The Untold Recent History of Black America: A Primer (Part IV, Finale: Analyzing the Charlotte Riots)

-This post is dedicated to my friend John, who lives in North Carolina. Dude, your state is going crazy! Language warning too: I go IN on this one, and I do not apologize.

-In case you’ve been under a rock somewhere, you’ve heard about rioting that went on in Charlotte, North Carolina, about 2 weeks ago. Basically, the story is as follows: Illegally armed Black male is approached by Black policeman. They have an interaction. It escalates, one thing leads to another, the Black male attacks the policeman and the officer shoots him, killing him. Before all the facts come out, namely that the officer’s shooting was justified and that both men are, in fact, of African descent, lies and half-truths get spread around, then Black Lives Matter gets involved, and then all holy Hell breaks loose. Youtuber Mark Dice has a pretty good summary of it all on his channel, and then there’s this hours-long coverage of it here.

This kind of thing happens about once every other week in any given chocolate (predominately Black) city. Truth? Facts? Who cares; they sure don’t. They’ll still loot, riot, and raise Hell. They just need an excuse. And yes, anarchists, BLM goons, and other race baiters come into town to aggravate the chaos, but there’s always an element of the local population that gets the rioting, looting, and chaos going, and they always have the same profile: Young Black people, mostly male, although there also tends to be a sizable female element these days. This ain’t anything other than prime evidence that the American Black population has no men (Not males, but men. There’s a HUGE difference), and definitely no fathers. Yes, there are a few, but it’s like 10% or less in these inner cities, and like 30% or less in general. Blacks, as a group, don’t do fatherhood, or much parenting in general, anymore. The rest of this post will be light on stats about this, because I’ve already listed them in other posts, and because, honestly, your lyin’ eyes should pretty much be able to put the picture together by now. No men, and no fathers, and a failed attempt by Uncle Sam to fill Daddy’s shoes, and this crap is what you get.

So now, I will paint the inverse picture, using these Charlotte riots, of what men and fathers bring to a community.

1. Money. This is for all those government-funded single mothers. Understand that ultimately it is men who make possible your social programs and ability to make it with no husband providing for you and 4 kids with 2 baby-daddies. Men pay most taxes, and most debt (in the future) will be paid for by men’s sweat and labor, and that is where those programs get their funding, at the end of the day. Also, take the State out of the equation, and the hard fact is this: men are biologically motivated to provide for women so that they can get sex from them, and women are biologically motivated to find a man to take care of them, protect them from other men, and provide for and protect any children she would have, as women are naturally inclined to, and built for, childbirth. This is the basic reality of life for most mammals, and us Homo Sapiens are no exception. We just live in a time when we can afford to ignore these realities and call them sexist due to our relative affluence and advanced technological progress (The Pill, labor saving devices, ect.). But one day, if this mess keeps spreading, we’ll be reintroduced to realities like this the hard way.

Even with all of our modern reality though, the truth remains: Communities with a core of decent, law abiding men leading them (Asians especially, Latinos, to a certain extent, and Whites, to a certain extent) tend to be less dependent on the government, more wealthy, and more prosperous; Blacks, who are dead last in terms of good men in their communities, are also the among the poorest overall ethnic groups in America. No men, no money, government meddling be damned.

2.Peace and discipline. If you go watch any videos of these riots, you will see lots of violence, cursing, and screaming. This is because of one thing: Only fathers can keep sons in line. When I was a teenager, I had a period where I got beyond my mother’s control; I didn’t feel much pain from her spanking me anymore, and I ignored her more when she told me to do stuff. But then my dad came in and beat me with a board. It hurt like hell. And today, I thank him, because I am a Black man struggling through college and working a job, but NOT a Black man in jail or prison. Those fools rioting? They harbor resentment and anger at their nonpresent fathers who never disciplined them, never reigned them in, never held them accountable for their actions. To a lesser extent, this goes for the girls too.

Not all cultures do physical punishment. Asian American communities, the most successful overall, use shame (“Do not bring dishonor on your family”), for example. And you know what? Their children tend not to be out rioting and going to jail and having kids out of wedlock, but instead go on to get at least decent jobs or own businesses, and raise families of their own.

The father sets the standards and enforces them in any functioning family unit. Single mothers simply cannot reign their sons in on their own, ESPECIALLY their teenage sons. Instead, they tend to, like many mothers of these Black thugs killed by cops, make excuses for them. And isn’t that the ethos of the “Black community” nowadays? Always blame White racism (even in cases like this one where all parties involved were Black), the police, society, anyone but yourself. Why? Because fathers and men are the ones who bear responsibility and accountability for their actions and their women’s actions. Because men lead. Period. Look at every other ethnic group in America, including African (post-slavery arrived) subcultures. Find me ONE which has as violent a culture as Black Americans, or which has abandoned the 2-parent family model as utterly. I dare you.

3.Order. Think of the above axiom writ large: Only fathers can reign in their sons. This logically flows to: Mothers cannot reign in their sons (yes, there are exceptions, but we are talking about the overall trends). A community of no fathers will have out-of control sons. A community of fathers will not have out-of-control sons. Fits what we’re seeing now, doesn’t it? Out-of-control sons tend not to develop marketable skills.

Uncontrolled sons tend to be violent. Uncontrolled sons tend to not work. Uncontrolled sons tend to be out doing and dealing drugs at 3AM, or robbing liquor stores, or looting and rioting, rather than in bed because they have work/school in the morning. Uncontrolled sons tend to dislike being reigned in (this is much of why Blacks overall resent police now; police are authority figures, and all those uncontrolled Black kids vent their anger against authority). Notice that I am not at all speaking on daughters now? Thats because they don’t factor into this equation. It is men who do most of the violence, and it is men who reign that in. Not women. And damn sure not government, although you could make that argument in macrocosm, as government force is executed mostly by men (cops, soldiers, ect.). At the end of the day, though, sons need their fathers to help mould them into productive citizens and to help them master and control their emotions and their masculine tendency to violence. Writ large, this discipline and moulding translates to having a more peaceful and orderly community.

4. Commerce. This is like money, but more like “how do they get the money.” Economics and free market capitalism is delicate. It can only take place in relative peace and stability. This doesn’t mean that it can’t happen in violent, war-torn areas; the world’s black markets show that. That means that there must be relative peace such that transactions of goods, services, and cash can be carried out. In warzones and violent areas, this means that armed men will be present to ensure some level of peace in at least the immediate market area, so that commerce can happen there. In more peaceful areas, it means a call to 911, justified shooting, or justified attack against criminals and thieves, or some combination of the 3. No one will be buying and selling in areas where they cannot be reasonably sure that their goods and cash won’t be lost or stolen.

This principle is why you don’t see nice stores and markets in the ghetto. The constant threats of customers being robbed and assaulted, robbery, vandalism and looting, and arson, all drive up the risks and operating costs of running a business! It is much harder and more expensive to run a business in the ‘hood with all that mess, plus poorer customers, violence against employees, and the added costs of security guards, bulletproof glass, cameras, alarms, and window and door bars and cages. No insurer in their right mind is going to offer these inner city businesses insurance for anything less than 2 arms and a leg. Thus costs are up, profit margins are down, and risk is sky high. So when the next Ferguson hits and said stores end up looted and torched by mobs of crazed, out-of-control Black people, many stores just say “The hell with this mess,” and leave. Many more owners are simply bankrupted and can’t rebuild. As they say, “This is why we can’t have nice things.” In this environment, anything but black market capitalism will fail.

5.Accountability. It was touched on above, but one reason why Black culture is one of “blaming everyone else for your problems” stems directly from a lack of men willing to say, “The buck stops here.” We see this even in politics, as many prominent politicians (and ESPECIALLY Black politicians) in our ever more feminized government seem unable to take accountability for themselves or their districts, and only make deflections and excuses. This, again, stems from the fact that men lead. A good leader has to be accountable to outsiders and even subordinates to some extent, and has to be able to take the blame for things he may not have even known happened under his leadership. A good father bears the burden of responsibility not just for himself, but for his entire family; even if he himself did not err, you will not see a good father and husband blame his wife or children for things when he is confronted about them. Look at how Adam messed up when God confronted him about the Apple; he blamed Eve. But God, and every other entity since, laid all the blame squarely on the man’s shoulders. Note that this is also an indictment on the sin of feminism: It blames men for everything, but wants to keep them from exercising authority over what it blames them for.

Black America is run by women, and women are not, in general, leaders, and certainly are not leaders of men. Call me a sexist all you want, but if women were leaders, then the Black community would not be in the quagmire it is currently in, as women, particularly single mothers, have had the reigns of the culture for the last almost 50 years, so Black women, at least, have an overall failing grade when it comes to leadership (just like the schools’ grades in their neighborhoods). So we will continue to see a pattern of nobody wanting to bear responsibility for their actions as long as the single mother is the backbone of the community. Sadly, this means that no one will be able to solve any of the mounting problems these communities have, as one must first own his problems before he can solve them.

6. Objectivity. Notice how the rioting and looting started before all the facts came out? I have a theory about why this happens constantly: Women are not usually subjected to the full consequences of their actions. Men are, much more often. Why? Because society is wired to appease women, because ultimately men build society to have sex with women. Said another way, even the fattest, ugliest woman has her vag to fall back on, if nothing else. Some man, somewhere, will give up something to [copulate with] her.

Not so in reverse; society and culture is much less lenient to men, because women in general are not starving for d*ck so much that they will give up resources for it. That’s biology; the men are the pursuers, the women the pursued. Because of this, women are much more likely to, say, initiate violence through men (“Let’s you and him fight”), as they know they won’t directly suffer harm. Look up the most conquest-hungry empires, and you will see a pattern: some woman, either the leader or the leader’s prominent side chick/main interest/wife, pushed their man/men/army to go fight. Compare Hillary’s foreign policy to Trump’s. Which is more aggressive?

Another subset of this is that women are not usually called out when they are wrong. Some comedians like to say, “Nobody wants to cross her ’cause they all want to f*ck her.” In contrast, men tend to be more measured and tactical in their actions, as they more often have to directly bear the consequences, which may include a painful death (God blamed Adam, not Eve). It is also true, though, that men tend to take more risks, because society rewards men taking risks and doing the hard stuff more so than it does women, but they also tend to spend more time calculating the risks. This leads to Chris Rock’s quip that “Men have a need to be factual [in an argument].” I can play fast and loose with someone else’s money a lot easier than I can with mine; the consequences with my money will affect me much more than with someone else’s. Men tend not to want modern marriage as much as women; men have much more to lose in the event of a divorce. When it’s your a** on the line, you get much more tactical and objective.

All these traits, multiplied by billions of people and millions of years, lead to this fact: Men are more objective than women. Perhaps that is why some feminists claim that objectivity is sexist; objectivity is a masculine trait. In these riots, notice how facts don’t affect the violence much? That’s because the female-dominant ghetto cares little for facts, unless those facts benefit them. That is how you can have people rioting while claiming to be peaceful, blaming White people when no Whites were involved in the initial situation, and ignoring the facts coming out and rioting anyway.

7. Role models. This remains true, and I will repeat it and repeat it: Men lead. Women follow. Men do not follow women unless forced. Women also prefer to follow men. Look up those studies on how female employees prefer male bosses. Men and women look up to men. Not vice versa. This is fact. Sexist, yes. True, hell yeah. This also has an age aspect to it: Most husbands are older than their wives, and all young people look up to older people in some way. Success plays into this also; successful men tend to be leaders. What these things add up to is that older men are much more looked up to, and successful men are much more looked up to, than the general population. Sorry, Sir Charles, but you are, in fact, a role model. Even when men aren’t the economic or political leaders of their communities, as is sadly the case with Black Americans, they are still the spiritual and cultural leaders. Look at Black culture in its violence and decadence. Look at who’s driving that. Crooked preachers, rappers and entertainers, gangsters and thugs, pimps and kingpins. Bad men. And when bad men are at the helm, you know the culture ain’t going nowhere good.

8. And lastly, discretion. I have a personal stake in this one. I have recently (as in less than a week ago) had to stop pursuing a girl because of her promiscuity; she views sex as something you just do, and does it somewhat frequently (though not by ‘hood standards, definitely by Hebrew standards). I have actually experienced this multiple times; the girls I fooled around with all have had more sexual history than I (as I am a lapsed Christian with one encounter to my name, and am going to sit the rest out until marriage). And I ain’t Captain Save-A-Ho; much of my motive for writing involves a desire to not be the beta male who wifes up the girl who 17 other guys slept with for much of nothing; I ain’t paying new car price for a used car.

Some more sensible Eastern and Middle Eastern cultures place a high value on female chastity. In fact, in some places a woman can be killed or disowned for lying about her virginity to her mate. Why? Because one of the foundational principles of civilized society is the assurance to a father that his children are indeed his, and the promotion of marital fidelity. If you look up the research, a woman’s infidelity and proneness to divorce rises significantly as her number of sexual partners rises. Men don’t have nearly the same correlation, as sex is much more costly for a woman biologically.

Look at Black culture. Do I need to say it? The promiscuity is through the roof; I am still personally shocked by just how crazy sexually active Blacks tend to be (I have heard stories I cannot bear to repeat, and this from a guy with a porn problem. Even the women are pretty vulgar in this regard.). Notice what’s missing? Fathers. Simply put: Fathers lower their daughters’ promiscuity A LOT, and tend to prevent them from being sexually abused, much more than single mothers do. You see the inverse side of this fact being played out in front of you if you look at modern Black culture. It won’t change until fathers come back in force. And yes, there will always be the abusive perverted scumbags, but even that is better than no father present.

No big long outro. Just this: Dad beats the living hell out of Uncle Sam when it comes to running a family. Peace.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s