By Dr. William Pierce
There has been an enormous increase in the percentage of lawbreakers in America primarily because the social institutions that used to keep anti-social activity in check … have been destroyed: deliberately destroyed.
And this has gone hand in hand with the growth of liberal attitudes and liberal public policies.
An example: In 1930 there was a very strict policy of racial segregation almost everywhere in the United States, in the North as well as in the South. Blacks did not live in the same neighborhoods as Whites, they did not eat in the same restaurants, they did not go to the same schools, and for the most part, they did not work in the same offices and shops as Whites.
Blacks who were found loitering in White neighborhoods, even in the daytime, were subject to arrest. Blacks and Whites did not mix socially, and so Blacks did not have much opportunity to commit crimes against Whites. Furthermore, Blacks understood that if they did commit crimes against Whites and got caught, there would be no mercy and no leniency. Punishment would be sure, swift, and severe.
The net result was that far fewer crimes against Whites were committed by Blacks, and so far fewer Blacks were in prison for offenses against Whites.
Now, the really interesting thing is that under these racially segregated conditions, Blacks also committed far fewer crimes against other Blacks. Why was that? Well, it was because Blacks had much more of a Black community, much more of a Black society of their own in America in 1930 … than they have today. They had their own schools, with their own teachers and principals. They had their own colleges. They were not flattered and pampered, or given all sorts of unrealistic expectations with the resulting frustrations. They understood their limits, what they were permitted to do, and what they were not permitted to do, what was expected of them and what was not expected. And, they adapted to their conditions moderately well.
Individual Blacks didn’t compare their conditions (achievements, or lack, thereof) to that of Whites, and as a result, become resentful and frustrated. Instead they compared their conditions to that of other Blacks. Their crime rate still was far higher than the White crime rate, but much lower than today’s figures.
Then the liberals, the egalitarians, set about removing all of the limits, setting aside all of the firm rules, abolishing the barriers between the Black society and the separate White society. They told the Blacks that they didn’t have to respect, or obey Whites any longer, that they were just as good as Whites, just as capable, and that they could enter White society and have everything the Whites had.
In February 1942, just a few weeks after the United States entered into WWII, White residents in Detroit responded to the government’s program of moving thousands of Blacks into the city and providing special housing for them, by organizing a posse of 1,200 armed men to block the entrance to one of these Black housing projects.
In June 1943, 26,000 White workers at Detroit’s Packard Motor Plant went on strike to protest the hiring of Blacks for factory jobs that had belonged exclusively to Whites. The strike turned into a riot, in which 29 Blacks and 6 Whites were killed. The government sent in Federal troops to protect the Blacks. However, Detroit was not the only American city where the Roosevelt government’s program to break down the barriers between the Black and White societies, had met with resistance from Whites.
After World War II — under the Truman, Eisenhower, Johnson and Kennedy administrations — the government continued breaking down the barriers, continued to forcibly integrate the Black and White societies.
There was the forced racial integration of the public schools everywhere, often accompanied by bizarre programs such as forced busing for racial balance. And then there were various forced housing schemes intended to break up racially segregated neighborhoods. And there was forced “equal employment opportunity” — which, in fact, often was racially-biased hiring and promotion in favor of Blacks … under the guise of “affirmative action.”
Blacks also rioted during the 1960s — not in opposition to the government’s programs of forced racial mixing — but, because their expectations of equality were not satisfied.
The government and the Jewish media, and the liberals had been telling them for decades that they were just as good and just as capable, and just as deserving as White people, and that they could have an (equal lifestyle) as that of Whites. And when they found that most Blacks could not have everything Whites had, — when they discovered that a White life-style was not automatically forthcoming for them — they rioted and burned and looted on a huge scale. They burned Detroit and Newark, N.J. and Los Angles and Washington and 20 other American cities in the 1960s.
The response of the government, the media, and the liberals to Black lawlessness was more of the same. The media and the liberals blamed both the Blacks‘ frustration and their explosions of rage on “White racism” and the government devised still more programs to force Blacks and Whites together.
But the old social constraints on Blacks were gone. They no longer had to address White people as “sir” or “ma’am.” They no longer feared, nor respected White people. And, most important, they no longer compared their own attainments with those of other Blacks, but now, with those of Whites … and the comparison infuriated them. So Black behavior took a drastic downturn, and Blacks began filling up the prisons.
Just as in America … the liberals blamed Black criminality in South Africa on “White racism“. It was the effect of apartheid on Blacks which frustrated them and made them strike out at their fellow Blacks … the liberals explained. It was the White man “holding the Black man down”; it was the White man “forcing the Black man to live in crowded, dirty, and violent slums”; it was the White man “refusing to share his schools, his neighborhoods and his White women with the Black man” — that made the Black man behave in a criminal way, say the liberals. Take your foot off the Black man’s neck and treat him like a fellow human being, the liberals said to the White South Africans, and “his behavior will improve greatly”.
White people are nothing, if not gullible, and White South Africans are, if anything, even more gullible than White Americans. They listened to the liberals. They said to themselves, “yes, we’re being terrible to the Blacks by making them have their own, separate society and by policing them so strictly, and by not letting them go to school with us, or marry our women”. They felt guilty about apartheid. And so in 1994 they turned their country over to the Black majority in South Africa.
And the Black man’s behavior suddenly became much worse than it had been before. Not only did he begin raping, robbing, and murdering Whites on an unprecedented scale, but he also began committing more crimes against his fellow Blacks than ever before.
[Other Websites: Violence Against Whites
Life in the Black townships has become much more violent and dangerous than it was prior to Black rule. And Blacks in rural areas are being burned and stoned to death by their fellow Blacks on charges of witchcraft and sorcery. When the Whites were in charge, they didn't tolerate that sort of thing. But now the Blacks are in charge, and many of them are wishing the Whites were running the country again. Crime is so bad that they long for apartheid again, a time when they felt much safer.
The same two things changed suddenly for Blacks in South Africa in 1994 as changed for Blacks in America over a period of several decades. White control was relaxed, and Black society lost its boundaries, as it was told to merge with White society.
And the results were very similar: an explosion of Black criminal behavior. The liberals, of course, have an explanation for Black behavior in South Africa, just as they do in the United States. It’s payback time, they say. The Blacks are still angry about having their human rights violated under apartheid, and that’s why they’re murdering White farmers and raping their White women, and stealing cars from White men … the liberals explain. It’s a little more difficult for the liberals to explain why the Blacks also are killing and robbing and raping more of their own people now.
[...] When Blacks are able to compare their condition, their attainments, their status with those of other Blacks, they can deal with it. When they begin comparing themselves with Whites, the result is frustration, resentment, anger, and criminal behavior.
And, I also should mention that the government’s attempt to force a multicultural society in America has resulted in an increase in criminal behavior on the part of Whites, too. >To Full Article