August 16, 2011

A city of L.A. gangs and English sunshine

From an AP article on the riots in England:
While senior British police officers openly resent that move, analysts of gang culture say it seems logical to seek American assistance, because today's British gangs consciously ape American gang ambitions and style, from the bling to the lingo. 
They talk in a street patois shaped by U.S. rap lyrics, use noms de guerre lifted straight from American gangster films and crime dramas, and choose such icons as Don Corleone, Al Pacino's Scarface or Baltimore ganglord Stringer Bell of "The Wire" TV series as their avatars on social-networking sites. 
"These teenage gangsters are creating their own criminal worlds, and in their minds it's very much an Americanized world. When they talk about the police, it's 'the Feds,' or 'The 5-0,' as in Hawaii 5-0," said Carl Fellstrom, an expert on England's gangs and author of a recent book on the topic, "Hoods." 
British law enforcement authorities admit that, until only a few years ago, they sought to minimize the scale and violent potential of their homegrown gangs. They promoted their preferred label of "delinquent youth groups" and billed full-blooded street gangs as an American phenomenon. ...
The starkest difference between British and American gangs is the firepower. In gun-control Britain, only the bigger gangs make firearms — smuggled in with drugs shipments from Holland, North Africa and the Caribbean — their weapon of choice. For U.K. teenage apprentices and wannabes, the knife is still king. 
Most of the more than 5,000 stabbings a year in Britain, according police and social workers, are gangs attacking rivals who strayed into their areas, muscled into their rackets, or simply insulted them. 
Already this year in London, eight teenagers have been stabbed to death. One wouldn't hand over his cell phone. Another was stopping a bicycle-borne gang from chasing his younger brother. 
Such bloodshed pales in comparison to the epicenter of gang culture, Los Angeles, where an estimated 90,000 gang members have been blamed for the majority of 297 murders last year [which is way down from a few years before]. 
The LA gang model is the world export leader, with chapters throughout the United States and Central America. Dozens of British gangs brand themselves as L.A.-style Crips and Bloods, too, although no true trans-Atlantic affiliation exists.

This whole idiotic Bloods-Crips thing got exported all over America after the beginning of West Coast gangsta rap around 1988. Local knuckleheads started calling themselves Bloods and Crips. By 1995, a lot of them were dead or in prison, and so the homicide rate dropped pretty quickly in the U.S. 

But, this kind of thing could go on a long time in gun-controlled and short jail-time Britain. 

It's like soccer rioting in England in the 1970s and 1980s, before it got squashed after the big death tolls at two soccer catastrophes in the later 1980s. Soccer rioting sounds totally moronic to Americans, because we assume it would get you killed really fast, but that mostly didn't happen for a long time. So, hooligan demographics weren't totally bottomscale. The guys who had the money to travel around Britain and Europe to take part in regular riots tended to be skilled blue collar workers. 

71 comments:

Anonymous said...

So, Starkey was right? Rap is a black thing, and libs keep telling us how great BLACK culture is.

jewamongyou said...

I don't know about the bloods, but the crips were around when I was a high school kid in L.A. in the early 70's. They pronounced it "kaaa-rip".

Barry Wood said...

You are forgetting the crucial role of class in stratified England which is best shown in our education system.

Most middle class people in employment. The rest are publicly educated in our politically correct state slum schools which have recieved all of the kids of the three and a half million immigrants over the last decade.

It has been well said that for the top third to flourish the bottom two thirds must be gently helped to fail.

The routes for a clever working class lad to better jobs have been all bust closed off. The jobs have been handed to the daughters of the middle class instead.

By way of example contrast the treatment given to the middle class residents of riot hit Clapham after the disturbances.

Here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCsrcnUy8ao

Now compare that with the treatment given to the white residents of the "white flight" suburban sprawl of Eltham. Maximum heavy police and a threat of broken white heads.

Prime Minister Cameron went out of his way to condemn the white crowds.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWEV4p6hcRw

Anonymous said...

There's a key difference between the wannabe gangbangers and the British soccer hooligans.
Basically all the soccer thugs wanted to dowas fight - in a peculair Oedipus 'test your young manhood' type of way.It was pitched battles in soccer grounds, no doubt emulating grndad's tales of D-day.
Anyway, that scene is largely dead.It's golden age was the 1970s when soccer was still the workiing class man's heap entertainment and young thugs had jobs and money in their pockets.There is a good base of literature on the subject all about the 'crews' and 'firms' that were legends in their own lunchtimes.
In Scotalnd a peculiar twist is the protestant/catholic sectarianism of Rangers/Celtic.
But the young black thugs that terrorize modern London our a total different beast.They are into general nastiness such as mugging, thieving, drug-dealing, burglary, robbery etc.
As they used to say about that the Krays* the soccer thugs 'only done their own'.

*Legendary East End crime family, in te days when London was white and the gangsters weres emi-respectable.

Chicago said...

Saying they "ape" American gangbangers is an appropriate way of putting it.
Another American cultural export to the world. Makes you want to chant "we're number one" over and over again.

Oik said...

Anon 8/16/11 4:16 AM

As they used to say about that the Krays* the soccer thugs 'only done their own'.

That is mostly true. But sometimes there might be a bit of collateral damage.

Let me tell you a little story...

In the mid 1980's, when I was in my twenties, one Saturday lunchtime, I was out having a pint with a couple of mates. It was just after 'doors' and we were the only three in the pub.

Suddenly it filled up with football supporters.

A large group of them came and sat at our table and others stood around us. It had only just turned 12, and they were obviously pissed out of their heads. One of them, sitting directly opposite me, was a big fat bloke, who began rocking backwards and forwards and chanting "we wanna ruck, we wanna ruck".

He looked, literally like a very large fat mental case.

They had the dead eyes of very drunk psychopaths.

I had stopped being a football fan when I discovered girls so I couldn't really engage them in that sort of chit chat, although my two mates could have. But that would probably have been a bad move as they were both from the midlands, and it was best that they just kept their mouths shut, and let me engage these nutters, who, judging by their accents they were from my corner of the country.

So I said to one of them, trying to be as cool and as unruffled as I could "so where are you lot from then"?

It turned out that they were Chelsea fans having an away day supporting their local non league team.

However, in a strange way it was fortunate they were Chelsea fans,despite their disturbing reputation, because even though we were all far from home, I was from the same town they were from. Also, my best mate from school's younger brother was a notorious Chelsea hooligan.

So, I asked the if they knew my mates brother, and of course they all did. They seemed surprised, and the atmosphere changed into one of friendly chit chat of "what school did you go to, do you know so-and-so, where did you used to live", etc. Although they were still very loud, raucous and alarming.

Then they all left as suddenly as they had arrived.

On the way out, the one nearest to me said "Its just as well you come from x and know y, coz we fawt you were locals and we were genna do ya, hahahahaha".

They did look like absolute psychos, and whilst I could have lived with a kicking, (it wouldn't have been the first time) they looked like the types who would have administered the famous Chelsea smile.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasgow_smile

Although I can pat myself on the back for acting cool and casual throughout the whole episode, it was one of the most alarming incidents of my entire life.

It was definately a very close run thing. And, I wasn't a football supporter.

Truth said...

"So, Starkey was right? Rap is a black thing..."

Whoa, that Starkey's a genius too, just like Brevik.

Anonymous said...

and keep in mind ALL of this is promoted by big media, big corporations....

so again - the place to look is our elite.. and they are never going to change.

@jewamongyou - are you the same named Amren commenter? if so, i like your posts.

Anonymous said...

For years the lefty entertainment industry claims that explicit sex and violence do not 'influence' child behavior... (so why they intentionally try to be so overtly political and encourage, say , race mixing and putting blacks in 'computer genius' roles is puzzling) ... but I think we can see that it is. LA gangs aren't making their way to the UK. .. MTV is.

Mark Caplan said...

Starkey was wrong. It's not that the whites in England are acting black. It's that the whites and the blacks are acting American.

Anonymous said...

I don't know, Barry Wood. When I lived in England, plenty of clever working class lads made a fortune from plumbing and remodeling my home; all "cash only, guv."

Anonymous said...

If black culture and hip-hop caused the riots, then what caused the riots in the 1640s during the English civil war? What about the riots during the "Glorious Revolution" of 1688? Too far back? What about the poll tax riots of March 1990? To equate all of black culture with nihilism and violence is ridiculous. To blame black culture for making whites behave in a way that they otherwise would not is preposterous. To pretend that these riots have nothing to do with current social and economic factors is disingenuous.

Kylie said...

So gangsta culture meets the "softly, softly" approach.

That's worked out well so far.

Marco Lalo said...

Keep preaching to the choir!

You're not convincing anyone who isn't already

stari_momak said...

I'm surprised I've not seen any mention anywhere of the Bullingdon Club -- an exclusive club at Oxford whose regular practice is to go out and smash up restaurants. Granted, they always pay for the damage afterwords, but the practice is sheer idiocy, as well as the no doubt huge inconvenience (to put it mildly) to the restaurant workers who clean up and fellow diners trying to have a pleasant evening.

Both Boris Johnson and David Cameron were members -- the rot starts at the top.

Wilifred von Wordhausen said...

The word is "quash", not "squash".

Anonymous said...

"...West Coast gangsta rap around..."

If we're going to spell it "gangsta rap", we might as well spell it "Wess Coass'.

Anonymous said...

The biggest thing they copied from America, that is the root of their problem BTW, is trying to have a diverse, vibrant population. The British should have taken one look at our riots in the 1960s and concluded their immigration policy was doomed to fail.

I don't think I've heard one British politician advocate a reduction in immigration as a way to mitigate this problem let alone repatriation. If they can't see this, then I am afraid Britain is irretrieveably lost.

Anonymous said...

So no horrible heat to keep them indoors.

Yeah, LA gangs and Engllish weather is a rough combo.

Jack Aubrey said...

"The British should have taken one look at our riots in the 1960s and concluded their immigration policy was doomed to fail."

They did know it would fail. Why do you think they let them come?

Their immigration policy is only a faiulure from the middle class's perspective.

Anonymous said...

The American solution is lengthy prison terms. And capital punishment. Think they're ready?

Anonymous said...

With whoopsy-doopsers like this guy, you know why so many young Britons look up to gangsters; gangsters are men of action.

Young males admire tough guys--John Wayne, Eastwood, Schwarzenegger, etc--, and women like real men--Sean Connery, Lee Marvin, Charles Bronson, etc.
UK used to produce hard men--as well as hoity-toiters. Look at the guys in BREAKER MORANT. Look at Guiness in BRIDGE ON RIVER KWAI. His men really admire him. Look at Lawrence of Arabia. Look at the guys in ZULU. Look at Churchill. But UK hasn't been producing positive tough male figures since WWII. It's all about guilt. White Britons are supposed to embrace Niceology, the ideology of inoffensive niceness. Such always existed in Britain but had been balanced by hard men--like the prison officer in CLOCKWORK ORANGE, fine fellow in my book. Now, there is only niceology as official dogma for white britons.

But young men don't like niceology. They want tough guys to look up to. Since there are no nationalist tough guys(and since ideological nice guys also faded with the end of Cold War--cultural marxists, powerful as they are, not are not very manly or tough-cool but prissy, priggish, and dorky), the only source left for tough guys is from criminality, sports, and pop culture.
Even the good guy vs bad guy in pop culture has faded. Westerns are barely made anymore, and the few that are made are 'anti-westerns'. And 'good guys' since the 60s have been pretty nihilistic, more about style than substance. They are really bad-guys-on-side-of-good against worse guys.
Also, blacks--associated with thuggery and badness--won in sports, so thuggery has greater cachet whereas white males--formerly symbols of civilizational power--have been knocked down a notch. Blacks also won in porn in a 'mainstream culture' that has become pornified: look how kids dance.

And in pop music and pop culture, the wild antics of 'bad guys' are tougher and rougher--more appealing to young males--than the dull moralism of good guys. And PC powers-that-be would rather have white kids look up to rappers and gangsters as an outlet for their pent-up male energies. Better that young white males emulate blacks and gangstas than 'fascists' and 'racist demaogogues'. In the 1930s, leftists preferred white kids dancing to jazz than marching for Hitler. According to the left, the dichotomy is black-culture-as-liberation vs white-power-as-nazi. Even if libs may not like certain aspects of black culture, they'd rather have white kids look up to Flavor Flav than Enoch Powell. They'd rather have white girls shaking their butts to Jay-Z than reading Pat Buchanan.

In PATTON, we admire the general for being tough. It was one of the last traditonal war movies from Hollywood. But in APOCALYSE NOW, we admire Kilgore for being a badass rock-n-roller. He's like half-cowboy half-gangster boss of war.

Nationalism is gone. Traditional morality is gone. Ideology is gone. Ideology--communism, fascism, anarchism, etc--used to appeal to young males and absorb and channel their aggressive energies. Though ideologies could be brutal, there was still some element of idealism, vision, higher purpose. But with most ideologies of left and right discredited or passe, the only power that remains relevant and appeals to young people is rock/rap rebel and gangster. It's all about naked power, naked greed, naked machismo, etc. It's 'honest', it's raw. And it's also very marketable and lucrative for consumerist corporations that want young people to spend every cent they have on fun, pleasure, and thrills.
Young men naturally look up to--admire, respect, fear, worship-- POWER. The only power that seems still in play is gangster power and youth thug rebel power.

Anonymous said...

In SHANE, the kid looked up to his hardworking father and Shane, a former bad man trying to go good. Today, kids worship the Palance character since good guys(and goodness itself)have been discredited either morally or athletically. Morally, white males have been tagged with 'racism'. Athletically, they've gotten clobbered by unruly blacks who now hold the championship crown. As Patton said, people don't tolerate losers, and white guys have been losing physically to blacks and mentally to Jews.

Young males can go for goodness wedded to toughness where such exist.
But they will not respect gutless niceness, which is what most of white liberalism and white conservatism are. Swipples are dorky, and white conservatives are mostly a bunch of wimps who are so afraid of being called 'racist'.
No wonder young people like Ron Paul. He has the guts to say it like it is.

So, even though niceology is the rule of the day among whites, young white people wanna partake of power. Since white power, ideologies, traditional morality, and etc are out, what is there but the gangster?

Anonymous said...

"If black culture and hip-hop caused the riots, then what caused the riots in the 1640s during the English civil war? What about the riots during the "Glorious Revolution" of 1688? Too far back? What about the poll tax riots of March 1990?"

Good point. All people act crazy and violent at times, but here's the difference.

1. Violence for real change vs violence for violence sake. Though whites also indulge in violence for violence sake, blacks do a lot more of it.
Also, much of white violence has been for a purpose, a cause, even if the violence got out of control. Black violence is often just gratuitous, even when blacks say they have a purpose. I mean this Duggan guy is pretty scummy, and blacks have been provided with free everything in UK. Yet, they look for any excuse to just riot and loot.

2. Whites destroy but they also rebuild and build more and grow.
Blacks in Africa, Detroit, Haiti, etc, keep destroying, destroying, destroying without building anything.

3. Whites in their own white would sometimes act nuts but they still maintain working societies. Blacks on their own run primitive tribal societies--as they'd done for 100,000s of yrs--or run nations like Uganda, Zimbabwe, etc whose main economy is foreign aid.

So, it's not a black vs white issue of blacks always being violent or whites always being peaceful. It's a matter of whites doing more building than destroying--and destroying more purposefully than crazily--while blacks tend to destroy far more than they build and they seem to celebrate mindless violence to a far greater degree.

Anonymous said...

It's like Germans and Russians destroyed much of Europe, but Germans, Russians, and Europeans did much to rebuild Europe.
It's like Chinese under Mao did much to destroy China, but Chinese since the late 70s have done much to rebuild their country.

Blacks, like whites and yellows, can destroy but they never seem able to rebuild. Detroit wasn't attcked by foreign powers, but just look at that place. Its destruction--as in Gary and black areas of St. Louis--happened in peacetime.

Truth said...

So any theories, on why black gangsters are the only ones in England...a country in which they MANUFACTURE guns...with guns?

Any theories on why the Krays and Lenny McClain and Charlie Bronson and Paul Sykes beat each other up with sticks and stones for decades?

Could it be superior IQ?

Truth said...

"1. Violence for real change vs violence for violence sake."

Yup, those Vancouverers, they really wanted to change the result of that Stanley Cup.

Anonymous said...

Ken Burns and Jack Johnson....

White swipple dork and black thug bully. Funny combination but it kinda makes sense.
And it explains why the tough white guy role model has been squeezed out.

In a meritocratic society, the best dominate.
When it comes to intellectualism and academia, white/Jewish dorks usually beat tough white guys--blue collar and 'dumb polack' types.
When it comes to athletics and crazy pop culture, black toughies usually beat out tough white guys.

So, white tough guys lose intellectually to white/Jewish dorks and lose athletically to black toughies.

So, we have white/Jewish dorks as champions of intellectualism/academia/media/serious culture;
and we have black toughies as champions of sports and rap. Since best attracts best, the new dynamic is white liberal dork thinker in allinace with black macho stud toughie.

No place at the table for white tough guys, who are double-losers. Intellectual losers to white dorks and physical losers to black toughies.

And so, young people no longer have positive white tough guy heroes to look up to. They get their ideas from swipples who run academia/media and they get their music/sports/porn jollies from big tough blacks.

And so... we have British kids emulating black thugs on the streets and listening to swipple talking heads on TV who say we must be 'compassoinate' to the 'dispossessed'.

Anonymous said...

Get your ideas from Yglesias and get your grooves from Jay-Z. Yep, that's us in the 21st century. Your mind is controlled by white dorkonomics and your body is possessed by negrocity.

Anonymous said...

"1. Violence for real change vs violence for violence sake."

"Yup, those Vancouverers, they really wanted to change the result of that Stanley Cup."

Like I said, whites can also commmit violence for violence sake, and Vancouver is a prime example. Even so, Canadians have fixed up and repaired the city since. Things are back to normal. But what happened to black cities after rioting? Was anything fixed up--especially by blacks?

Yes, Canada has idiots too, but compare Canada with Haiti or Congo. Canadians destroy 5% of the time and build 95% of the time. Africans build 5% of the time and destroy 95% of the time.

Anonymous said...

That Ludovico treatment in ACO is looking better and better. Hell with free will. Just get them rioters injected.

Anonymous said...

"To pretend these riots have nothing to do with social and economic factors is disingenuous".

Not true. Cornwall and south Wales are much poorer areas and no riots there. They are also almost 100% white.

Camlost said...

"1. Violence for real change vs violence for violence sake."

Yup, those Vancouverers, they really wanted to change the result of that Stanley Cup.


Truth has finally found his great White defendants. In Vancouver.

He'll be posting links to those Vancouver youtube videos for ages.

Anonymous said...

"Truth has finally found his great White defendants. In Vancouver.
He'll be posting links to those Vancouver youtube videos for ages."

But the true lord of that riot was some Chinese kid.

Truth said...

"Not true. Cornwall and south Wales are much poorer areas and no riots there. They are also almost 100% white."

They don't have internet or satellite TV yet. They got the news two days later on tep delay.

Truth said...

"Truth has finally found his great White defendants. In Vancouver... He'll be posting links to those Vancouver youtube videos for ages."

That's won't be necessary, there's a hockey riot every 3-4 years in Canada.

Anonymous said...

I hate gangsters of all stripe--though I love gangster movies. I really really hate them. When it comes to law and order, I'm a puritan through and through.

Even so, not all gangsterism are the same. Yakuza movies have long been popular in Japan. The the book MCMAFIA spells out the depressing role of gangsterism in Japan. But Japan is still an orderly society. You generally don't have youths running around burning cities down.
Though working outside the law, the Yakuza believe in hierarchy and social order. Members must respect elders and superiors. Violators are severly punished. And they follow certain rules in working with legit society.
Same goes for the mafia. Scumbags to be sure, but the mafia was not about rampant criminality but controlled organized crime. There were also sexual mores. Divorce was frowned upon. In CASINO, we learn that if you screw another guy's wife, you get whacked. They are thieves but working within and maintaining some kind of order. And younger guys have to pay respect to older guys.

But look at the gangsterism in CITY OF GOD. It's just completely crazy. It's like a world where babies in diapers shoot guns. It's worse than Dante's Inferno. it's worse than savagery in the wild. It's just totally insane. No family, no structure, no codes, no nothing but I got bigger guns and bigger balls than you.

Mexico is bad but not as bad as favelas in Brazil or Congo. Some Mexican villagers welcome crime lords because the latter maintain some kind of order about the town. Mexican druglords are a murderous and messy lot but still have some sense of order and hierarchy, though not as much as Japanese or Italian gangs.

So, some crime-infested cultures control their young while others are taken over by young thugs who acquire guns as soon as they learn to walk. Black community in UK seems to be pretty crazy, and it's this form of gangsterism that seems to have appeal for lots of white kids too.

Anonymous said...

Puppeteers go gangsta

I aint got no flying shoes

Laban said...

Are the Black Johnson Family still going ?

re poverty and crime/riots, a few years back the FT analysed crime by parlimentary constituency.

The poorest constituencies by per capita income, which were also the isolated and rural ones, had least crime.

Anonymous said...

So, it won't be rise of machines, apes, zombies, aliens, etc but of gangsters.

Oik said...

Truth said...

So any theories, on why black gangsters are the only ones in England...a country in which they MANUFACTURE guns...with guns?

Any theories on why the Krays and Lenny McClain and Charlie Bronson and Paul Sykes beat each other up with sticks and stones for decades?

Could it be superior IQ?

That's quite funny but the Krays were imprisoned for the shooting dead of George Cornell and the attempted shooting (the gun jammed so Reggie Kray stabbed him in the face and chest) of Jack the hat McVitie.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_McVitie
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Cornell

The rest of them I don't know much about and can't be bothered to look up.

White British gangsters do have, and use guns.

However, one of the differences between white British gangsters and Black British gangsters can be said to be the difference between organised crime and disorganised crime. I'm just quoting from the Telegraph. See here:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1542824/Where-life-is-guns-drugs-and-violence.html
Trident was launched by the Metropolitan Police in 1998 in response to pressure from London's black leaders for action against gunmen terrorising their community. The Trident squad is now more than 300-strong...

Trident insiders have frequently counselled against trying to explain the "disorganised crime" they face in terms of traditional notions of disciplined gang organisations.


The white gangsters with guns tend to be organised crime families with a hierarchy and a code of omerta and crooked lawyers and the rest of the stuff that Americans will be familiar with from the Italian-American mafia.

Black gun crime tends to be a lot of idiot kids shooting each other and random passers by.

No doubt they are pretty damn scary if you happen to live in the area or go to school with them. But they are not the mafia or the IRA.

A black bloke I used to know who reckoned he knew about these things told me that black drug dealers get the blame for drug dealing but in reality they are just the foot soldiers for the white mafia above.

Mr Lomez said...

"White swipple dork and black thug bully. Funny combination but it kinda makes sense. And it explains why the tough white guy role model has been squeezed out."

I've never heard this "swipple"/"thug" dichotomy before, but it strikes me as particularly reductive, even for some of the simpler minds who convene here.

The SWPL crowd is a strong, but by no means the only dominant voice in the intellectual/serious art discourse. Cormac McCarthy, the most renowned American novelist of the last 30 years, hardly qualifies as another liberal shill. Thomas Sowell is as oft quoted in university pub debates as Noam Chomsky. Ernest Hemingway is still widely read and admired. In a survey done by the website Mediaite, Clarence Thomas and John Roberts were the most identified SC Justices. Etc.

As far as popular culture goes, I think you're over-stating the point by a wide margin--at best. Look at the list of the highest grossing films of the last ten years (not including cartoons). EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM HAS A WHITE MALE PROTAGONIST. And not dorky white males either--consider Christian Bale's Batman, or the ex-marine hero in Avatar. And before you start thinking that rap is the end all be all of modern popular music, take a look at the top selling artists of the 2000's. The list is dominated by white country and rock n' roll artists--Johnny Cash, Toby Keith, Kenney Chesney, Metallica, etc.

In other forms of popular media, stand-up comedy, for instance, which is always a reliable proxy for gauging the collective conscious, the most popular performer in the US right now--by far--is Louis CK, who, though perhaps politically liberal, is by no means a SWPL. He is as middle-class white as middle-class white gets.

The point here is that this culture corruption argument is deeply flawed. Yes, certain invidious aspects of black thug and SWPL culture have seeped into the mainstream, but to say that the younger generations have run out of tough, morally guided, white male heroes is patently false.

The question is, why, among the broad scope of positive/traditional role-models to choose from, are certain parts of our society--from white middle-class suburbia, to the inner-cities--being seduced by "black thug" culture. I don't have an answer.

Kylie said...

"Starkey was wrong. It's not that the whites in England are acting black. It's that the whites and the blacks are acting American."

Right. Because as we all know, in Africa, blacks acting African are oh-so-civilized.

Anonymous said...

They don't have internet or satellite TV yet.
Moron.

Anonymous said...

I used to hang out a bar in Chicago (Sterch's on Lincoln Ave.) that had a lot of journalists, hack novelists and other low-level writers among its clientele.They all had politics like this:
http://newimprovedgorman.blogspot.com/2011/08/jerry-lewis-bill-maher.html#c5618910055444106721
Ridicule is the only weapon we have left where the tea party is concerned. They've taken over congress. We need to un-elect every one of them. I agree with David Frum (something I'm loathe to do because he created "The Axis of Evil" and told thousands of lies about why we needed to invade Iraq). Can Chomsky point to a single tea partier who can lay out anything but a ridiculous fantasy as a plan for a government as massive and international as ours? I agree with you, Charlie. Rock and a hard place between Obama and tea partiers. I'd go third party but that would just hand the government over to even more racists and anti-scientists and homophobes and morons. Our congress is filled with them now; we don't need more.

I hope things have improved in the last 10 years. If only Cormac McCarthy had shown up.

Anonymous said...

Yup, those Vancouverers, they really wanted to change the result of that Stanley Cup.

Truth, I will agree that whites can be as violent as any other especially when it comes to organized military mayhem.

But here is what I and most on this blog think. Europeans, and Northeast Asians for that matter, have enough average, above average and superlative talent to run successful nations without being brought down by their underclasses. About the only thing that can derail them is the political system they choose to use such as North Korea, the Warsaw Pact and our current cultural Marxist dystopias.

If you took the forty million black Americans and gave them an exclusive country, it would not matter if they implemented a republic, a peoples republic or a benevolent monarchy. That nation would not be successful because there would not be enough average, above average and superlative talent to overcome the deleterious effects of the black underclass. They just wouldn't have enough talented people to run production lines, bureaucracies, institutions and other essential services let alone to provide the tax revenue to support the black underclass.

So despite the presence of white trash manifesting itself as "Vancouver Hockey Fans" or "English Chavs", Canada, the UK and other Euros would still be able to be first world nations.

Therefore, when folks on this blog highlight the black nature of the riots in England, we are not ignoring the fact whites can behave badly. We are upset because the blacks rioting in England did not have to be there in the first place, and are only there in such numbers because of an insanely, suicidal political system that is going to do what the white underclasses couldn't, namely to overwhelm and reverse the achievements of the upper echelons of our socieities. The same can be said about the USA and our massive third world transformation.

beowulf said...

Let me tell you a little story...
In the mid 1980's, when I was in my twenties, one Saturday lunchtime, I was out having a pint...


I was SO waiting for Tim Pawlenty to play a part in this story.

beowulf said...

The routes for a clever working class lad to better jobs have been all bust closed off. The jobs have been handed to the daughters of the middle class instead.

That's an interesting point, that's true to some extent in the US (I guess you mean what we'd call "upper middle class" jobs).

Anonymous said...

Oik - that would be the Chelsea Headhunters then.

I was at Uni with a guy who was vaguely connected to them, he wasnt a hooligan himself but he did support Chelsea and grew up around these Headhunter guys and he claimed thay had saved him from a beating once or twice, I suppose late 170s, early 1980s. This was mid 80s when I met him.

Thing is I thought he was making it all up until a few years later the police cracked down on the firm and reading about it I realised I recognised some of the names - from my student accquaintance.

Anonymous said...

Truth - re Cornwall & south Wales - They don't have internet or satellite TV yet. They got the news two days later on tep delay.

You were joking I take it?

About 1992 I was in Cornwall visiting friends and for the first time met someone who worked via the internet, in IT. As he pointed he could work anywhere and was at based in the middle of nowhere in Cornwall. Back then I had barely heard of the internet.

Truth said...

"A black bloke I used to know who reckoned he knew about these things told me that black drug dealers get the blame for drug dealing but in reality they are just the foot soldiers for the white mafia above."

Hey Steve-O, you read that; the mystery of Who Causes British Crime has been solved.

Bill said...

The ironic thing about this riot is that it started over an attempt to halt gun crime. In a sense, you could say the riots were originally about the right of black inner-city gangsters to be armed with guns. When you've got inner-city gangs flush with cash, guns are going to get in somehow. Irish gangsters will gladly sell them to the London black gangs. Just wait and see.

Britain has been trying to position itself as somehow "better" than the US where this kind of thing is concerned. Now that their minority population has reached critical mass, they're going to have exactly the same problems we do. In fact, it will be worse for them because they can't run off to the hinterlands like middle-class Americans.

I'm sorry to say it, but I don't have much sympathy for those sanctimonious British social workers and journos who are still desperately clinging to some fantasy of a multi-culti la-la-land.

Anonymous said...

The recent spate of "incidents" in England were in fact:

A.The tail-end of the Royal Wedding
festivities

B. A marketing ploy to promote "The
Planet of the Apes"

C. A time-warp back to the Pliocene

D. Job interviews for Rupert . Murdoch's replacement

E. A backlash at the failure to . find the Higgs Boson.


Anon.

Anonymous said...

Compare John Cassavetes with his son. Father made great gritty tough movies like FACES, HUSBANDS, KILLING OF CHINESE BOOKIE. His son makes the insipid NOTEBOOK.

America used to produce men like John Ford, Howard Hawks, John Huston, Sam Peckinpah, Raoul Walsh, etc. And even the Jews of the past were tougher.
Now we have as filmmakers wussies, wimps, and dorks like Alexander Payne, PT Anderson, Wes Anderson, Noah Baumbach, and a gaggle of others who were raised in cocooned environments of nicey wiceyness.
They should get their butts kicked once in a while.

Oik said...

Oik - that would be the Chelsea Headhunters then.

Yes. I think so.

The two blokes I was with were both football supporters. One was a Wallsall supporter and the other one Leicester. There was normally a third who wasn't there that day who was a Reading supporter.

They all had been involved in minor hooligan skirmishes. Particularly the Reading supporter.

Going out drinking with them would always end up at some point with them taunting eachother about the time the Reading ran from the Leicester or Leicester ran from Wallsall or whatever.

I found it all very tedious and predictable. It was on one of these occaions that I met my wife. I was so bored I thought I'd go and chat up some birds.

The Wallsall supporter was the most intelligent of them all and when the others weren't around he told me that football hooliganism was mostly school playground stuff. He said you'd be taunting their supporters and they'd be taunting yours. Everyone would get caught up in the excitement. Someone would charge at them and they'd run or vice versa. If the supporters did make contact it mostly involved a few badly thrown punches and kicks. Mostly it was all just a bit of fun.

However, these Chelsea supporters seemed to be in an entirely different league.

One of the things I remember fairly vividly was their eyes. Its quite possible they were all speeding. Being the eighties it was unlikely they were coked up.

I'm no psychiatrist, but I bet there was a fair collection of pathologies and personality disorders there.

I've talked my way out of a getting a beating on a few occasions, but that was by far the scariest.

Georgia Resident said...

Could someone dig up the numbers on the damage caused by recent "white trash" riots like the Vancouver riots versus the damage caused by the London riots, in terms of economic losses and injuries to bystanders? My guess is that the Vancouver rioters were far less vicious and destructive than the London rioters, but I don't want to make any hard pronouncements without a source to back it up.

Truth said...

"but I don't want to make any hard pronouncements without a source to back it up."

Good job! Well the Vancouver rioters caused about $4m. in damage -- and of courese Vanc. is a hell of a lot smaller than London

Perspective said...

Truth wrote:
"Good job! Well the Vancouver rioters caused about $4m. in damage -- and of courese Vanc. is a hell of a lot smaller than London"

The damage caused by the riot in London is @ $300 million and climbing.http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44106625/ns/world_news-europe/t/uk-riots-cost-over-million/

Unlike the Vancouver riots, five people died in the London/Uk riots. Including the 68 year old white man that died when he was attacked by a 16 year old black teenager while trying to put a fire caused by the thugs.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2026433/London-riots-Teenager-16-killed-Richard-Mannington-Bowes-single-punch.html

Anonymous said...

White reporter makes good points about riots but is so eager to be 'fair' and 'balanced' and keeps back-peddling after making a point. Gentlemanly and polite self-deprecation seems to be a part of white British culture. Blacks, of course, feel no such restraint.

Do serious people really equate rap with jazz? And was the influence of jazz itself entirely good?

As for Afro-Carribeans being angry because of how they were mistreated when they arrived in the 50s... I mean gimme a break. Brits still treated them better than they treated one another.
And Chinese and American-indians weren't treated well by 19th and early 20th century Americans, but they are not going around burning stuff.

And if you gotta be black to undertand black culture, you gotta be white to understand white culture; so blacks and Jews should not pass judgement on whites.

Truth said...

"The damage caused by the riot in London is @ $300 million and climbing."

And 60% black, Wow, Steve is right, whites in England are more destructive than they are in Vancouver!

Anonymous said...

Same goes for the mafia. Scumbags to be sure, but the mafia was not about rampant criminality but controlled organized crime. There were also sexual mores. Divorce was frowned upon.

Funny you should mention that. The classical Italian/Sicilian Mafia were a conservative tribe but they found business opportunities with such forbidden fruits as alcohol (when it was illegal), drugs, porn, and gambling. And many modern ethnic gangs are drug-based.

panjoomby said...

who cares WHY they riot - the thing to care about is WHAT MAKES THEM STOP?

Truth said...

"who cares WHY they riot - the thing to care about is WHAT MAKES THEM STOP?"

Total universal control by a one world government, that should do it.

Anonymous said...

It's been said class has mattered less in the US because of greater upward mobility and plenty of space. But maybe it also owed something to diversity. Because of blacks, many poor Southern whites decided to stick with richer whites than side with poor blacks (against rich whites). If the South had been composed of only rich whites and poor whites, there might have been more of a class angle thing. Another reason Southern whites rebelled less against rich whites is because of the shared animosity of rich and poor Southern whites against them yankees.

And in the North, class consciousness was also stifled by ethnic diversity. A poor Irish preferred to side with rich/powerful Irish than with poor Poles or Swedes. And poor Italian-Americans felt closer to rich Italian-Americans than with poor immigrant Jews or Greeks. Due to the ethnic fragmentation, it was difficult to develop a united working class consciousness--even among the chronic poor or working class.
Even now, many poor whites feel closer to well-off whites than with poor blacks--though many rich whites 'spiritually' and 'morally' feel closer to blacks and don't reciprocate the feelings of racial solidarity of poor whites. Maybe one of the reasons why American industrialists welcomed immigration was to ethnically divide up the working class so it won't unite as one.

Indeed, unions and political leftism made the greatest headway in generally ethnically homogeneous white states.

Maybe UK might follow this model. With increasing numbers of non-whites--Asians, blacks, Muslims, etc--poor white Britons may come to feel greater racial/cultural consciousness than class consciousness. Seeing poor blacks as their main threat, poor whites might prefer to see themselves as 'white' than 'working class' or 'poor'.

But what if a poor-white/poor-black class unity does gradually emerge? How could such happen?

1. Predominance of black culture--rap and gangsta culture, sports heroes, etc--with which poor whites(increasingly from broken families)identify with(as Eminem did).

With black culture as the main culture of poor whites, white guys will act 'whigga' and white girls will have more babies with black men. And black guys will make more aggressive moves on white girls, pushing white guys aside for the choice sexual pickings. Speaking to a white kid from a mixed race community, he told me that he was beaten up by blacks by going with a pretty white girl. Black thugs told him not to go near her again, and so her only choice of date/mate at school are black guys. Anyone who dares come near will get his ass whupped.
So, with more white guys pushed aside by blacks for white girls--and with more white girls turned onto porny rap culture--, there will be more interracism. Over time, poor whites and blacks might merge like the Puerto Rican or Brazilian communities.

2. Betrayal by rich whites. In the past, white unity was a reality, and rich whites tended to be conservative. They sided with and supported poor whites against blacks. Poor whites were given preference, protection, jobs, opportunities, etc. Rich Irish took care of poor Irish. Rich Italian-Americans looked out for poor Italian-Americans. Rich wasps felt solidarity with poor wasps.
Not only is such protection/solidarity no more but white elites today are explicitly and aggressively attacking poor whites for being 'racist' and not mixing fast enough with blacks and browns. Rich whites in NY and other places fume over poor whites in the South and Texas who won't mulatto-ize and mestizo-ize fast enough. White(or Jewish)controlled media, education, and entertainment promote blackness as cool, hip, and wonderful, something poor whites should merge with and emulate. Eminem is to be the model of poor whiteness--merge with blackkness.

Anonymous said...

This reminds me of the substitute teacher in 6th grade. Afraid of disciplining rowdy black kids, she picked on non-black kids over relative minor infractions to send to the principal's office. In this case, two white kids who created a pro-riot facebook page get 4 yr sentences while most of the thugs who actually did the rioting will get nothing. Judge says it will be a deterrent, but it will have the exact opposite effect. Thugs will get the message that if you're really tough and rough and burn the city down, the law will not touch you, but if you're a geeky armchair rioter, you'll get the book thrown at you. But hey, the courts found the GREAT WHITE DEFENDENT. It wasn't black rap culture that corrupted the British young. It was a couple of facebook geeks.

Anonymous said...

What a contrast to what happened in London

Anonymous said...

After being dispossessed during internment during WWII, Japanese-Americans worked themselves to become among the most successful in America. What a contrast to pampered Afro-Caribs in Britain.

Georgia Resident said...

"'The damage caused by the riot in London is @ $300 million and climbing.'

And 60% black, Wow, Steve is right, whites in England are more destructive than they are in Vancouver!"

Truth, do you lack basic reasoning abilities, or are you just deliberately obtuse?

Anonymous said...

Let's see, Vancouver has ~500,000 people, while London has about 8,000,000. So multiplying $4,000,000 by 16 we get...64 mil. That's a lot less than 300 mil.

NLF said...

The problem with kids today is they learn irreverence before reverence. One should learn reverence before earning the right to be irreverent. But if kids are introduced to irreverence headfirst--via SNL, Simpsons, Family Guy, Sesame Street ugliness, rap music--, they'll never gain reverence for anything. Everything will be a joke, something to mock and laugh at.
There are things kids are made to reverent about: MLK worship, Magic Negro, gay sainthood, but this only causes schizoness among kids. Just how do you shake your butt to crazy violent rap while worship MLK as the god of peace? And just how are irreverent people supposed to overlook the truths about King?

Anonymous said...

All you gang members should fight the real enemy not each other.fight governments & fight oppression.