing: a racial breakdown of capital crimes. How troubled and disturbed should we be, really, that 48% of defendants were black (DOJ), when blacks made up 49% of homicide arrests in 2000, 49% in 2001, 50% in 2002, and so on, year after year?

Well, never mind all that: let’s give a murdering drug lord a six-month reprieve because we’re “concerned about ‘the disturbing racial composition’ of the inmates on federal death row” (New York Times). In a later case, the judge threw out the evidence strictly “because of a statistical pattern suggesting racial bias” in traffic stops (Boston Globe).

A year later, on review, racial bias in the death penalty vanished (Washington Post):

The review was based on an analysis of nearly 900 death penalty cases and is a follow-up of a Justice Department study released last year that found wide racial and geographic disparities in the federal death penalty system.

“There is no evidence of racial bias in the administration of the federal death penalty,” Ashcroft said […]

“Our analysis has confirmed that black and Hispanic defendants were less likely at each stage of the department’s review process to be subjected to the death penalty than white defendants,” Ashcroft said.

That’s a novel definition of racial bias — and it puts a new spin on this (Times):

Ms. Reno’s review process has reduced the apparent racial bias.

In the 682 cases she reviewed in which the defendant was white, she authorized the death penalty 38 percent of the time; when the defendant was black, she authorized the death penalty 25 percent of the time.

Now compare the New York Times coverage of the follow-up study (2001):

‘Attorney General Says Report Shows No Racial and Ethnic Bias…’

As opposed to: ‘Pervasive Disparities Found…’ in 2000.

Declaring that he had “no higher priority than protecting the civil rights of all Americans,” Attorney General John Ashcroft said today […]

Versus “the Justice Department has found…”

Critics said today […]

Diann Y. Rust-Tierney, who leads the American Civil Liberties Union’s efforts against capital punishment, said […]

Representative John Conyers Jr., Democrat of Michigan, complained […]

In 2000, not one critic was quoted; in 2001, only critics were quoted.

Guys, you can cut back on the propaganda! There’s really no need for it: in 2003, Senator Russ Feingold was still trying to abolish the death penalty on the grounds that DOJ’s 2000 report “showed [that] who lives and who dies in the Federal system appears to relate to the color of the defendant’s skin,” and the ACLU was still complaining that it “shows that the federal death penalty… is used disproportionately against people of color.”

Not to mention Leonard Pitts Jr., in 2008. That’s two years after the RAND Corporation showed that “controlling for nonracial case characteristics eliminated [race] effects.”

These findings support the view that decisions to seek the death penalty were driven by heinousness of crimes rather than by race.

In other words, death penalty likelihood “rose for murders that were particularly heinous — usually involving a number of aggravating circumstances such as the killing of several victims, sexual abuse of the victim, the killing of an elderly person or a child, premeditated murders where there was extensive planning, killings in which the victim was set on fire, and murders in which the victim was mutilated or dismembered” (RAND).

Now see if you can take a WILD FUCKING GUESS why an unbiased Attorney General would be “far more likely to seek a death sentence in White victim cases” (ACLU).

Statistically Speaking

Here’s how I know, for a fact, that police aren’t biased against blacks. The FBI keeps track of arrests through the Uniform Crime Reporting program, while the Census Bureau counts offenders in the National Crime Victimization Survey. NCVS is an extensive, nationally representative survey of crime victims, and it does not involve the police in any way. Putting the two together, we can compare the racial breakdown of arrests to the racial breakdown of offenders (of known race) as reported by the victims.

Let’s take 2004 to 2008, the last five years for which NCVS data are available, and look at three crimes: aggravated assault, robbery (or mugging), and rape (plus sexual assault); making sure to combine single- and multiple-offender crimes from NCVS. What percentage of offenders were black? How about arrests? (Bearing in mind that blacks make up about 13% of the U.S. population.) You will find the results on the next page.

Black share of robbery offenders (red) and arrests (orange)

Black share of robbery offenders (red) and arrests (orange)

Black share of rape offenders (blue) and arrests (purple)

Black share of rape offenders (blue) and arrests (purple)

Black share of aggravated assault offenders (green) and arrests (yellow)

Black share of aggravated assault offenders (green) and arrests (yellow)

When Leonard Pitts Jr., or whoever, starts babbling about “documented biases against black people,” he is essentially asking us to believe that it’s easier to frame them for murder, rape and robbery, than round them up for loitering, vandalism and drunkenness:

Black share of arrests (left to right): murder, robbery, rape; loitering and curfew violations, vandalism, and drunkenness

Black share of arrests (left to right): murder, robbery, rape; loitering and curfew violations, vandalism, and drunkenness

It goes without saying that cops would rather let a white killer go free than arrest the actual perpetrator. Nope, we’ll just lock up some random black guy. (Still a bit of a mystery why they refuse to arrest Asians: 5% of the population, 1% of violent crime arrests.)

Not that there aren’t statistics on the other side of the debate! “Green jobs” racketeer and cop-killer enthusiast Van Jones teams up with Jason Zeidenberg of the Justice Policy Institute to create perhaps the most offensively stupid document on race and crime I’ve ever seen: ‘ARE Blacks A Criminal Race? Surprising Statistics’ (Huffington Post).

Mr. Jones explains that although “media coverage, conviction rates and ‘common knowledge’ (stereotypes)” are all working together to create the impression that blacks commit a lot of crime, this may be “largely a stereotype, which is driven by the disproportionate rate of ARRESTS and CONVICTIONS of Black [sic] people,” and not at all supported by “the actual government statistics.” Indeed, our “over-focus on Black crime” might just “conceal an alarmingly high crime rate within the white population.” To bolster this remarkable assertion, he has enlisted the statistics of “one of the best minds on the subject.”

“Those who believe that African American or Latino youth are more ‘criminal’ than any other ethnic groups are simply wrong,” Mr. Zeidenberg begins in perfect smugness. “The real facts tell us much more than stereotypes, or musings — both of which obscure the well-documented disparate treatment accorded African Americans compared to whites within the justice system.” Unfortunately, criminal victimization statistics appear nowhere in Mr. Zeidenberg’s analysis — which means he doesn’t have the actual black and Hispanic crime rates, which means he cannot “document” any sort of “disparate treatment.”

Instead, he pops over to drug crime, as did Leo Terrell in debate with Jared Taylor. A favorite tactic of black crime apologists, it allows Zeidenberg to ignore inconvenient facts like this (Color of Crime): “The single best indicator of violent crime levels in an area is the percentage of the population that is black and Hispanic.” This is still true — the correlation hardly changes — after controlling for poverty, unemployment, and lack of education.

No, it’s best to keep the discussion away from violent crime: you want to make sure no one knows that blacks commit 85% of interracial violence; or that they’re more likely to choose a white victim than a black one. Someone might complain. (“Cry me a river.”)

Another reason to focus on drug crime is that you can often get away with claiming that blacks use drugs at the same rate as whites, and therefore racism. Here it is in action:

According to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, among youths aged 12 to 17, the rate of current illicit drug use was 11.1% among whites, and 9.3% among African Americans. […] The Monitoring the Future Survey of high school seniors shows that white students annually use cocaine at 4.6 times the rate of African Americans students, use crack cocaine at 1.5 times the rate of African Americans students, and use heroin at the same rate

Both of his sources, and all of his claims, are based on self-reported drug use. That’s self-reported use… of crack cocaine… among high school seniors.

Question 1. yo you smoke crack??

This is the impeccable logic of Human Rights Watch: “Contrary to public belief” and common sense, “the higher arrest rates of black drug offenders do not reflect higher rates of drug law violations. Whites, in fact, commit more drug crimes than blacks” — based on “[survey] questions about drug selling.” (Equally stupid is comparing arrest rates to the total number of crimes, when whites are almost five times as numerous as blacks.)

Question 2. loooool smoke some crak

It is also the reasoning of black pundit Armstrong Williams: “According to the federal Centers for Disease Control, a white adolescent male is four times more likely than his African-American classmate to be a regular cocaine user.” (Also idiotic: the notion that “9 out of 10 serial killers are white males between the ages of 20 and 35.” Actually, blacks made up 32% of all serial killers in the past three decades, and the number is rising.)

Question 3. sooo baked right now

And it is the thesis of Michelle Alexander, the unhinged author of The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness, who uncovers “startling stats: White students used cocaine seven times the rate of Black students, used crack eight times the rate of Black students, used heroin seven times the rate of Black students” (CounterPunch).

Question 420. cant feel my face

It is even the expert testimony to Congress of David Harris: “among black youths… there is evidence that use of all illicit substances has actually been consistently lower than among white youths for twenty years running.” Try swallowing that slice of crazy-cake.

Here’s what bothers me, friends: the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) tracks admissions for drug abuse treatment. In 2006, 49% of “smoked cocaine” admissions were black, along with 25% of “other” cocaine admissions, and 22% of heroin admissions. So blacks were admitted for smoked cocaine at six times the white rate; other cocaine at twice the white rate; and heroin at twice the white rate too.

Between 2004 and 2008, the Drug Abuse Warning Network (DAWN) reported that blacks accounted for 35% of emergency room visits for cocaine, heroin, marijuana, PCP, LSD, and meth (here). That’s more than triple the white rate. As “stereotypes” would suggest.

Now, do these figures accurately represent the racial breakdown of drug use? I don’t know, I’m too high to figure this out, but they do confirm that asking high school students if they smoke crack is not a reliable way to gauge drug use. Plus, actual sciens reserch has shown that “black respondents had at least twice the odds of underreporting compared with white/other respondents for every indicator of underreporting” (Oxford Journals).

As it turns out, when a sociology graduate student — let’s say Sudhir Venkatesh — goes wandering around the ghetto, asking people whether or not they smoke crack, black people are no more likely than white people to say: “Why yes, I do smoke crack.”

As I started to climb the stairs, the smell of urine was overpowering. On some floors the stairwells were dark; on others there was a muted glow. I walked up four flights, maybe five, trying to keep count, and then I came upon a landing where a group of young men, high-school age, were shooting dice for money.

“N¡gger, what the fuck are you doing here?” one of them shouted. I tried to make out their faces, but in the fading light I could barely see a thing.

I tried to explain, again. “I’m a student at the university, doing a survey, and I’m looking for some families.”

The young men rushed up to me, within inches of my face. […]

“C’mon, n¡gger!” one of the younger men shouted. “We know you’re with somebody, just tell us who.”

Another one, laughing, pulled something out of his waistband. At first I couldn’t tell what it was, but then it caught a glint of light and I could see that it was a gun. […]

Two of the other young men started to search my bag. They pulled out the questionnaire sheets, pen and paper, a few sociology books, my keys. […]

By now I was sweating despite the cold. I leaned backward to try to get some light to fall on the questionnaire. The first question was one I had adapted from several other similar surveys; it was one of a set of questions that targeted young people’s self-perceptions.

“How does it feel to be black and poor?” I read. Then I gave the multiple-choice answers: “Very bad, somewhat bad, neither bad nor good, somewhat good, very good.”

The guy with the too-big hat began to laugh, which prompted the others to start giggling.

“Fuck you!” he told me. “You got to be fucking kidding me.”

But do go on, Professor Zeidenberg. “According to the Center on [sic] Disease Control’s annual Youth Risk Behavior Survey, in 2001 whites and African Americans reported similar rates of carrying a weapon… and similar rates of carrying a gun… African Americans report being in a physical fight at a similar rate,” and “both report similar rates of delinquency.” Hard data — from the demographic that brought you “Stop Snitching.”

So much for “the real facts.” I’d stick with stereotyping, if I were you.


Statistical anti-black bias in the justice system is a lie. Sometimes it’s easy to refute (see above); other times, slightly less easy. Christ, even the New York Times has sort of figured this out. What’s that? “Black felons… receive longer maximum sentences”?

Prosecutors say — and researchers agree — that the statistics cannot possibly capture the whole story, because analyzing how the legal system treats different people is difficult. […] it is very hard to identify defendants of different races who are otherwise in very similar situations, because every crime is different.

“You also have to understand why there is a difference in treatment” in different cases, said James P. Fox, district attorney in Redwood City, Calif., and the president of the National District Attorneys Association. “Is it because of prior failures on probation? Is it because of the seriousness of injuries to the victim?”

David Baldus, whose study of death penalty cases in Georgia for the McCleskey case is viewed as one of the most sophisticated, agreed that the numbers must be carefully analyzed. “If you look at death row, it’s 40 percent African-American in this country and then people blithely compare it to the percentage of blacks in the population, and that’s 12.5 percent,” he said. “You’re not adjusting for the participation of blacks in homicides.”

Basic stuff — but we’re not going let racist facts stand in the way of Social Justice.

“Quantitative and qualitative evidence collected at the federal, state, and local levels confirms that racial profiling persists” (CivilRights.org). And how do we know this? Traffic stops and searches are “disproportionate” relative to the “total population.”

“Racial bias permeates the Minnesota justice system” (Hamline Law Review): it’s “extensive,” “substantial,” indeed “rampant,” and it’s “getting worse and not better.” And we know this because… “Recent studies show that African Americans in Minnesota are arrested for violent crimes at a rate twenty-five times higher” and so on and so forth.

In Washington State, census figures reveal that “black men and women were incarcerated at a disproportionately high rate” (Spokesman-Review). “Experts say drug policies explain the racial disparities… despite equal amounts of drug use across racial lines.”

If you can’t find police “bias,” you can always broaden the definition. Internal Affairs in San Jose rejected four years’ of worth “racial profiling or other bias allegations against city cops,” so now, in a move celebrated by “minority community leaders,” the department has changed its policy, “making it a violation for an officer to show any biased behavior at any time during an encounter with the public” (Mercury News). It has also stopped officers impounding the cars of unlicensed drivers, “a practice many felt was unfairly targeting undocumented Latino immigrants.” Unfair targeting — of unlicensed illegals.

Not satisfied with merely identifying the fake problem, the activist-journalist-sociologist complex is quick to suggest solutions, always involving the expansion of bureaucracy.

Because “higher rates of black drug arrests do not reflect higher rates of black drug offending,” all levels of government must “ensure the enforcement of drug laws does not disproportionately burden black communities,” and “take appropriate action to eliminate racially disparate treatment” in all “police activities” (Human Rights Watch).

Given that blacks are disproportionately “exonerated by DNA testing” (sample size 242), proving “racial bias in the criminal justice system,” the NAACP Criminal Justice Program is “actively litigating” to “force a change in policy” (Innocence Project). While we’re at it, we’d better “reform [the] mental connection between race and criminality.”

Our pal Jason Zeidenberg applauds the Justice Department for “working to reduce the racial disparity seen in juvenile arrests and juvenile imprisonment.” Congress also “has promoted policies to ease those disparities.” You know, because “African American youth arrest rates for drug violations, assaults and weapon offenses are higher than arrest rates for white youth — even though both report similar rates of delinquency.”

Wait a minute: in real life (whether or not it shows up on a survey) Zeidenberg’s “African American youth” have much higher rates of — well, every crime, actually; certainly including drug violations, assaults, and weapon offenses. So what exactly is the Justice Department doing, when they claim to be “working to reduce” a nonexistent “racial disparity”?

What would it mean to “eliminate racially disparate treatment,” when “disparate treatment” just means that black arrest rates match black crime rates? And what sort of “change in policy” can sever the “mental connection between” two related factors?

Attorney General Reno “reduced the apparent racial bias” in capital punishment by disproportionately executing white defendants. Attorney General Ashcroft sees “no evidence of racial bias” when white defendants are demonstrably more likely “at each stage of the department’s review process to be subjected to the death penalty.”

Today, under Attorney General Eric “My People” Holder, DOJ Civil Rights is “reluctant to take cases of white victims” (Washington Times). In its report, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights cited “numerous specific examples of open hostility and opposition.”

Testimony obtained by the panel during its investigation included allegations that some Justice Department lawyers refused to work on cases involving white victims; that lawyers who worked on such cases were harassed and ostracized; and that some employees, including supervisory attorneys and political appointees, openly opposed race-neutral enforcement of voting rights laws.

Across the pond, for at least three decades now, imported Pakistanis have been raping and generally abusing untold numbers of English white girls, “but police had not gone public about the problem for fear of upsetting ethnic groups” (Daily Star). According to former Detective Superintendent Mick Gradwell, “The main pressure police have is being called institutionally racist if they highlight a crime trend like this.”

At least England’s “all-white juries” are “not guilty” of racial “bias” (Guardian).

In fact, it seems all juries are more likely to convict white defendants, and notably, some white juries […] are more likely to convict a white defendant if the victim of the assault was black or Asian. […] the jury is one element in the criminal justice system that seems to treat black and Asian defendants fairly.

Because race-neutral enforcement isn’t what they have in mind. “The colorblind thesis, the notion that ‘race’ does not or should not matter and that society and its laws are or can be colorblind, is simply unfounded” (Michigan Journal of Race and Law, my emphasis).

Welcome to critical race theory.

“The original trauma was the sin of slavery, followed by the assault of Jim Crow, then by today’s battles waged by Color-Blind Warriors” (Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law). These “right-wing intellectuals” want to let whites off the hook for “subconscious forms of racial bias” including “self-fulfilling stereotypes” and “failures of imagination.”

Meanwhile, Jeannine Bell “addresses a particular instance of societal blindness in the here-and-now: the failure to adequately recognize the important contribution of ‘anti-[white] violence’ to racially segregated housing patterns in the United States.” White people prefer “largely [white] neighborhoods ‘because they fear [black] hostility and the violence associated with it,’ ” a fear which “stems from realistic [white] perceptions.” Although “society is… not entirely blind to anti-[white] violence… when the supposedly rare instance of anti-[white] violence is noticed and brought to the attention of the police, they often do not see it for the race-motivated crime that it is.” I’m kidding, of course: swap the races (black for white), and watch out for that scary “anti-integrationist violence.”

It’s quite impressive, really, how the author manages to perfectly invert reality.

We live in an “era of color-blind racism,” “a de facto racism where people of color, especially African Americans, are subject to unequal protection of the laws, excessive surveillance, … and neo-slave labor via incarceration” (American Behavioral Scientist): “disproportionately policed, prosecuted, convicted, disenfranchised, and imprisoned.”

Now, “the rhetoric of color-blind racism… a co-optation and subversion of the dream of Dr. King” by “so-called ‘racial realists,’ ” “would have us believe that this situation is the unfortunate result of disproportionate Black and Latino participation in crime.” This, however, merely reflects a “racist and classist economic and political agenda.”

The solution to the problem, which was created by progressive post-war social policies (in conjunction with evolution), is — even more progressive social policies: “organized political struggle and radical pedagogies for change… transform[ing] for social justice.”

As we have seen, the call for social justice cannot rely on civil justice or macro-level remedies alone; law has been the handmaiden of what hooks [sic] (1992) has termed “the white supremacist capitalist patriarchy” […]

The work of justice must begin at the micro level […]

The true underpinnings of criminal justice […] must be surfaced via radical and relentless pedagogies of resistance; […] they must be surfaced through the research, writing, and teaching of those whom Mumia Abu-Jamal (2005) called “radical intellectuals”

Okay, so these people are completely fucking nuts. So what?

Well, for starters, there are a lot of them, and they’re very loud. The message is getting out, and plenty of blacks are willing to “[begin] the work of justice… at the micro level.”

Scores to Settle

When he slaughtered four people, Brian G. Nichols “considered himself a ‘soldier on a mission’… a wrongly accused man in a legal system unfair to African-Americans… angry that many of the inmates around him were also black” (AJC). “ ‘He called it systematic slavery.’ ” What do you think? I dunno, I feel like neo-slave labor just sounds cooler.

Previously, we talked about how the rhetoric of critical race theory is used to justify black-on-white violence. I’m hardly the first to have noticed this, and it is hardly a new phenomenon. As I’ve mentioned, if you’ve ever wondered what Susan Brownmiller meant by “rape is a crime not of lust, but power,” you’ll find the roots of our relentless pedagogies of resistance in the work of depraved black revolutionary psychiatrist Frantz Fanon. (Bill Ayers wrote him into Barack Obama’s college years: late-night dorm room discussions of “neocolonialism, Franz [sic] Fanon, Eurocentrism and patriarchy” (Dreams from My Father).)

This is not the only tremendously evil thing critical race theory has accomplished.

In case you haven’t noticed, “urban jurors, particularly African-Americans, have grown increasingly willing in recent years to acquit defendants they believe are guilty if they detect any abuse of police power” (Baltimore Sun). And I suppose it’s possible their detection capabilities are better than Jason Zeidenberg and friends’ — but I’m not optimistic.

According to a black former federal prosecutor, now professor, these urban jurors have become “extremely sensitive” — that’s an excellent choice of words — “to certain patterns of testimony or to lapses in accepted police procedure.” Again, I suppose it’s possible their pattern recognition is better than urban journalists like Leonard Pitts Jr., but…

Curtis Lavelle Vance, serial rapist of white women, smashed Anne Pressly’s head apart with his fists and left her to die in what the Associated Press called “a suspected burglary.” Kristen Edwards considers herself lucky just to have been raped (Arkansas Times).

Given how good the DNA evidence is in the Marianna rape, how much of a slam dunk it seems […] not to mention the fact that Vance took the stand in the rape trial and testified that he had, in fact, told Little Rock detectives in a taped confession that he was in Edwards’ house on the morning of the rape, it was confusing for a lot of people when on Feb. 3, a jury in Marianna decided they couldn’t reach a verdict. The case was declared a mistrial.

The jury split seven to five along strictly racial lines — seven blacks and five whites. Even though it would be hard to find a genetics expert in the world who would tell you there was more than an unfathomably remote chance that the semen found inside the victim belonged to anyone other than Curtis Vance, the fact of the matter is this: All the white members of the jury were apparently swayed by that evidence, while all the black jurors were not.

Black jury nullification: call it a radical pedagogy for change.

[Prosecutor Fletcher] Long told the story of another Marianna rape trial he was involved in a few years back […] After the second mistrial in that case with the jury again split strictly on racial lines, the victim decided not to press it any further. Unlike Curtis Vance, that defendant — innocent until proven guilty in a court of law — is walking the streets of Marianna today.

It’s only one of the cases in the area, Long said, where a trial involving DNA wound up with “equally bizarre results” broken down on racial lines. “I’ve seen it in other types of cases,” Long said. “Although it gets particularly difficult to deal with in black/white crime” […]

Long said that the origins of that kind of thinking might lie with the media. “I think we spend so much time in the news nationwide and local to our state underlining, in the process of saying mea culpa, all the unjust things that have been done to blacks in the past, which creates a psychology of, almost, an ‘I’m going to level the score’ type thing.”

Meanwhile, the Center for Crime Prevention and Control rationalizes “ ‘stop snitching’ culture” (NPR): “What is really going on is that, after centuries of bad treatment at the hands of the outside world, … it has become mainstream thought in many minority, especially African-American communities, that law enforcement is the enemy, and good people do not treat with the enemy.” And street thugs are just looking to “finish school.”

Crime journalist Radley Balko is still “astonished to hear one hip-hop artist and activist say he would not cooperate with the police even if he had witnessed the rape and murder of an old woman in broad daylight” (Reason). Maybe you should adjust your expectations.

But once again, this is hardly a new phenomenon. As Winfield H. Collins wrote in The Truth About Lynching and the Negro in the South (1918): “Seldom is it found that the Negro will aid in the detection of the Negro criminal, rather otherwise.”

Or as Thomas Nelson Page wrote at length in The Southerner’s Problem (1904):

Conditions in the South render the commission of this crime [rape] peculiarly easy. The white population is sparse, the forests are extensive, the officers of the law distant and difficult to reach; but, above all, the Negro population have appeared inclined to condone the fact of mere assault.


The criminal, under the ministrations of his preachers, usually professed to have “got religion,” and from the shadow of the gallows called on his friends to follow him to glory. So that the punishment lost to these emotional people much of its deterrent force, especially where the real sympathy of the race was mainly with the criminal rather than with his victim. […]

For a time, a speedy execution by hanging was the only mode of retribution resorted to by the lynchers; then, when this failed of its purpose, a more savage method was essayed, born of a savage fury at the failure of the first, and a stern resolve to strike a deeper terror into those whom the other method had failed to awe.


A close following of the instances of rape and lynching, and the public discussion consequent thereon, have led the writer to the painful realization that even the leaders of the Negro race — at least, those who are prominent enough to hold conventions and write papers on the subject — have rarely, by act or word, shown a true appreciation of the enormity of the crime of ravishing and murdering women. Their discussion and denunciation have been almost invariably and exclusively devoted to the crime of lynching. Underlying most of their protests is the suggestion that the victim of the mob is innocent and a martyr.

Or as William Winwood Reade wrote in Savage Africa (1864):

It is one of the chief peculiarities of the Sierra Leone negro that he hates, with an intense and bitter hatred, this white man to whom he owes every thing. […]

This hatred of the white man becomes really dangerous in a court of justice, when cases of black v. white come before black juries. These men do not want for intelligence; but they form no idea of the sacredness of their calling, and give verdicts at will where their private feelings are concerned. […]

[A Mr. Shreeve observes] that the negro’s system of physiognomy tends to represent all men bad who happen to be white, and that the white man can not obtain justice in Sierra Leone; […] quoting an instance in which a man who had killed another (probably a white victim) was found Not Guilty in spite of all evidence, “a decision at which even the culprit himself appeared astonished, and a virtuous indignation from many ran through the hall” […]

Finally he adds, “Here Justice should be painted like Le Brun’s Revenge, with a bowl and dagger, not with the balance and the sword.”

Today, of course, we all realize that lynching was actually an endless series of hate crimes perpetrated by racist white folks (redundant, I know) against poor, innocent, long-suffering black folks — and of course we teach this to the least intelligent, most violent demographic.

And the War on Hate rages on.

As you know, I’ve taken it upon myself to document the subtle difference between actual crimes, on the one hand, versus the fake, made-up, non-existent crimes against “racial equality” committed by racists, fascists, ogres, trolls, dragons, wizards, ghosts and goblins — and all the other fantastical villains of Fantasyland.

Schadenfreude is by far the classiest way to say “trollolololol #reKKKt”:

As hundreds of protesters [sic] began marching through downtown Berkeley, the unrest that marked protests [sic] Saturday night was touched off again as someone smashed the window of a RadioShack. When a protester tried to stop vandalism, he was hit with a hammer, Officer Jennifer Coats, the spokeswoman for the Berkeley Police Department, said.

The police said groups of protesters [sic] began roaming through the downtown area late Sunday, throwing trash cans into streets and lighting garbage on fire, smashing windows on buildings, and damaging and looting businesses. There also were reports of vandalism at City Hall.

A hippie SWPL egalitard Eloi (but I repeat myself) in a hand-painted, hilariously un-ironic “Stop Killing [Project N¡ggers]” polo shirt inexplicably tried to save a racist fascist corporate exploiter from getting social justice’d by a pack of workers and peasants — and took a Morlock mace to the face for his troubles (video).

Yes, institutional racism strikes yet again, as another aspiring carpenter of color is viciously persecuted when a kulak smashes his face into the victim’s hammer.

(It’s still not as dangerous as being an “aspiring rapper” these days: see here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here of course, here, here, here…)

Nice shirt

“Condolences: the bums lost.”

But wait! There’s more! From the “Couldn’t Have Happened to a Nicer Guy” files:

A powerful video posted to YouTube shows a bloodied man in the moments after he had two teeth knocked out by masked vandals late Tuesday in Oakland during a protest [sic] against police brutality that ranged from Berkeley to Oakland to Emeryville.

“Around blacks, never relax” (video).

Resolved to make his point, the man says, “This harms movements. This harms our ability to protest [sic]. Every time we do this, they can stop our marches… They just knocked my two teeth out. I did nothing violent… All I did was passively try to stop them.”

Yeah, we know. Thanks a bunch:

“It is common for African-American teens to walk in the middle of the street and block in cars at intersections,” said the man, who has lived in the neighborhood for half a decade. “We have been stopped at intersections in Bevo and our car attacked by teens who pound on the car — laughing at us.”

“They only do this to white individuals, who they have learned will generally not respond.”

But wait! There’s more!

The site of Michael Brown’s killing has become particularly dangerous for media members in the last 24 hours. A crew of four freelance journalists was robbed at gunpoint [by 15 to 20 blacks] this evening around 8 p.m. as they tried to film a segment at the Canfield Drive memorial.


“He came up and said, ‘You think you’re safe here?’ and I told him, I said, ‘No, I don’t feel totally safe here to be honest,’” said Hampel. “He said, ‘If you want to get out of here fucking alive you better leave fucking now.’”

By the way, I’d just like to point out that it is actually not normal for this sort of thing to happen in a civilized country. Astonishing — but true.

But thankfully, Chris Mooney was able to see through the lies, illusions, propaganda, squid ink, smoke and mirrors to identify the real threat:

Most white Americans demonstrate bias against blacks, even if they’re not aware of or able to control it. It’s a surprisingly little-discussed factor in the anguishing debates over race and law enforcement that followed the shootings of unarmed black men by white police officers.

And we managed to detect this invisible, impalpable “bias” how?

the computerized Implicit Association Test

According to the same test, more “biased” physicians discriminate less, and black people prefer to interact with “highly racially biased” white people. Possibly this is because the IAT measures “simple cognitive inertia — the difficulty in switching from one categorization rule to another — rather than unconscious preferences.”

Or maybe all white people are evil and deserve to die? Take it away, Chris:

Bias in the test occurs when people are faster at categorizing negative words when they are paired with African American faces, or faster at sorting positive words when they’re paired with white faces — suggesting an uncontrolled mental association between negative things or concepts and African Americans.

Golly gee wow I wonder how on Earth they could possibly make that connection.

One key thing to notice about the map above is that white people in every U.S. state are biased. […]

Overall, looking at a map like this one tells us something pretty crucial to our understanding of racial bias: It is everywhere, from north to south, from Maine to California. […]

We have a huge amount of work to do.

Well then, let’s get started! From the St. Louis Post-Dispatch of November 29:

Let’s have this conversation.

Let’s talk about race. We know it’s going to be awkward, no matter how well-intentioned. We know it makes both blacks and whites uncomfortable.

(I’m fine, thanks.) — and from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch of December 8:

For the next two months, we are turning off the comment function on all editorials, columns and letters in the opinion section.



Last Sunday, we challenged our region to have the serious discussion on race that it has been avoiding for decades. Such difficult discussions are made more challenging when, just to present a thoughtful point of view, you have to endure vile and racist comments, shouting and personal attacks.

Heresy! Blatant heresy! Thoughtcriminals on the loose, spreading — dissenting views! Oh dear God won’t somebody please think of The Narrative?

We intend to use our opinion pages to help the St. Louis region have a meaningful discussion about race. So we are going to turn off the comments in the editorial section […]

Now let’s be absolutely clear on one thing, you worthless racists/valued customers:

To be clear: It’s not that we don’t want to hear from those who disagree with us.

Accordingly, they have provided several “venues” where you can “talk about” how much you hate “racial injustice,” i.e., evil white people, in a “safer, more civil,” which is to say more rigorously climate-controlled way. Go ahead: “discuss.”


“Y U POAST SLO???” I’m finishing a book.

Good morning, friends. How are you doing? It’s a beautiful day: damp, gray and drizzly. Puts me in a sort of retrospective mood…

As you know, I’ve been away. I spent the first half of 2013 setting up a brand-new, state-of-the-art secret race-research facility deep in the fetid jungle heart of Midnight Mountain, the legendary long-lost Nazi island base of occult operations, whose trove of… archaeological oddities, shall we say, renders it undetectable to radar, sonar, satellite imagery, prayer, dowsing, and the power of positive thinking.

I spent the second half of 2013 fending off super-intelligent radioactive mandrills.

When my calculations revealed that said mandrills were breeding faster than I could slaughter them with the available chemical, biological and supernatural weaponry, I reluctantly punched the island’s thermonuclear voodoo self-destruct sequence and fucked off to New Zealand, which is a much nicer place to live. (It has kiwis.)

Anyway, I’m back in the United States now, as of Monday, and — I don’t know, maybe that isn’t enough time to fully acclimate to the cultural-Marxist zeitgeist, but to be honest… well, I’m pretty sure your country is completely fucking nuts.

I would like to offer, as evidence of this claim, some items I missed from 2014.

The topic of much debate

The topic of much heated debate [image]

“No Angel”

According to the New York Times, the late Michael “Fuck What You Have to Say” Brown, aspiring rapper, amateur cop-boxer and occasional convenience store robber, “spent [his] last weeks grappling… with life’s mysteries.” And its “promise.”

Brown was “joking and outgoing,” and he “regularly flashed a broad smile,” and yet he was also “reserved… around people he did not know.” Little Asian store clerk. Although “not the best student,” he “overcame early struggles in school to graduate on time” — an impressive feat, I’m sure we can all agree! Little Asian store clerk. His family insists “he never got in trouble with the law as a juvenile,” and “was pointed toward a trade college and a career.” Little Asian store clerk. He never, “ever threw a real punch.” Little Asian store clerk. Brown “spoke seriously about religion and the Bible,” in that he thought he saw “Satan chasing [an] angel” in the clouds one time.

Mr. Brown was sometimes philosophical, as he showed in his final hours.

“Everything happen for a reason,” he posted to Facebook the night before he was shot. “Just start putting 2 n 2 together. You’ll see it.”

If I’ve hallucinated this entire story, will someone please leave a comment below?

“An outrage plume” promptly erupted all over the glowing profile of Michael “You’re Too Much of a Fuckin’ Pussy to Shoot Me” Brown, according to Erik Wemple. You see, friends, the author, John Eligon, described “Mr. Brown” as being “no angel.”

“The phrase is indeed alarming,” Ben Mathis-Lilley notes, for “the opposite of an angel is a devil.” Yes, “no angel” certainly is “a loaded term” — although, “taken in its entirety, the Times’ article about Michael Brown tells the story of his life fairly.”

“Fairly,” friends. “Fairly.”

But Wemple demands to know: “Would the New York Times have chosen this term — which is commonly used to describe miscreants and thugs — if the victim” (that is, the miscreant and thug) “had been white?” Eligon repents, and “acknowledges” the “merit in the backlash.” Writes NYT Public Editor Margaret Sullivan:

Let’s get the obvious out of the way first: That choice of words was a regrettable mistake. […]

“I understand the concerns, and I get it,” Mr. Eligon said. He agreed that “no angel” was not a good choice of words […] and noted that a better way to segue into the rest of the article might have been to use a phrase like “wasn’t perfect.”

You racist filth. Spew your vile waste elsewhere, you white-supremacist monster. You think an unarmed black teenager who was also an aspiring rapper and a good kid who dindu nuffin “wasn’t perfect”? Did you seriously just say Michael Brown “wasn’t perfect”? Oh, fine! Why not just call him a “nigger” and be done with it?

[Margaret Sullivan:] In my view, the timing of the article (on the day of Mr. Brown’s funeral) was not ideal. Its pairing with a profile of Mr. Wilson seemed to inappropriately equate the two people.

Again, if I’ve hallucinated this entire story…

This week, with your indulgence, I would like to illustrate, with recent high-profile case studies, the difference between actual crimes, on the one hand, versus the fake, made-up, non-existent crimes against “social justice” committed by witches, warlocks, racists, sexists, ogres, trolls, Sasquatch, the platypus, and other fantastical villains of Fantasyland, on which we are so reliably informed by our incredibly reliable and totally unbiased “mainstream” media — as, for example, in the case of Slate’s very timely 2013 coverage of the 2011 Wisconsin State Fair mob attack:

WTMJ (2011): “It looked like they were just going after white guys, white people,” said Norb Roffers of Wind Lake in an interview with Newsradio 620 WTMJ. […]

“It was 100% racial,” claimed Eric, an Iraq war veteran from St. Francis who says young people beat on his car.

“I had a black couple on my right side, and these black kids were running in between all the cars, and they were pounding on my doors and trying to open up doors on my car, and they didn’t do one thing to this black couple that was in this car next to us. They just kept walking right past their car. They were looking in everybody’s windshield as they were running by, seeing who was white and who was black.” […]

“I think once we get all the info in it’ll be just like that, like what happened in Riverwest,” said the police sergeant.
“I saw them grab this white kid who was probably 14 or 15 years old. They just flung him into the road. They just jumped on him and started beating him. They were kicking him. He was on the ground. A girl picked up a construction sign and pushed it over on top of him. They were just running by and kicking him in the face.”
A witness told WTMJ that as he worked in a kiosk at the State Fair Midway, he saw what he described as “a Riverwest type mob. Easily between 50–100 kids all under 18 and all African American. They were running around knocking people over (young kids and adults), looting the Midway games (stealing the prizes), starting fights.”

Slate (2013): “Dozens to hundreds”? When witnesses can’t differentiate between 24 and 100, should we really rely on them to speculate whether a crime was racially motivated?

Stay classy, kiddo. I hereby dub you: Ace Journalist Emma “Google Is Now Blocking ‘Black Mob’ Stories” Roller (blocking, that is, WorldNetDaily for its more than 670 reports documenting Emma’s ongoing “false narrative” of black mob violence).

Anyway, let’s get started: Ferguson goes to war!

Crimes, Real and Imaginary, in Ferguson, Missouri

/09 AUG 2014

“My hands are up! Don’t shoot! No, no, please, Officer Wilson! Please don’t murder my black baby body because of institutional racism!”

[Sustained automatic gunfire.]


[Continued racist gunfire.]

“Save me, Obama! Save me, Oprah Winfrey! Save —”


Wave after wave of white-supremacist death squads — funded by the John Birch Society, commanded by former SS Lieutenant-Colonel John “Zyklon” Boehner — sweep the redlined Ferguson housing projects in helicopter gunships, mowing down black babies’ bodies with machine guns, incinerating their voter IDs with an unceasing barrage of Hellfire missiles, scooping them up in enormous nets and releasing them from spectacular heights to tumble helplessly into grain threshers —

Technically, did not actually happen [image]

Technically, did not actually take place in exactly this way [image]

Oh, wait, my mistake: this is the real world, where Michael Brown (6’5”, 289 lbs.), the not-so-gentle giant, lurching down the middle of the road after manhandling a diminutive Asian clerk in a convenience store cigar robbery, settles on the brilliant plan of attacking a white cop through the window of a patrol car using his fists for absolutely no reason. Not the fake, made-up, fantasy world that doesn’t exist.

Here, for comparison, are a few examples of actual, real, actual crimes:

  • stealing cigars from a convenience store
  • shoving a diminutive Asian store clerk
  • striking a police officer in the face with your fist
  • scrabbling at his gun with your big fat fingers
  • rioting
  • looting
  • lobbing Molotov cocktails
  • igniting police vehicles
  • burning down buildings
  • instructing people to burn down more buildings
  • inciting further riots
  • roaming the streets of St. Louis beating white people with hammers
  • finding a white person and beating him to death with your hammers
  • first running up and down the street screaming “kill the white people”
  • doing any or all of the above even if you belong to a demographic that is subject to a proportionally higher-than-average number of traffic stops

So, if you or someone you know is planning to do any of that — whoa, hey now! Look out! That might not be such a good idea. Measure twice, friend. Measure twice.

And now you know!

And now you know! [image]

Appendix: Random Chance

St. Louis Post-Dispatch (Dec. 2):

Mayor, police, say race played no role in hammer slaying of Bosnian immigrant

No role at all — gosh, that was a fast and thorough investigation.

One teen was charged with murder, two more were held and a fourth was sought Monday as officials spent another day trying to quell speculation that the bludgeoning death of a Bosnian immigrant was racially motivated.

Trying real hard. Hey, what race are Bosnians?

“There is no evidence that this was a crime occasioned by the race or ethnicity of the victim,” Mayor Francis Slay declared in a formal statement. He added, “Speculation that this attack had anything to do with the Ferguson protests is absolutely unfounded.”

You mean the vaguely anti-white quasi-race riots less than 14 miles away?

Mitchell and one of the two juveniles in custody are black, police said; the other is Hispanic.

According to court documents, members of the group yelled at Begic, his fiancée and two others as they walked to Begic’s car. As the vehicle drove away, one teen jumped on the back and began beating on it. Begic stopped and got out, and one of the men taunted him to fight before all four attacked — and continued to beat him after he fell to the ground.

“We think it was wrong place, wrong time,” police spokeswoman Schron Jackson said.

Detectives do not believe the attackers took anything but Begic’s life.

Sounds random to me!

New York Times (Dec. 1):

Missouri: 3 Teenagers Arrested in Hammer Death

Three teenagers [of what persuasion?] have been arrested after a man was beaten to death with hammers in St. Louis [near…?]. The victim, Zemir Begic, 32, a Bosnian immigrant [of what persuasion?], was in his car about 1:15 a.m. Sunday when several young people [no srsly wut race are they] began damaging it, the police said. He suffered injuries to his head, abdomen, face and mouth, and was pronounced dead at a hospital. A 17-year-old suspect turned himself in late Sunday, after 15- and 16-year-old suspects were taken into custody.

Hard-hitting journalism!

BBC (Dec. 3):

Beyond the local reaction, the story has gained traction among conservative commentators and bloggers, who view it as an example of media and liberal activist hypocrisy for expressing outrage over Brown’s death but ignoring the Begic attack.

If the episode can somehow be linked to the Ferguson demonstrations, that fact could be used to discredit the protest as a whole, characterising it as the work of lawless and violent malcontents (a theme also raised during recent episodes of looting and vandalism).
But is it fair to draw connections between Ferguson and this attack — beyond their close proximity? Like Ferguson, there are conflicting eyewitness accounts being reported. Although police assert that ethnicity was not a factor, some aren’t so sure — and point to locals who say the attackers yelled racial epithets.

Quite the mystery we’ve got on our hands. Someone call Benedict Cumberbatch!

Haitian History

I’m a voodoo child, voodoo child;
Lord knows I’m a voodoo child.

Jimi Hendrix

Hello, friends! Welcome (back) to the Unamusement Park.

— which is, depending on whom you ask, either an online encyclopedia of race relations with added kittens OR the most hateful collection of hatred known to man. It’s really up to you, intrepid Park ranger, to decide that for yourself.

Today’s topic: the history of Haiti, formerly known as the French colony of Saint-Domingue (or Santo Domingo), on the island of Hispaniola, which it shares with the Dominican Republic, which is… well, a rather different sort of place from Haiti. I don’t want to get ahead of myself, but let’s start with a little “compare and contrast.”

From ‘Haiti and the Dominican Republic: A Tale of Two Countries’ (Time, 2010):

The U.N. ranks the Dominican Republic 90th out of 182 countries on its human-development index, which combines a variety of welfare measurements; Haiti comes in at 149th. In the Dominican Republic, average life expectancy is nearly 74 years. In Haiti, it’s 61. You’re substantially more likely to be able to read and write if you live in the eastern two-thirds of Hispaniola, and less likely to live on less than $1.25 a day.

So how can we “explain why Haiti suffers, while the Dominican Republic — which shares the 30,000 sq. mi. of the Caribbean island of Hispaniola — is relatively well-off?” In the wake of Haiti’s devastating 2010 earthquake, Jared Diamond (who, by the way, thinks New Guineans are “more intelligent, more alert, more expressive, and more interested in things and people around them than the average European or American,” which is… interesting…) tiptoed up to the truth in the Guardian:

A second social and political factor is that the Dominican Republic — with its Spanish-speaking population of predominantly European ancestry — was both more receptive and more ­attractive to European immigrants and investors than was Haiti with its Creole-speaking population composed overwhelmingly of black former slaves. […] Hence European immigration and investment were negligible and restricted by the constitution in Haiti after 1804 but eventually became important in the Dominican Republic. Those Dominican immigrants included many middle-class businesspeople and skilled professionals who contributed to the country’s development.

Ridiculous, write Daron Acemoglu and James Robinson:

Many commentators end up arguing that Haiti is poor because of its people. A recent book by Laurent Dubois, Haiti: the Aftershocks of History, is a useful corrective to these arguments. Dubois starts by recapping many of these arguments which go back centuries. For example, Victor Cochinat, a 19th-century visitor from Martinique, stated

Haitians were lazy and ‘ashamed’ to work, …, which was why they were so poor. They spent too much money on rum.

Lest you think that these are the ramblings of an eccentric 19th-century explorer, Dubois shows how the same arguments are what gets traction today […]

You see, people have been noticing the same thing for centuries, which makes it a “stereotype,” which makes it wrong, and you’re a bad person for noticing it.

The book makes a lively read, dispelling these notions, and firmly locating the roots of Haiti’s poverty in its history.

Haiti, you see, was an “extractive” colony, indeed “a dystopic colony, based on terror and repression,” with “brutal punishments… common for the most minor of offenses.” As a result, “slaves died at staggering rates,” such as the completely made-up figure of “10% of the slave population dying of disease, overwork and other causes.” Fortunately, “Haitians shocked the world with a formidable slave revolt in 1791, ultimately leading to independence from France.” Unfortunately, “this revolt did not lead to the development of inclusive institutions.” Nope. Instead, it lead to a “vicious circle of extractive institutions.” Fascinating. As Steve Sailer puts it:

MIT economist Daron Acemoglu has a blog in which he advances his world-shattering insight that the reason some countries are poorer than others is because they have worse institutions bequeathed them by European imperialists. (Personally, I think he can take it a step further and point out that what’s even more true of poor countries in general is that they have less money.) […]

Diamond’s comparison of the differing fates of Haiti and Dominican Republic, both in Collapse and after the Haitian earthquake reads like 40 proof crimethink compared to Acemoglu/Robinson’s embarrassing handling of the same subject.
While Acemoglu’s political correctness certainly has promoted his career, as far as I can tell, though, Acemoglu is a True Believer. He comes across as being wholly untainted by the slightest doubts in the conventional wisdom.

It’s actually rather amusing to see the newer generation of True Blue dopes turning on the aging cynics who taught them too well.

But now we really are getting ahead of ourselves. No, we’re not ready for a “formidable slave revolt” yet. See, we haven’t truly experienced the hell-hole of modern Haiti yet. Let’s review this earthquake business, shall we?

‘The horrifying moment lynch mob beats to death a looter and drags his body through the streets as Haiti descends into anarchy’ (Daily Mail, 2010):

A mob of men and children watch as the bloodied corpse of a suspected thief is brutally beaten by a man with a stick.

The victim is naked and bound at his hands and feet. It is broad daylight in the devastated capital city of Haiti.

These are the latest in a series of chilling images from the country as anarchy threatens to destabilise the relief effort following Tuesday’s earthquake.

(Make sure to check out the awesome pics.)

Meanwhile, fears are growing for the continued safety of the nation with violence rife as scavengers and looters swarm over the wrecks of shops, carrying off anything they can find.

Robbers prey on survivors struggling without supplies in makeshift camps on roadsides littered with debris and decomposing bodies.

Men armed with machetes and other weapons walk brazenly through the capital city while others stalk the streets holding shotguns.

‘One Year After Earthquake, Haiti Still in Ruins’ (Voice of America, 2011):

January 12 marks the one-year anniversary of the earthquake that devastated the Caribbean nation of Haiti. One year later, reconstruction is moving at a snail’s pace, millions of people are still without a permanent home, a cholera epidemic has killed thousands, and the recent first-round of the presidential election is under investigation for fraud.

Only an estimated five percent of the capital’s rubble has been cleared, and many streets are still blocked by debris. Makeshift camps in and around Port-au-Prince house more than a million people.

‘Haiti: 2 Years After the Quake’ (Atlantic, 2012):

Two years ago tomorrow, January 12, a catastrophic 7.0-magnitude earthquake struck Port-au-Prince, Haiti, leveling thousands of structures and killing hundreds of thousands of people. Haiti, already an impoverished nation, appears in many ways to have barely started recovery 24 months later, despite more than $2 billion in foreign aid. So many homes were destroyed that temporary tent cities hastily set up throughout Port-au-Prince have begun to appear permanent — more than 550,000 people still live in the dirty and dangerous encampments throughout the Haitian capital.

‘3 years after Haiti’s quake, lives still in upheaval’ (USA Today, 2013):

On this third anniversary, local refugees and aid groups working in the impoverished Caribbean island nation say recovery is still painfully slow, despite billions in aid donations, including funds that remain undistributed.

An estimated 357,785 Haitians still live in 496 tent camps, according to a recent report by The New York Times. Others have moved to shanties or slums. Cholera, widespread joblessness and other woes still grip the nation.

‘Four Years Later, Haiti’s Troubled Recovery Haunts Its Future’ (Time, 2014):

Four years after an earthquake leveled Port-au-Prince, capital of the poorest country in the western hemisphere, killing more than 100,000 people, pushing 2.3 million into homelessness and reducing tens of thousands of structures to mere matchsticks, Haiti slowly continues its resurrection from ruin.

Port-au-Prince has rebounded to an extent, considering its airport, roads and seaport were unusable or barely functional, hampering the quick influx of aid and personnel. But the simultaneous collapse of its political system and public-health infrastructure, among other sectors wracked by endemic corruption, made a bad situation worse for its 10 million people. At the time, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon called it “unprecedented” and “overwhelming.” And in many regards, as international relief organizations renew their calls for attention and resources in hopes of highlighting slim progress and a mélange of challenges ahead, that hasn’t changed.

Billions of dollars in promised aid haven’t yet been dispersed and may never trickle down far enough for victims to feel it. A new action plan by the U.N. found that at least 70% of Haitians lack access to electricity, 600,000 are food-insecure and 23% of children are out of primary schools. At least 172,000 people remain in 306 displacement camps, down significantly from a peak of 1.5 million, but often with little or no access to safe water, sanitation and waste disposal. Amnesty International claims that many camps are at risk of flooding during hurricane season and their residents are privy to forced evictions.

Okay, that’s Haiti now. Let’s back it up a couple hundred years. From Remember Haiti at Brown University’s John Carter Brown Library — ‘Economy’:

Once the richest colony in the world, Saint Domingue was a leader in the production of sugar, coffee, indigo, cacao, and cotton.

Haiti’s early history is characterized by remarkable economic output. On the eve of the Haitian Revolution, Saint Domingue had become the most lucrative colony on earth. It was the world’s top producer of sugar and coffee and among the global leaders in indigo, cacao and cotton (which was rising rapidly in importance). Indeed, Saint Domingue, occupying only a small territory, outproduced the entire Spanish empire in the Americas.

And ‘Environment’:

A dazzling array of flora and fauna greeted Haiti’s earliest visitors.

Travelers and local writers found Hispaniola a luxuriant paradise, not only endowed with tremendous economic potential, but also full of the wonderment of life, as defined by a rich variety of flora and fauna unknown in Europe. […] In 1742, Jean-Baptiste Labat wrote, “one does not know any other country in the world more abundant than this island, the land here has an admirable fecundity, rich, profound, and in a position of never ceasing to produce all that one could desire.”

Compare Spenser St. John’s Hayti: The Black Republic (1889, p. 20):

I have travelled in almost every quarter of the globe, and I may say that, taken as a whole, there is not a finer island than that of Santo Domingo. No country possesses greater capabilities or a better geographical position, or more variety of soil, of climate, and of production, with magnificent scenery of every description, and hill-sides where the pleasantest of health-resorts might be established.

Whereas today: ‘Poor Haitians Resort to Eating Dirt’ (National Geographic, 2008).

It was lunchtime in one of Haiti’s worst slums, and Charlene Dumas was eating mud.

With food prices rising, Haiti’s poorest can’t afford even a daily plate of rice, and some must take desperate measures to fill their bellies.
A reporter sampling a cookie found that it had a smooth consistency and sucked all the moisture out of the mouth as soon as it touched the tongue. For hours, an unpleasant taste of dirt lingered.

Which is… quite a difference. Now, opinion is divided as to whether the changes in Haiti have been positive or negative. Divided, that is, between sane people (or “racists”) and the staff of the New York Times (‘A World of Its Own,’ 2013):

What if conventional wisdom has it exactly wrong? What if Haiti, instead of being mired in retrograde customs and superstitions the developed world cast off centuries ago, is in fact ahead of the curve? What if, as Amy Wilentz posits in her excellent “Farewell, Fred Voodoo,” Haiti has always been the most modern of nations, at the forefront of every major historical trend since Columbus dropped anchor off the Hispaniolan coast?

Yes, what if. Let me just think on that, friends. Hmmmm…


welcome to haiti

Well, anyway, it’s still quite a difference — which brings us to Haiti’s exceedingly “formidable slave revolt.” From the John Carter Brown Library again — ‘Revolution’:

The Haitian Revolution was the world’s only successful slave revolt.

The Haitian Revolution was one of the great episodes of human history. Although perpetually overshadowed by the American and French Revolutions, which preceded and to a degree caused it, it forever changed the history of the world. It witness [sic] the first successful slave uprising, introduced the first African-led nation in the new world, and profoundly affected France, the United States, and the neighboring nations and colonies of the hemisphere.

Huzzah! Truly “one of the great episodes of human history” — although, as it turns out, this “episode” was not exactly a straightforward “slave revolt.” No, Spenser St. John (no doubt an evil raciss) begs to differ (pp. 49–50):

It is curious to read of the projects of these negro leaders. They had no idea of demanding liberty for the slaves; they only wanted liberty for themselves. In some abortive negotiations with the French, Jean François demanded that 300 of the leaders should be declared free, whilst Toussaint would only have bargained for fifty. The mulattoes, however, were most anxious to preserve their own slaves, and, as I have related, gave up to death those blacks who had aided them in supporting their position; and a French writer records that up to Le Clerc’s expedition, the mulattoes had fought against the blacks with all the zeal that the interests of property could inspire.

“As I have related” (pp. 41–43):

In the meantime the coloured men at Mirebalais, under the leadership of Pinchinat, began to arouse their brethren; and having freed nine hundred slaves, commenced forming the nucleus of an army, that, under the leadership of a very intelligent mulatto named Bauvais, gained some successes over the undisciplined forces in Port-au-Prince, commanded by an Italian adventurer, Praloto. […]

When everything had been settled between the chiefs of the two parties, the Haytians returned to Port-au-Prince, and were received with every demonstration of joy; they then agreed to a plan which showed how little they cared for the liberty of others, so that they themselves obtained their rights. Among those who had fought valiantly at their side were the freed slaves previously referred to. For fear these men should excite ideas of liberty among those blacks who still working on the estates, the coloured officers consented that they should be deported from the country. In the end, they were placed as prisoners on board a pontoon in Môle St. Nicolas, and at night were for the most part butchered by unknown assassins. Bauvais and Pinchinat, the leaders and the most intelligent of the freedmen, were those that agreed to this deportation of their brethren in arms who had the misfortune to be lately slaves! I doubt if the blacks ever forgot this incident.
The coloured men, jealous of each other, did not combine, but were ready to come to blows on the least pretext; while the blacks, under Jean François, were massacring every white that fell into their hands, and selling to the Spaniard every negro or coloured man accused of siding with the French.

I guess they chose poorly. But — “massacring every white”? Golly gee! Tell us more, Lothrop Stoddard! From The French Revolution in San Domingo (1914, p. 151):

The horror of the race war in the West now [1791] almost surpassed that of the North. The mulatto Confederates, in hideous token of their Royalist sentiments, fashioned white cockades from the ears of then-dead enemies. The atrocities perpetrated upon the white women and children are past belief. “The mulattoes,” writes the Colonial Assembly to its Paris commissioners, “rip open pregnant women, and then before death force the husbands to eat of this horrible fruit. Other infants are thrown to the hogs.”

And that’s not at all (pp. 281–282):

It was on August 1, 1800, that Toussaint Louverture made his triumphal entry into Les Cayes. After a solemn Te Deum for his victory, Toussaint mounted the pulpit according to his wont and promised a general pardon. But this was only a ruse. Toussaint knew that the mulattoes were his irreconcilable enemies, and he had no mind to see himself stabbed in the back at the height of some future struggle with France. He therefore appointed the sinister Dessalines Governor of the South with general orders for the “pacification” of the country. And Dessalines did not disappoint his master. Backed by overwhelming masses of negro troops, this ferocious brute born in the wilds of the Congo traversed in turn the districts of the South. Not by sudden massacre, but slowly and methodically, the mulatto population was weeded out. Men, women, and children were systematically done to death, generally after excruciating tortures chief among which was Dessalines’s own special invention, — a form of impalement christened “The Bayonet.” The number of persons who perished in this atrocious proscription is usually estimated at ten thousand. Toussaint’s comment was characteristic. Reproached with Dessalines’s cruelty he answered, “I told him to prune the tree, not to uproot it.”

Check out the ‘1804 Haiti Massacre’ at Wikipedia (source of all truth):

The 1804 Haiti Massacre was a genocide, which was carried out against the remaining white population of French Creoles (or Franco-Haitians) in Haiti by the black population on the order of Jean-Jacques Dessalines. […]

Squads of soldiers moved from house to house, killing entire families. Even whites who had been friendly and sympathetic to the black population were imprisoned and later killed. A second wave of massacres targeted white women and children.
After the defeat of France and the evacuation of the French army from the former French colony of Saint-Domingue, Dessalines came to power. In November 1803, three days after the French forces under Rochambeau surrendered, he caused the execution by drowning of 800 French soldiers who had been left behind due to illness when the French army evacuated the island. He did guarantee the safety of the remaining white civilian population. […]

Whites trying to leave Haiti were prevented from doing so.

On 1 January 1804, Dessalines proclaimed Haiti an independent nation. Dessalines later gave the order to all cities on Haiti that all white men should be put to death. The weapons used should be silent weapons such as knives and bayonets rather than gunfire, so that the killing could be done more quietly, and avoid warning intended victims by the sound of gunfire and thereby giving them the opportunity to escape.
Women and children were generally killed last. White women were “often raped or pushed into forced marriages under threat of death.”
Before his departure from a city, Dessalines would proclaim an amnesty for all the whites who had survived in hiding during the massacre. When these people left their hiding place, however, they were killed as well.

Y’see, ’cuz “the Haitian Revolution was one of the great episodes of human history.”

By the end of April 1804, some 3,000 to 5,000 people had been killed and the white Haitians were practically eradicated. […]

In the 1805 constitution, all citizens were defined as “black,” and white men were banned from owning land.

Jumping back to The French Revolution in San Domingo (pp. 349–350):

The nature of these events is well shown by the letter of a French officer secretly in Port-au-Prince at the time, who himself escaped by a miracle to the lesser evil of an English prison in Jamaica. “The murder of the whites in detail,” he writes, “began at Port-au-Prince in the first days of January, but on the 17th and 18th March they were finished off en masse. All, without exception, have been massacred, down to the very women and children. Madame de Boynes was killed in a peculiarly horrible manner. A young mulatto named Fifi Pariset ranged the town like a madman searching the houses to kill the little children. Many of the men and women were hewn down by sappers, who hacked off their arms and smashed in their chests. Some were poniarded, others mutilated, others ‘passed on the bayonet,’ others disembowelled with knives or sabres, still others stuck like pigs. At the beginning, a great number were drowned. The same general massacre has taken place all over the colony, and as I write you these lines I believe that there are not twenty whites still alive — and these not for long.”

This estimate was, indeed, scarcely exaggerated. The white race had perished utterly out of the land, French San Domingo had vanished forever, and the black State of Haiti had begun its troubled history.

Yes, “the Haitian Revolution,” as we were so kindly informed by Brown University, “introduced the first African-led nation in the new world.” So how did that turn out? I mean, we already know the ending (mud for dinner). But — in the short term?

Back to Spenser St. John’s Hayti: The Black Republic (p. 78):

The tyranny exercised by Dessalines and his generals on all classes [from 1804] made even the former slaves feel that they had changed for the worse. There were no courts to mitigate the cruelty of the hard taskmasters, who on the slightest pretext would order a man or woman to be beaten to death.

Yeah, but… things got better, right? Well, actually (p. 86):

I am quite unable to reconcile the reports made of the state of affairs in Hayti at this time [1836]. After a twenty years’ peace, the country is described as in a state of ruin, without trade or resources of any kind; with peculation and jobbery paramount in all the public offices; an army supposed to consist of 45,000 men, according to the Budget — in reality, few soldiers, but many officers, among whom the appropriations were divided. I feel as if I were reading of more modern times [i.e., circa 1889] instead of the halcyon days of Haytian history.

In other words: instant, permanent failure forever.

And now it’s earthquakes again, for crying out loud (pp. 12–13):

Cap Haïtien never recovered from the effects of the fearful earthquake of 1842, when several thousands of its inhabitants perished. To this day they talk of that awful event, and never forget to relate how the country-people rushed in to plunder the place, and how none lent a helping-hand to aid their half-buried countrymen. Captain Macguire and myself used to wander about the ruins, and we could not but feel how little energy remained in a people who could leave their property in such a state. It was perhaps cheaper to build a trumpery house elsewhere.

One of those that suffered the most during that visitation wrote, before the earth had ceased trembling, “Against the acts of God Almighty no one complains,” and then proceeded to relate how the dread earthquake shook down or seriously injured almost every house; how two-thirds of the inhabitants were buried beneath the fallen masonry; how the bands of blacks rushed in from mountain and plain, not to aid in saving their wretched countrymen, whose cries and groans could be heard for two or three days, but to rob the stores replete with goods; and — what he did complain of — how the officers and men of the garrison, instead of attempting to keep order, joined in plundering the small remnants of what the surviving inhabitants could save from the tottering ruins. What a people!

Whereas today: ‘Haiti Authorities Battle Looters’ (The Wall Street Journal, 2010).

PORT-AU-PRINCE, Haiti — Thousands of looters played a deadly version of cat-and-mouse with police in the earthquake-shattered capital on Sunday, stripping stores of canned goods, wash basins and other wares along block after block of a downtown thoroughfare.

The stealing surged and ebbed as police, far outnumbered by the teeming mob of mostly young men and some women, occasionally passed through the section of Boulevard Jean Jacques Dessalines [trollolol]. Sometimes the officers stopped and fired some shots or arrested a looter or two, and sometimes they simply drove through.

Do you think, perhaps, that things might have been slightly better under the evil white-supremacist French racists? The historian James Anthony Froude actually visited Haiti in the late 19th century (The Bow of Ulysses, 1888, pp. 301–303):

We were to stay some hours. After breakfast we landed. I had seen Jacmel, and therefore thought myself prepared for the worst which I should find. Jacmel was an outlying symptom; Port au Prince was the central ulcer. Long before we came to shore there came off whiffs, not of drains as at Havana, but of active dirt fermenting in the sunlight. Calling our handkerchiefs to our help and looking to our feet carefully, we stepped up upon the quay and walked forward as judiciously as we could. With the help of stones we crossed a shallow ditch, where rotten fish, vegetables, and other articles were lying about promiscuously, and we came on what did duty for a grand parade.

We were in a Paris of the gutter, with boulevards and places, fiacres and crimson parasols. The boulevards were littered with the refuse of the houses and were foul as pigsties, and the ladies under the parasols were picking their way along them in Parisian boots and silk dresses. I saw a fiacre broken down in a black pool out of which a blacker ladyship was scrambling. Fever breeds so prodigally in that pestilential squalor that 40,000 people were estimated to have died of it in single year. […] We English are in bad favour just now; no wonder, with the guns of the ‘Canada’ pointed at the city; but the chief complaint is on account of Sir Spenser St. John’s book, which they cry out against with a degree of anger which is the surest evidence of its truth. It would be unfair even to hint at the names or stations of various persons who gave me information about the condition of the place and people. Enough that those who knew well what they were speaking about assured me that Hayti was the most ridiculous caricature of civilisation in the whole world. […]

In this, as in all other communities, there is a better side well as a worse. The better part is ashamed of the condition into which the country has fallen; rational and well-disposed Haytians would welcome back the French but for an impression, whether well founded or ill I know not, that Americans would not suffer any European nation to reacquire or recover any new territory on their side of the Atlantic. They make the most they can of their French connection. They send their children to Paris to be educated, and many of them go thither themselves. There is money among them, though industry there is none. The Hayti coffee which bears so high a reputation is simply gathered under the bushes which the French planters left behind them, and is half as excellent as it ought to be because it is so carelessly cleaned. Yet so rich is the island in these and other natural productions that they cannot entirely ruin it. They have a revenue from their customs of 5,000,000 dollars to be the prey of political schemers. They have a constitution, of course, with a legislature — two houses of a legislature — universal suffrage, &c., but it does not save them from revolutions, which recurred every two or three years till the time of the present president.

What have we learned here? The India-born British explorer/adventurer/big-game hunter/sniper/cricketer Major Hesketh Vernon Prichard has an idea — but I’m not sure you’re going to like it much (Where Black Rules White, 1900, pp. 277–278):

Can the negro rule himself?

The present condition of Hayti gives the best possible answer to the question, and, considering the experiment has lasted for a century, perhaps also a conclusive one. For a century the answer has been working itself out there in flesh and blood. The negro has had his chance, a fair field and no favour. He has had the most fertile and beautiful of the Carribbees for his own; he has had the advantage of excellent French laws; he inherited a made country, with Cap Haytien for its Paris, “Little Paris,” as it was called. Here was a wide land sown with prosperity, a land of wood, water, towns, and plantations, and in the midst of it the Black Man was turned loose to work out his own salvation.

What has he made of the chances that were given to him?

What indeed (pp. 280–281):

To-day in Hayti we come to the real crux of the question. At the end of hundred years of trial, how does the black man govern himself? What progress has he made? Absolutely none. When he undertakes the task of government, he does so, not with the intent of promoting the public weal, but for the sake of filling his own pocket. His motto is still, [Dessalines’] “Pluck the fowl, but take care she does not cry out.”

Corruption has spread through every portion and every department of the Government. Almost all the ills of the country may be traced to their source in the tyranny, the ineptitude, and the improbity of those at the helm of state.

Whereas today (I do hope you’re “enjoying” these asides as much as I am): ‘In Haiti, Little Can Be Found of a Hip-Hop Artist’s Charity’ (The New York Times, 2012).

Portraying himself as persecuted like Jesus and Martin Luther King Jr., Mr. Jean, 42, writes with indignation about insinuations that he had used his charity, Yéle, for personal gain. […]

Even as Yéle is besieged by angry creditors, an examination of the charity indicates that millions in donations for earthquake victims went to its own offices, salaries, consultants’ fees and travel, to Mr. Jean’s brother-in-law for projects never realized, to materials for temporary houses never built and to accountants dealing with its legal troubles.

On the ground in Haiti, little lasting trace of Yéle’s presence can be discerned.

Oh well. I’m sure some generous white people will pick up the slack!

Froude writes, in The Bow of Ulysses (p. 304):

I stayed no longer than the ship’s business detained the captain, and I breathed more freely when I had left that miserable cross-birth of ferocity and philanthropic sentiment. No one can foretell the future fate of the black republic, but the present order of things cannot last in an island so close under the American shores. If the Americans forbid any other power to interfere, they will have to interfere themselves. If they find Mormonism an intolerable blot upon their escutcheon, they will have to put a stop in some way or other to cannibalism and devil-worship. Meanwhile, the ninety years of negro self-government have had their use in showing what it really means, and if English statesmen, either to save themselves trouble or to please the prevailing uninstructed sentiment, insist on extending it, they will be found when the accounts are made up to have been no better friends to the unlucky negro than their slave-trading forefathers.

It’s not as crazy as it sounds: ‘Protectorate Touted to Mend Haiti’s Crippled Society’ (Los Angeles Times, 2004).

With Haiti’s interim government halfway through its 18-month mandate and the Brazilian-led U.N. peacekeeping mission nearly at full strength, life remains cheap and security elusive in a society so broken it can’t cobble together even the means to accept humanitarian aid.

Fruitless efforts to impose peace and pave the way for elections after years of dictatorship and chaos have given rise to debate about whether Haitians are capable of resolving their own crises or should have their country placed under international control.

In a briefing paper prepared for American military commanders on security challenges in Latin America, Gabriel Marcella of the U.S. Army War College warned that Haiti was undergoing an implosion and suggested that an international protectorate might be the only way to contain the disaster.

“Haiti’s violence is the consequence of a predatory state, a nonexistent political culture, economic collapse and ecological destruction,” Marcella wrote in the November advisory. “Long-term measures are necessary, to the point of considering Haiti for protectorate status under a Brazilian-led regional coalition, if one can be created that is willing to support a 10-year restoration initiative.”
The protectorate idea, tantamount to foreign occupation that could last at least a decade, has ignited more enthusiasm among Haitian intellectuals than might have been expected in a year marking the bicentennial of the country’s independence. Celebrations of the anniversary have been muted by catastrophic floods that killed at least 5,000, armed rebellion and repression.

“People are exasperated and exhausted. If you took a poll, 65% to 70% of the population would support a protectorate,” said Claude Beauboeuf, an economist who compares Haiti with Afghanistan after the ouster of the Taliban government.
Politicians and historians note that one of the few periods of stability in Haiti stemmed from a 1915–34 U.S. occupation, now fondly regarded by many here as an act of benevolence rather than imperialism.

And Bret Louis Stephens (Pulitzer Prize winner, 2013) throws out this: ‘Haiti, Sudan, Côte d’Ivoire: Who Cares?’ (Wall Street Journal, 2011).

What, if anything, does it all mean?

It means that we’ve come full circle. It means that colonialism, for which the West has spent the past five decades in nonstop atonement, was far from the worst thing to befall much of the colonized world. It means, also, that some new version of colonialism may be the best thing that could happen to at least some countries in the postcolonial world.

Take Haiti. Haiti is no longer a colony of the West, but it has long been a ward of it. Even before the earthquake, remittances and foreign aid accounted for nearly 30% of its GDP. The country is known as the “Republic of NGOs,” since some 3,000 operate in it. What good they’ve done, considering the state the country has been in for decades, is an open question. Security, to the extent there is any, is provided by some 12,000 U.N. peacekeepers.

Should more responsibility be handed over to Haitians themselves? I used to think so, and debate on this subject rages among development experts. A new consensus holds that the long-term presence of foreign aid workers is ultimately ruinous to what’s known in the jargon as “local capacity.” Probably true. Prosperity has never been built on a foundation of handouts.

But last year’s fraudulent elections are a reminder that Haitians have been as ill-served by their democracy as by their periodic dictatorships. When “Baby Doc” Duvalier was overthrown in 1986, per capita GDP was $768. In 2009, on the eve of the quake, it was $519. Nor do the troubles end there: Criminality is rampant, and Haiti ranked 177th out of 179 on Transparency International’s 2008 corruption index. These are not the depredations of greedy foreign interlopers. This is the depravity of the locals.

Put simply, Haiti has run out of excuses for its failures at the very moment the “international community” has run out of ideas about how to help.
The West professes to “care” about countries like Haiti, Côte d’Ivoire and — at least for as long as George Clooney is in the area — south Sudan. But “care” at the level of simple emotion is little more than a cheap vanity. The colonialists of yore may often have been bigots, but they were also, just as often, doers. Their colonies were better places than the shipwrecked countries we have today.

One day, some latter-day King Acqua will come to the West with a similar plea. If we aren’t prepared to shoulder the full burden entailed in the request, the least we can do is stop pretending we care.

Alternatively, we always have the “Carlyle Option” (Occasional Discourse, 1849):

Or, alas, let him look across to Haiti, and trace a far sterner prophecy! Let him, by his ugliness, idleness, rebellion, banish all White men from the West Indies, and make it all one Haiti, — with little or no sugar growing, black Peter exterminating black Paul, and where a garden of the Hesperides might be, nothing but a tropical dog kennel and pestiferous jungle, — does he think that will forever continue pleasant to gods and men? I see men, the rose-pink cant all peeled away from them, land one day on those black coasts; men sent by the Laws of this Universe, and inexorable Course of Things; men hungry for gold, remorseless, fierce, as the old Buccaneers were; — and a doom for Quashee which I had rather not contemplate! The gods are long-suffering; but the law from the beginning was, He that will not work shall perish from the earth; and the patience of the gods has limits!

Meanwhile, Haitian gratitude to the West has not been conspicuous.

‘Quixotic Haiti Seeks French Restitution’ (Los Angeles Times, 2003):

PORT-AU-PRINCE, Haiti — France owes this country exactly $21,685,135,571.48, the government figures — not counting interest, penalties or consideration of the suffering and indignity inflicted by slavery and colonization.

Paris swiftly rejected the demand for restitution when Haiti raised the issue in April, on the 200th anniversary of the death of Toussaint Louverture. A revered figure here, Louverture led fellow slaves in throwing off their French colonial oppressors.

‘France urged to repay Haiti billions paid for its independence’ (Guardian, 2010):

A group of international academics and authors has written to Nicolas Sarkozy calling on France to reimburse the crushing “independence debt” it imposed on Haiti nearly 200 years ago.

The open letter to the French president says the debt, now worth more than €17bn (£14bn), would cover the rebuilding of the country after a devastating earthquake that killed more than 250,000 people seven months ago.

Its signatories — including Noam Chomsky, the American linguist, Naomi Klein, the Canadian author and activist, Cornel West, the African-American author and civil rights activist, and several renowned French philosophers — say that if France repays the money it would be a solution to the shortfall in international donations promised following the earthquake.
Their letter says: “The ‘independence debt,’ which is today valued at well over €17bn… illegitimately forced a people who had won their independence in a successful slave revolt, to pay again for the freedom.”

‘Haiti’s Ex-Slaves Demand Land and Mule From France’s CDC’ (Bloomberg, 2013):

France’s colonial past in Haiti is coming back to haunt it.

A group of black-rights associations is suing a French state-owned bank over compensation payments it collected for slave owners in the Caribbean nation, citing as precedent reparations ordered by U.S. Civil War General William Sherman.
The group is demanding that CDC pay 10 million euros ($13 million) to fund slavery-related research and education.

CDC should pay for French school textbooks to be updated to explain the consequences of French imperialism and a slavery museum should be built in France, Tricaud said.

France in 2010 canceled 56 million euros of remaining debt from Haiti and said that it would spend 230 million euros to help the country rebuild after the earthquake in January 2010 that killed about 300,000 people.

Never fear, Haitians: President Obama is on the case (Newsweek, 2010):

We look into the eyes of another and see ourselves.

— which turns out to mean amnesty for 100,000 Haitian illegals. You see, as Froude pointed out, Haitians would gladly settle for resettlement in the (hateful, raciss) West. ‘Haitian invasion welcomed in rural America,’ apparently (BBC, 2012):

Mount Olive is a small town in rural North Carolina, best known for its pickle factory and southern charm. Less than two years ago the Census listed this place as having zero immigrants from Haiti among the town’s 4,600 inhabitants. But over the past 18 months that has changed as thousands of Haitians have flocked to the area.

The BBC’s James Fletcher has been to Mount Olive to find out why and to see how the town is coping.

I’m sure they’re loving it. More Haitians! We must have more Haitians!

I mean, really, what could go wrong?

Presented without comment (AlterNet, 2010):

Two weeks ago, on a Monday morning, I started to write what I thought was a very clever editorial about violence against women in Haiti. The case, I believed, was being overstated by women’s organizations in need of additional resources. Ever committed to preserving the dignity of Black [sic] men in a world which constantly stereotypes them as violent savages, I viewed this writing as yet one more opportunity to fight “the man” on behalf of my brothers. That night, before I could finish the piece, I was held on a rooftop in Haiti and raped repeatedly by one of the very men who I had spent the bulk of my life advocating for.

It hurt. The experience was almost more than I could bear. I begged him to stop. Afraid he would kill me, I pleaded with him to honor my commitment to Haiti, to him as a brother in the mutual struggle for an end to our common oppression, but to no avail. He didn’t care that I was a Malcolm X scholar. He told me to shut up, and then slapped me in the face. Overpowered, I gave up fighting halfway through the night.
Black men have every right to the anger they feel in response to their position in the global hierarchy, but their anger is misdirected.

Women are not the source of their oppression; oppressive policies and the as-yet unaddressed white [sic] patriarchy which still dominates the global stage are. Because women — and particularly women of color — are forced to bear the brunt of the Black male response to the Black male plight, the international community and those nations who have benefitted from the oppression of colonized peoples have a responsibility to provide women with the protection that they need.
I went to Haiti after the earthquake to empower Haitians to self-sufficiency. I went to remind them of the many great contributions that Afro-descendants have made to this world, and of their amazing resilience and strength as a people. Not once did I envision myself becoming a receptacle [!!!] for a Black man’s rage at the white world, but that is what I became. While I take issue with my brother’s behavior, I’m grateful for the experience. […]

My brothers can be sensitized to women’s realities in Haiti and the world over if these are presented to them by using their own clashes with racism and oppression as a starting point.

We’re Back

And we’re back.

Did I miss anything good?

Oh, would you look at that: apparently war has broken out. Yes, while I was away, an honest-to-God shooting war broke out between the United States and — some kind of a third world country, I’m guessing from the pictures coming in?

The name of this far-off land is… “Ferguson.”

This image, in particular, caught my eye:

Oops! That’s not Ferguson at all. No, apparently it’s some sort of promotional material for a Hollywood motion picture about chimpanzees. Ah, here we go:

Nope, still not getting it! Okay, okay, for real this time:


negroes make negro-noise; stir up negro nonsense #ReusingMyTrayvonTweets

“War! It’s war!” Are we winning?

We’re not winning, are we.

More on the Ferguson War to follow. I’ll put the archives back up later. [They’re up.] And coming up tomorrow: a Haitian history extravaganza!

Dr. Park: Oh hi there! Come in, please. Here, put on this lab coat and protective eyewear.

Welcome — to Unamusement Park’s Center for Research On Craziness Occasioned by Pointed Observations of a Racial Nature and Its Practical Uses and Benefits: the newly operational C.R.O.C.O.P.O.R.N.I.P.U.B., funded by your generous donations to the Carlyle Club and bearing no relation whatsoever to the erotic herpetology drinking establishment “Croco-Porno-Pub,” which is sixty miles west of here along Route 302 and should never under any circumstances be visited by any persons, for any reason, living or dead.

This is where top ‘Park scientists study just how crazy they can drive otherwise quite reasonable people simply by stating politically inconvenient (“incorrect”) facts.

On your left you can see the Trayvon Testing Range, which — obviously — we’ve filled with Skittles and “white”-Hispanic Neighborhood Watch volunteers.

[Automatic gunfire.]

What’s that? Yes, a volatile combination indeed! Well spotted. And on your right you’ll see the Simulated Social Sciences Department, where the boys down in R&D have got us fixed up with no less than six life-size models of early 21st century American social science professors for us to work on. Of course, we’ll be staying back here, at a safe distance, — yes, you’ll want to keep those goggles on, ma’am, — but trained professionals from our own private paramilitary force are hard at work delivering our custom-crafted lines at close range. Let’s listen in:

Maj. von Braun (in Blackface): [Clears throat.] Say, uh, “Professor”… hi, I’m in your… anthropology class. Could you, uh, help me with this homework?

Professor-Bot Mk. IV: Why. Yes. Of course: Ethnic. Minority. Student. What. Seems to be? The trouble.

Maj. von Braun (in Blackface): I’m supposed to be proving that the justice system is biased against minorities. (Do I really have to say this?)

Hate Technician: Just read the script, please, Major.

Maj. von Braun (in Blackface): Minorities like me. An African-American Hispanic transgender lesbian. With… with a lithp. Suscep — thutheptible to thtereotype threatth. However, all the evidenthe thuggestths that dithproportionate imprithonment ith due to dithproportionate offending rateth.

Professor-Bot Mk. IV: Well: Ethnic. Minority. Student. That sounds like. Racial. Discrimination. Do you need me. To file? A hate crime report.

Maj. von Braun (in Blackface): Oh but profethor I do not understand how facts can be “rathist,” won’t you please take a look at these statistics I have downloaded from Unamuthement Park.

Hate Technician: Major, I’m picking up some unusual readings on this end — but that might have something to do with the lithp — I mean lisp.

Professor-Bot Mk. IV: Race — statistics — Ethnic. Minority. Student. — social construct — error — legacy of slavery — Ethnic. Minority. — pri-vi-lege — error — systemic racism — Holocaust — warning: system shutdown —

Hate Technician: Prepare to evacuate simulated classroom environment in 3, 2, —

Maj. von Braun (in Blackface): Ah, thcrew it —

[Automatic gunfire.]

Dr. Park: Splendid! What? Yes, that’s perfectly normal. We go through about four Professor-Bots a day. Better than shooting real social science professors, right kids?

[Huge wink.]

Let’s move along, shall we?

Ah, here we see one of our Junior ‘Park Rangers, Hate Cadet unj, conducting a little experiment of his own: electronically posting — or electro-posting — the ‘Park’s excellent race/crime flyer to a popular World Wide Web opinion aggregation center!

What did you learn from your experiment, Hate Cadet?

Hate Cadet unj: I have learned many things. Here, they are on this… poster board I have prepared:

  1. Anyone who says “black people are more criminal than white people” is a “racist” because that is a “racist” “lie.”
  2. Everyone already knows that black people are more criminal than white people, so the only reason to state this commonplace truth is that you are a “racist.”
  3. Anyone who says “black people are more criminal than white people” and then immediately calls someone else a “racist” for saying the same thing is exempt from being called a “racist.”
  4. Classifying people as white or black for the purpose of calculating crime rates is “racist.”
  5. Classifying people as white or black for the purpose of calculating poverty rates is the opposite of “racist.”
  6. It is “racist” to assert that numbers like 13 and 4.6 are “way higher” than “only” 2.7.
  7. If you say something that is similar to some other, never explicitly stated thing, which — you are told — has been said before on Free Republic, then what you said is “racist.”
  8. In spite or perhaps because of Findings 1 through 7, “racist” is still a meaningful word with a real definition that can and should be used to shut down any and all discussions of race that stray from blaming everything bad in human history on white people, if indeed they deserve to be called people.
  9. Black people can do literally anything, at any time, for any reason or no reason at all, and it is either (a) bad, and therefore caused by slavery, or (b) not so bad, and therefore proof that black people have never done anything bad ever.
  10. The typical criminal in 21st century America is a rascally bread-pilfering urchin out of a Charles Dickens book or perhaps Les Misérables, except slightly more pathetically angelic on account of being black.
  11. The best way to understand race relations in contemporary American society is to believe everything a black academic says, unless it’s Thomas Sowell or Walter Williams.
  12. The best way to understand race relations in contemporary American society is to live in the suburbs surrounded by white people.
  13. The best way to understand race relations in contemporary American society is to scream “Racist!” as loud as you can, hoping to fit in.
  14. When someone says something which is arguably or even plainly true, “Simply wrong” is a sufficient rebuttal. “Straw man” or “Non-sequitur” will also suffice.
  15. A phrase like “logically correct in the assumptions it makes in its data” is totally meaningful and definitely not just a hash of vaguely intelligent-sounding words thrown together to make the author sound smart to lazy, careless and/or dim-witted readers.
  16. Words like “logic,” “assumption,” “data,” “bias,” “factual,” “statistic,” “misleading” and “socio-economic” can pretty much be inserted into a sentence at random, making that sentence 80 to 100 percent more convincing to lazy, careless and/or dim-witted readers, and this is entirely intellectually honest.
  17. Despite the alleged existence of African albinos and non-Hispanic Arabs, “race” is logically, semantically and biologically equivalent to skin color.
  18. Your skin color cannot make you more criminal, but it can make you more “racist.”
  19. Black people are not more criminal than white people.
  20. Black people are obviously more criminal than white people.
  21. The notion that black people could be more criminal than white people is so preposterous and bizarre that anyone who says it must be insane or evil.
  22. Black people are identical to white people and therefore, logically speaking, must have an identical crime rate.
  23. Black people are identical to white people except that white people are “racist” and therefore, ethically speaking, black people are entitled to be more criminal, which they either (a) are, (b) aren’t, (c) “Racist!” or (d) all of the above.
  24. If the conclusion upsets you, you don’t have to look at the data if you don’t feel like it. After all, it’s probably “racist.”
  25. If the conclusion upsets you, you must never look at the data. After all, etc.
  26. If you don’t understand how to get from the raw data to the conclusion, you don’t have to ask, because the problem isn’t you; it’s “racism.”
  27. If you don’t understand how to get from the raw data to the conclusion, you must never ask, because etc.
  28. Poverty causes rape. Unemployment causes arson.
  29. Slavery causes rape. Segregation causes arson.
  30. When in doubt, shout “racist” and run. This rule supersedes all other rules.

Dr. Park: So there you have it. We learned several interesting things today.


We’re running a fundraiser over at Radish. Please check it out.

In honor of star witness and 19-year-old non-high school graduate Rachel “That’s Real Retarded, Sir” Jeantel and her free ride to college, I present to you an updated version of the classic Unamusement Park race/IQ flyer.

Race and IQ flyer

Three columns for ease of reading. (You print it sideways.)

Click the pic for the glorious full-size version. PDF file here.

Now go do something suitably hateful with it. Personally, I’ll be on the state college campus tomorrow morning, sticking ‘em in every book on “social justice” I can find. How about you?

I thought it might be nice to have an updated version of the classic Unamusement Park race/crime flyer.

Race and crime flyer

Three columns for ease of reading. (You print it sideways.)

Click the pic for the glorious full-size version. PDF file here.

Older Posts »