November 27, 2013

Knockout Game = Fistivus

A commenter suggests that Knockout Game is actually just youths celebrating their holiday of Fistivus

After all, why should the articulate be privileged when it comes to the Airing of Grievances ("I got a lot of problems with you people!")?

Fistivus simply merges the Airing of Grievances with the Feats of Strength.

Equality at last!

70 comments:

Anonymous said...

Of course, some might argue that blacks are very articulate via rap music, and they seem to be attacking some people who aren't known for being articulate.

Anonymous said...

'Fistivus.' Brilliant. Just Brilliant. Happy Thanksgiving Steve.

Anonymous said...

Excerpt from the Book of Fistivus:

Veni, Vidi, Blinsidi, Vici.

Tim said...

A festival for the rest of y'all!

Anonymous said...

Jesus, I made the mistake of clicking on that link.

That show always made my skin crawl.

And now that I am well versed in HBD & The Dark Enlightenment & 20th Century History, I know why.

Jeff W. said...

Festivus is commemorated by erecting an aluminum pole.

For Fistivus, a big black fist might be an appropriate symbol.

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

It's probably for sale. Move it to your town and put it in the town square in December along with the creche and the menorah.

Anonymous said...

Maybe OT, but there is a White House petition asking the government to look into the knockout game and related issues, here:

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/investigate-nature-extent-and-racial-context-knockout-game-well-its-societal-implications/JKdkTdnY

"Investigate the nature, extent, and racial context of the "knockout game", as well as its societal implications."

Harry Baldwin said...

Left wingers will dismiss Knockout King as a hoax, or if they acknowledge it happens at all, it's certainly not a trend. This despite hundreds of reported examples.

Meanwhile, the shooting of Trayvon was treated as though it were part of a trend, the trend of innocent black teens being shot by whites (or nearly whites). This despite the fact that such shootings rarely occur outside of the realm of self-defense.

Similarly, the Duke rape case was treated as though the raping of skanky black strippers by white frat boys was a trend dating back to plantation owners and their concubine slaves. This despite the fact that white-on-black rapes are statistically insignificant.

How about the trend of hate crimes on campus--swastikas painted on statues, nooses hung on door knobs? Each time a new one is reported, the left treats it part of a well-known trend, rather than another likely hoax.

The real is unreal and the unreal is real in the world today.

Anonymous said...

I find your belief system fascinating.

Anonymous said...

"That show always made my skin crawl."

Steve and many among his commentariat are enthusiastic fans of Seinfeld.

Anonymous said...

Seinfeld has not aged well. The show gets harder and harder to watch as the years go by.

Anonymous said...

merry fistmas?

Sounds more like a homo thing.

jack johnson lives.

Anonymous said...

Guess who controls the media?

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/michael-w-chapman/duke-rape-accuser-got-160-tv-news-stories-accusation-3-murder

Anonymous said...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=A3txI0goxrI

Lock yo car doors? But aint that racist? It be assuming that black folks be thieves. Sheeeeeet.

Anonymous said...

http://www.amren.com/news/2013/11/over-50000-illegal-ethiopian-workers-sent-home-from-saudi-arabia/

Saudis have more sense. Bless the Muslims.

Rex Little said...

This post claims that the "knockout game" is a myth. Any comments? (Might be fun to leave them at the linked post; it's normally an echo chamber over there.)

Carmine said...

Just a quick note to people visiting any big city in America with at least a few blacks- Do not go in alone. Whites or Asians in groups are rarely attacked by thugs, it's almost always individuals walking alone who are the victims. I live in a city where I occasionally hear about a lone college student or tourist being sucker punched, but it never happens to anybody who has some backup. It's very important to realize that these "youths" are cowards who attack in packs and it's pretty easy to get them to stay out of your way as long as you have some buddies with you to even up the odds.

Chicago said...

Detroit has that giant 24 foot long hanging sculpture of a fist honoring Joe Louis. Something like that seems appropriate. Hang one like that next to the nativity scene or Christmas tree that most city centers have on display.

Anonymous said...

Hey, George Zimmerman was just playing the 'bang-bang game' when he accidentally killed Trayvon Martin. Nothing to worry about really, just bored youths looking for some fun .......

Anonymous said...

Is it that black culture, going back to Africa does not carry values of individual bravery, of 'fair fight' as whites or asians see it ? We are constantly reminded not to be alone in the presence of blacks, as even small groups are virtually immune from attack by packs of blacks. We may think is it cowardice on their part (many do), but I think it is mostly an ingrained part of blackness.

They tend to fight in groups, and conversely expect to be set upon by groups too, which is why they are so uneasy when alone among non-blacks.

Truth said...

"Saudis have more sense. Bless the Muslims."

So when are you moving? I'll help you renounce your citizenship anytime you want, just shoot me an email.

Anonymous said...

MLK be shoutout king.

Heathcliff said...

Stone-cold white hipsters need to start playing this ASAP. Maybe, e.g., the life-style homeless types found in Harvard Square?

jef said...

From an HBD perspective, this seems like groups of young African hunters acting out behaviors designed for the Congo, not Philly. The laughter seems to indicate a successful hunt rather than an expression of grievance.

Gubbler said...

Some cultures prefer the sap-out game.

http://youtu.be/H5KZXbBmdwc

http://youtu.be/7tJmvT92hdE

panjoomby said...

kwanza claus & fistivus are cousins, yo!

Asher Jacobson said...

Joe Louis was a decent man and patriotic American. Don't link hiim with this depravity.

pat said...

I agree with Anonymous (@ 7:00PM). I've successfully avoided ever watching Seinfeld only to be dropped into that pile of cow flop by your hyperlink.

How about some warning message or label? The same is true for 'Friends'.

Albertosaurus

Anonymous said...

It never ends:

Kanye West on Obama's Failures: ‘Black People Don’t Have the Same Connections as Jewish People’


http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2013/11/27/kanye-west-obamas-failures-black-people-don-t-have-same-connections-j

Anonymous said...

http://gawker.com/this-dramatic-reenactment-of-a-youtube-comment-war-is-o-1469802904

Anonymous said...

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

Anonymous said...

http://clashdaily.com/2013/11/can-whoop-ass-black-pastor-obama-son-hed-look-lot-like-knockout-thugs/

Sheeeeeeeet. This pastor must be part of the rightwing news conspiracy cooking up a myth.

Anonymous said...

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/new-york-chef-victim-knockout-game-article-1.1531959

Another Obama-supporting white libber gets ko'ed by a Democrat black.

Not our problem.

Whiskey said...

I loved Seinfeld. It was hilarious, note only Kramer was not beset by neurosis, all the others were.

But yes it has not aged well. It was a show for the Clinton era good times. Where status climbing nit survival was the main concern.

There has been however no other show like it SINCE, humor from characters neurosis not blue humor like Two and a Half Men.

Anonymous said...

http://articles.latimes.com/1988-07-23/news/mn-6091_1_velvet-underground

"It was Dylan who had introduced her to Warhol and Warhol who had discovered Velvet Underground singing at the Cafe Bizarre in Greenwich Village. The group took on Nico at Warhol's urging."

Warhol's one positive contribution to culture.

Pochinko said...

The knockout game is just a sign that progressivism has taken us into a state of greater barbarism than the Wild West. You had to pack heat there to be safe too, but at least the law recognized your rights to do so, had sane views when it came time to punish assailants and assist law abiding citizens who defend themselves, and made strong efforts to crack down on gangs of troublemakers. But then again this was a white run society, almost no one in the US had heard of Marxism, the population was almost completely white with only a handful of Mexicans and subservient blacks in the mix. And this was at the raw, untamed frontier of Western civilization, not in the middle of major Western cities.

Harry Baldwin said...

Anonymous said...Is it that black culture, going back to Africa does not carry values of individual bravery, of 'fair fight' as whites or asians see it ? We are constantly reminded not to be alone in the presence of blacks, as even small groups are virtually immune from attack by packs of blacks. We may think is it cowardice on their part (many do), but I think it is mostly an ingrained part of blackness.

I would call it savagery rather than cowardice. A fair fight is a civilized concept. As was said of dueling, which was a fight made fair by rules and seconds, "It is a savage custom in a civilized society, and a civilized custom in a savage one."

Dave Pinsen said...

To those who say Seinfeld hasn't aged well: what sitcom that ran during the same years has aged better, in your view? If you can't think of one, then your comment is really about sitcoms in general, rather than about Seinfeld in particular.

And if you didn't like Seinfeld when it was on, then it's really not a matter of it holding up. But if you didn't like it, it's worth giving it another shot.

The episode with Elaine's father is hilarious, as is the one where George's parents find a condom in their bed. And so are the ones where George pretends to be a marine biologist, respectively, and has sex with the cleaning lady at his office. Those episodes and others remain funny after multiple viewings.

Anonymous said...

The most memorable scene in all of Seinfeld.

Anonymous said...

How Israel deals with men of African ancestry loitering in public areas:

http://mondoweiss.net/2013/11/siege-aviv-station.html

Whiskey said...

Dave Pinsen -- WKRP in Cinncinati, Taxi, Get Smart, Barney Miller, and Married With Children all work today.

Great writing, gifted actors, ensemble work, and fewer ties to zeitgeist make them superior. Friends and Seinfeld are the Monkees of their time. Or Adam West Batman. It was the 90s.

As far as the Wild West goes, read for free from Google Books John Wesley Hardins autobiography. Armed Blacks looking for revenge? Armed Mexican gangs out for blood? Corrupt law enforcement and legal system? Indians killing any undefended White persons? Check and double check.

Hardins brother a sedate non criminal lawyer and cousins and friends were lynched by a mob of his clan-gang enemies when they could not find Hardin. The old West wad esentially a Hobbesian place. Competing clans and mega alliances making justice into a mockery.

Anonymous said...

Fistivus should meet my friends Smith & Wessonus.

Dave Pinsen said...

Whiskey,

Here in the New York area, none of the shows you list as examples of timeless sitcoms are on the air in syndication, as far as I know. So I guess I'm not the only one who disagrees with your assessment.

If Seinfeld seems tied to any zeitgeist, it's probably only to the extent that it contributed to the zeitgeist, and not the other way around.

Friends is a different animal. It was never that funny, but doesn't seem too dated now. Close, hairstyles, etc., of the show aren't too different from today. Biggest difference is the ubiquity of smart phones now.

Harold said...

Harry Baldwin said...

“A fair fight is a civilized concept.”

Rams don’t sucker-butt other rams. Rams don’t attack other rams in packs.
Ritualised fighting to determine dominance heirarchies is an innate propensity in many animals, why not in Germanics?

Gubbler of the Society of Reformed Chechenistics said...

We often hear 'progressives' complain that Walmart doesn't pay a living wage to its employees, and therefore, too many Walmart employees end up depending on government programs and services to make ends meet.

But these same 'progressives' never argue that farm workers in places like California should earn a living wage. They are content with the fact that so many migrant workers, legal or illegal, work for very low wages(and often depend on government programs whether accessed legally or illegally, though this is murky since many states allow illegals to receive legal benefits, which means the state itself is aiding and abetting illegal activity instead of upholding the laws of this country).

If wages at Walmart should pay well enough to sustain decent lifestyles for American workers, why shouldn't farm work also pay 'living wages' so that Americans would be willing to work for them?

Why is it that, when it comes to farm work, 'progressives' don't mind dirt-cheap wages that appeal only to migrant workers from poor nations like Mexico and Central America?

Is there something different about farm work that makes it less deserving of respect and dignity? Is a cashier or stock boy at a super store more deserving of a 'living wage', whereas people who pick tomatoes and grapes should expect nothing more than third world wages?

Why the selectivity and lack of consistency on the Left when it comes to the demand for 'living wages'?

I guess if farm work did pay 'living wages', many more Americans(especially young people during summer time) will be willing to work for them, and that would mean less need for migrant workers.
Thus, there would be less need for Mexican migrant workers whose prolonged stay in this country only helps the Democrats.
So, as long as low farm wages attract the sort of people who will prove to a boon to Democrats, I guess sub-living-wages are just fine for 'progressives'. They want 'living wages' in urban centers, but when it comes to people toiling away on the farm, they don't care how much wages are depreciated by influxes of yet more migrants and illegal aliens.

Anonymous said...

http://filmsworthwatching.blogspot.com/2013/11/12-years-slave-2013-directed-by-steve.html

Anonymous said...

"Is it that black culture, going back to Africa does not carry values of individual bravery, of 'fair fight' as whites or asians see it ?"

Fair fight?

You mean like Japan in Nanking and the sneak attack on Pearl Harbor?
Anglos mowing down Indians with guns? Germans gassing Jews? Soviets raping millions of women? Americans nuking babies in Japan? Viet Cong using stealth to drive Americans crazy? Mussolini using poison gas in Ethiopia? Sherman's march and scorch earth policy? French napalming of Algeria?

A Working Class American said...

I suppose in a way that the knockout game is indeed the airing of grievances--blacks see themselves as striking back against the white slavemasters.

Problems is that it was not whites who had slaves--it was the rich.

If you go to the 1860 census and do simple arithmetic, it becomes clear that only 1.5 percent of all white americans owned slaves.

The one percent, in other words.

And no surprise there--the average slave cost 400 dollars in that era, and the average white family had income of perhaps 400 dollars or so...give or take.

And credit was harder to come by back then. So who has cash equal to one year's income for business expenses? The rich.

And that 1860 census also shows us that a fair percentage of slaveowners were nonwhite (4%, as I recall).

So who told blacks that it was whites who owned slaves and omitted the fact that it was the rich who were slaveowners?

Well, our large and powerful societal institutions--academia, hollywood, the corporate media, the government, and the large nonprofit institutions that helped shape those institutions, starting decades ago.


Who owns and/or controls those large societal institutions? The rich and powerful.

The rich found a scapegoat for their crimes of slavery--the whites.

In a way, the scapegoating of whites by the upper class for the crimes of slavery reminds of how Old Money scapegoated the jews in weimar germany. That scapegoating evolved into the 3rd Reich.

Read Karl Mayr's essay "I was Hitler's Boss." From that article, it is clear that the old money cadre of army officers was already preparing to subvert working class populist anger against the upper class, and the Jews were a handy scapegoat. Hitler was hired by the Reichswehr, which was in effect the political outreach arm of the Old Money army officer cadre. At that time he was destitute and basically homeless. He could have cared less about jews at that time. But as Mayr tells us, in his current state, destitute and his mind fogged by the after effects of poison gas he was subjected to during WWI, he totally embraced the mission that he was given, anti-semitic scapegoating and all.


The white working class male is the Jew of modern america--a handy scapegoat that the rich use to shield themselves.


Remember, as Orwell said, those who control the past control the future.


So now instead of the upper class, whites and nonwhites alike, who owned slaves, it became the white working class Walmart shoppers became the New Jew....


Pretty soon they will have us wearing some sort of symbol on our sleeves so that the blacks and other nonwhites will be more "empowered" to strike back against us. Perhaps a yellow star? No, how about a Dixie flag? Better hope you don't have a glass nacht...it might shatter like ... Kristal...

Anonymous said...

@ Gubbler

Maybe it's because 'progressives' like their bogus organics veggies cheap, while they wouldn't be caught dead shopping at Walmart ?

Their behavior is mostly dictated by the posturing they have to do in front of their peers.

Anonymous said...

I was going to say that I honestly don't know whom I more loathe & despise:

1) Bike-riding spandex-wearing ****-****ing euro-******s, or

2) People who "like" Seinfeld [whatever "like" might mean in some bizarre nightmarish sado-masochistic anti-reality].

And I was a little worried that it might require a decade or two of feverish contemplation to determine the correct answer.

But then I realized that we're talking about one and the same group of people here.

BOO-YAH!!!

So I don't have to water down the intensity of either of my hatreds.

In fact, the two might even feed off of one another so as to form a perfect white-hot kernel of pure absolute seething rage.

Life is good.

Life is good.

Happy Thanksgiving, y'all.

Happy Thanksgiving!

Anonymous said...

Here is a White House petition asking the government to look into the knockout game and related issues. It needs 150 signatures at this link before the wider public can view it. Please have a look, and if you agree you can sign it and pass it on:

"Investigate the nature, extent, and racial context of the "knockout game", as well as its societal implications."

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/investigate-nature-extent-and-racial-context-knockout-game-well-its-societal-implications/JKdkTdnY

SFG said...

"So, as long as low farm wages attract the sort of people who will prove to a boon to Democrats, I guess sub-living-wages are just fine for 'progressives'. They want 'living wages' in urban centers, but when it comes to people toiling away on the farm, they don't care how much wages are depreciated by influxes of yet more migrants and illegal aliens."

No, actually, most liberals do want to organize farm workers and would want the minimum wage to apply to them. The dogma has its inconsistencies--they won't face up to the fact that importing immigrants drives down wages--but they've always been supporters of Cesar Chavez, etc.

Of course, right now rights for men who think they're women are a higher priority. There's an elite left and a populist left, just like there is for the right.

Truth said...

"Is it that black culture, going back to Africa does not carry values of individual bravery, of 'fair fight' as whites or asians see it ?"

So I guess when we started the Gulf War, we took stock of the Iraqi army, and matched the financial, personnel, and equipment output, to there's before we sent in the troops?


WHAT...A...FUCKING...MORON!

Truth said...

"If wages at Walmart should pay well enough to sustain decent lifestyles for American workers, why shouldn't farm work also pay 'living wages' so that Americans would be willing to work for them?"

Because the family that owns the 70 acre alfalfa farm in Nebraska doesn't have 5 members on the Forbes 500 richest list, and those people are usually conservative anyway.

Harry Baldwin said...

Rory Miller, the retired corrections officer who has gone on to write some excellent books on the nature of violence, separates the male dominance display of one-on-one aggression from the all-on-one group violence.

The first is what he call the Monkey Dance. It is a more-or-less fair fight in that the victim can walk away from it if he is willing to lose face. Quote:

Most, if not all animals have a ritualized combat between males of the same species to safely establish dominance. Snakes coil around each other and wrestle. It can look like mating to the uninitiated. Deer and elk lock antlers and push and fence. Rams slam their horns, reinforced with massive blocks of bone, into each other. Humans fist-fight or wrestle.

In all cases, it is a ritual with specific steps, genetically designed NOT to be life-threatening.
This human dominance game, the Monkey Dance, follows specific steps. You have all seen it:

--A hard, aggressive stare.
-- verbal challenge, e.g., “What you lookin’ at?”
--An approach, often with the signs of increased adrenaline: gross motor activity of arm swinging or chest bobbing, a change in color, usually with the skin flushing.
--As the two square-off, there may be more verbal exchanges and then one will make contact. It will usually be a two-handed push on the chest or an index finger to the chest. If it is an index finger to the nose it will go immediately to step No. 5. If there is no face contact, this step can be repeated many times until one of the dancers throws
--A big, looping over-hand punch.


Then there is the Group Monkey Dance, which is the dynamic underlying Knockout King. The victim does not have the opportunity to walk away. One "teen" may make the blow, but he is backed up by his group. Quote:

The Group Monkey Dance (GMD) is a show of group solidarity. There are two levels, at least. In the lowest level an outsider is discouraged from interfering with group business—it is a way of establishing territory. . .

This is behavior that is familiar in chimps and baboons—your tribe will band together to drive away or scare off members of another tribe or a predator. If you don’t play, your loyalty to the group might be questioned.

In the higher level of GMD, the victim is sometimes an outsider but often an insider who is perceived in some way to have betrayed the group. The group bands together in an orgy of violence, possibly beating, burning and cutting on the victim. It is literally a contest to show your loyalty by how much damage you can do to the outsider. Some of the most brutal murders, lynchings, and war atrocities are examples of the Group Monkey Dance.

Most GMDs occur when an outsider is within the threat-group’s territory. There is an exception. You may remember the wildings in Central Park or the roving band of young men randomly beating people in Seattle. This pack behavior follows a similar dynamic and serves the same purpose as any other GMD—it strengthens bonds within the group. Causing fear in others (and fear is power) is just a by-product.

In earlier societies, this bonding-through-violence was ensured by hunting large game animals.



Anonymous said...

http://stuartschneiderman.blogspot.com/2013/11/the-feminist-war-on-science.html?spref=tw

Anonymous said...

http://www.theimaginativeconservative.org/2013/11/kitsch-kitchen-sink-illustrating-conservatism-andrew-wyeth-thomas-kinkade.html?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=kitsch-kitchen-sink-illustrating-conservatism-andrew-wyeth-thomas-kinkade

Bert said...

I don't know why Steve keeps approving Truth's comments.

Anonymous said...

'Conservative' elites are meth dealers. They sell stuff that harms people on their own side.

They'd rather have us to do meth than know the math.

Anonymous said...

Too many people here don't hang out with members of The Tribe, I guess.

I watched Seinfeld once. It was enough to see that, as a guy with many neurotic Jewish friends to entertain him, I didn't need to watch it on television.

Mr. Anon said...

"Anonymous said...

1) Bike-riding spandex-wearing ****-****ing euro-******s, or

2) People who "like" Seinfeld [whatever "like" might mean in some bizarre nightmarish sado-masochistic anti-reality]."

You are wrong. I, like you, also despise the spandex warriors who plague the roads like a swarm of preening wasps. However, I also liked Seinfeld, because it fullfilled the one requirement of a sit-com: It was funny - often uproariously so. The characters were shallow, selfish, and wholly unlikeable. There was no message underlying it - no PC or SWPL propaganda, as usually is to be found in such fare. It was just written and performed to be funny.

Anonymous said...

"I don't know why Steve keeps approving Truth's comments."

Never hurts to have a laugh...

Anonymous said...

@ Truth

Hi ! Moron here !

I did not say that whites and asians
consistently upheld these values of individual bravery and fair fight, I simply offered the opinion that they seemed to be largely absent from black culture.

Ramble said...

3 days ago the Philadelphia Inquirer had an article where, unlike the NYT, they never mentioned race nor even alluded to it.

Take that New York Times.

Dave Pinsen said...

I don't see a lot of overlap in the spandex/Seinfeld Venn diagram either.

FWIW, I didn't get Seinfeld when I first watched it. I was meeting a friend in a college town bar where they turned off the music and turned up the TV volume when Seinfeld came on. But once I started watching it in syndication, I thought it was great.

Anonymous said...

Truth said ....

"So I guess when we started the Gulf War, we took stock of the Iraqi army, and matched the financial, personnel, and equipment output, to there's before we sent in the troops?


WHAT...A...FUCKING...MORON!"

No, we took stock and sent more than enough to beat them convincingly. We didn't then commit mass rape, mass killings, indiscriminate bombing....

Consider the history of warfare, particularly African warfare, in comparison.

The Americans were criticized in WWII by the Brits for using excessive force against the Germans. Anecdotal accounts suggest that was true. After it became apparent to everyone that the German cause was lost. The Americans seem to have reacted with unconcealed rage.

Never mind any of that, though, because you're comparing fisticuffs to warfare.

You snipe with BBs, not bullets.

Justin Time said...

"To those who say Seinfeld hasn't aged well: what sitcom that ran during the same years has aged better, in your view? If you can't think of one, then your comment is really about sitcoms in general, rather than about Seinfeld in particular."

Well, don't know about same years, but 'Welcome Black Carter' seems pretty relevant these days.

Anonymous said...

I haven't seen anything even remotely funny on American television since back circa the late 1970s/early 1980s, when we used to get the Fawlty Towers re-runs on PBS.

In fact - with the possible exception of The Sarah Connor Chronicles, and maybe the first few seasons of NCIS [before Moonves's hacks moved in, and ruined the series] - it's been years since I've followed anything on the major networks.

I don't even watch [non-olympic] sports anymore - the idea of listening to a broadcast booth filled with Scots-Irish loudmouths blathering away about the exploits of African thugs who play children's ball games is enough to give me a migraine.

Silver said...

I used to love Seinfeld in the 90s, when I was a teenager. I just watched some youtube clips of episodes I can remember. So much of what I once found hilarious seems exceedingly moronic now. I doubt I could sit through an entire episode these days. A clip from the Sugar Ray Leonard episode, with George scurrying about trying to make black friends, still got a chuckle out of me though.

Anonymous said...

"Is it that black culture, going back to Africa does not carry values of individual bravery, of 'fair fight' as whites or asians see it?"

Probably correct Africans don't have much of a culture of honor. Let alone the Northwest European one where honor and law are closely linked. (Compare certain other groups who shall remain nameless where law is either a religious duty or an intellectual game you win, with no concept of it being basically a regulated culture of honor.) Africans do certainly have a culture of trying to look like the biggest badass and maybe standing up for "your boys" but it's not the same at all.

All the contrary examples of warfare given by the geniuses here denote big differences due to situation.

Place different races in the same situations (which you laughably cannot do with examples where you would need Blacks to be able to marshal major military force) and you'll find that Whites try to organize the rules of engagement more and are harsher on those who cheat the rules of engagement.