Steve Sailer writes: I’ve often pointed out how Americans could learn a lot from studying the policies of Israel, a remarkably successful country. But most Americans aren’t very adept at noticing what Israel does, so the Israeli connection to recent Chicago history has gone almost wholly unremarked…
Clearly, these population transfers of poor blacks out of higher potential neighborhoods were wholly unintended…
But where would the vice chairman of the CHA board (and future White House chief of staff and mayor of Chicago) ever hear about the utility of population transfers of undesired ethnic elements? I mean, besides at the Emanuel family dinner table while his father Benjamin reminisced about his good old days with Menachem Begin in Irgun in 1940s Palestine? Or when in his thirties, according to Wikipedia, “Emanuel took part in a two-week civilian volunteer holiday, known as the Sar-El, where, as a civilian volunteer, he assisted the Israel Defense Forces during the 1991 Gulf War, helping to repair truck brakes in one of Israel’s northern bases.”
The problem for Mayor Emanuel, however, is that his system for deporting poor blacks from the nice parts of town and concentrating them in the bad parts has set off a sort of directionless intifada on the South and West Sides as old-timers and newcomers shoot each other to see who is boss.
COMMENTS AT STEVE SAILER:
* White Zionism: the genie is out of the bottle.
“We want to emulate your success! What’s the problem? Your example is a light unto nations!”
We shall lash ourselves to their flanks. They can’t drop bombs on us when we’re standing right next to them!
* Israel’s influence and power over many Americans is based on its perceived moral authority in their minds. These sorts of policies can generate cognitive dissonance in Americans’ minds and erode Israel’s moral authority, which is why they’re generally not explicitly presented or explained to Americans. They’re all subsumed in the fog and haze of “fighting terrorism”. To the extent that highlighting these policies more explicitly serves to generate this cognitive dissonance, it could be regarded as somewhat anti-Israel.
* I’m not sure Americans needed to learn from Israelis to come up with these urban real estate shenanigans. The US has a lot more experience with managing multiethnic and multiracial cities, of which there are only a handful in Israel.
Israel’s record on this is actually not necessarily all that great. See: The creeping Arabization of Nazareth Illit, or the de-facto loss of control over East Jerusalem’s Arab neighborhoods. The closest Israel has gotten to this sort of thing is some gentrification that’s taking place in Jaffa.
* It’s a well-known fact that blacks in close quarters deconstruct themselves. That’s been the case since history has recorded black culture.
Not long ago, I read the diary of a british elephant hunter from 1901. My take on his observations was that blacks could organize a somewhat functional society, as long as they were kept to relatively small clans, at least 20 miles apart from each other. If the clans get larger, or the the mileage between them gets smaller, black bodies start piling up.
It’s the supreme arrogance of american whites and even mulattos to assert that we have such a profound effect on black culture that blacks would collectively change their tribal ways in the long run. That’s just not going to happen.
The eternal question is, what can we do about it? As long as it remains unanswered, this country will always have one hand tied behind it’s back economically.
* If hostile elites are maliciously targeting our nice suburban neighborhoods, what is to be done?
Comes a Trumpening.
* When Obama was first elected, the Israeli media crowed about Rahm Emmanuel being their man in the White House.
* It’s a great comparison. Furthermore, since real estate interests have made an historic seismic shift that nobody wants to talk about, i.e., the shift from local real estate speculators to national corporations, the notion that a viable concerted effort for the ethnic cleansing of vast areas isn’t much of a stretch.
We have a housing shortage in California because local entrepreneurs can’t compete with corporations when it comes to development. This means when and where housing occurs is up to national corporations who will manipulate the housing market for profit, trading shares of assorted companies related to their objectives ahead of time. Real estate has become a money tree for Corporations.
So Sailer’s assertion of Corporate-influenced politicians, as well as the corporations themselves assuming a Steve Irkle “did I do that?” posture while blacks are ethnically cleansed, or put at odds with each other to ethnically cleanse themselves, to meet a corporation’s marketing criteria isn’t what I would call wild conjecture.
Having less non-Israeli’s is “good for Israel,” as having less blacks in areas where urban condo’s are being marketed at premium prices is “good for business.” It just isn’t good marketing to stand up and shout about it.
And let’s be real. Would you be happy spending over a million dollars for a condo, then walk out the front door of your building and have to deal with one of 31 flavors of this black hootenanny every day.
Better to hand them a section 8 voucher, and let them eat Victorville.
* Washington, D.C. experienced the same thing back in the late 50′s when the old Southwest (west of South Capitol Street, east of the Washington Channel (part of the Potomac River), north of Ft. McNair (where all the military top brass lived in palatial houses), and south of the federal buildings lining Independence Avenue), largely a collection of old brick row houses occupied by blacks, were torn down as part of an “urban renewal project” then in vogue and replaced largely with modern mid-rise apartment houses. Those poor blacks, who lived in the run-down row houses, were then moved a short distance away to other housing projects across the Anacostia River, in the area generally referred to as Anacostia. As a result, by 1963-64, a largely white middle class-lower middle class (with aspirations) population picked up and moved a few miles away to Prince Georges County. That was the time when the liberal hero (endorsed by the Washington Post) was the Republican Spiro Agnew, the executive of Baltimore County, and his opponent one George Mahoney who campaigned for governor on the slogan “a man’s house is his castle,” which was rendered meaningless by the passage of federal civil rights laws prohibiting discrimination in housing. Anacostia High School, which had been roughly 15-20% black in 1961, became 99% black by 1964, a virtual overnight transformation. A fully functioning middle class neighborhood with many small businesses and a relatively low crime rate was turned into a barren hell-hole with no businesses and a high crime rate that became dangerous to drive through.
* The long run ‘solution’ would be to concentrate blacks in a few states. Mississippi as an example. Maryland and South Carolina could also be used for regional black ‘homelands’. Once blacks are concentrated in a few states there would be far fewer blue states and more red states.
The trick would be to ‘lure’ blacks into the new ‘bantustans’ with Federal jobs and housing programs. Once there a new Congress could transfer welfare programs back to the states and limit their portability.
* Not more than a few years ago I stayed in a very nice bed and breakfast in Dubuque. The B&B was a glorious, winding mansion built during the Gilded Age and constructed into the stone face of the hills that overlook the town from the west.
The town itself was aging well, despite being very economically depressed. There were even attempts at urban renewal with a expansive, new river front park being built and other “SodoSopa” type installations popping up.
We decided to walk one day from the mansion down through the town to the riverfront. Quickly, the houses became progressively more dilapidated, the streets more littered and the people more likely to be sipping from small paper bags. If it weren’t daylight we would have turned around. Basically, we stumbled onto the exodus of the Chicago urban blight.
The net effect of these people was destroying any, albeit small chance, of there being urban renewal. How do town officials allow this to happen? Were they forced? What is the mechanism?
* They don’t disappear, they just become someone else’s neighbor. So one group of better connected people can dump the unwanted on those with less clout. One problem is that less prosperous whites have their neighborhoods and quality of life ruined by others, a not very nice thing to do.
It seems that once in Section 8 then they must always be in. When their current dwellings get taken over by developers they all must be given something elsewhere for life and perhaps their children also in perpetuity. Perhaps for non-elderly and disabled that should be phased out. We have a caste of permanent wards of the state as it is right now.
Even though Chicago may have lost a couple hundred thousand blacks it’s not as if there’s any shortage. Mississippi is where most migrated from so perhaps if they are to be relocated anywhere then that would be the logical choice rather than places like Iowa. They would probably feel more at home there than in some alien whiteopia.
* I’m not really seeing how any of this article constitutes “anti-Israel” sentiment. If anything, Steve seems to be in favor of the general thrust of what Mayor Emmanuel is doing. Its pretty obvious to make the Israeli connection, when you factor in that the Mayor’s father was one of the principal figures in the Irgun. Steve’s point, I think, is that our dominant press has such a comically strong natural aversion to essentially anything at all that is interesting, or in drawing logical conclusions based on the history of families & peoples. Everyone’s just a blank slate, and Mayor Emmanuel’s family history has no relevance at all in the policies he promotes. Its mindbogglingly stupid, but its what we’re supposed to believe, it seems.
* Not really an anti-Israel reference, just a reminder that Israel aggressively pursues it’s national interests unhindered by “p.c.” ideology, which can manifest itself in the terrorist murder of British citizens at the King David Hotel, or the relentless aerial bombardment of the USS Liberty or the ethnic cleansing of the wrong types of people to more “suitable” areas.
* By fostering a baby boom mentality, a bratty generation was created that came of age between ’65 and ’75, living the Beatles, Morrison, etc., and creating its own Law of Unintended Effects, which was the technological revolution of the late 1990s and the internet, but also including the improvements in industrial engineering making goods cheaper and easier to manufacture. (The Chinese would not be the factory of the world if it weren’t for that.)
But I also mention, in that 1 posting by me, Sorcerygod, that socially speaking, the left wing cause was advanced in the same period by the unintended viral spread of Sixties ideas. Specifically, the notion of anti-war has made the Pax Americana difficult, the free love ethos has endangered anti-AIDS efforts of the 2000s, and worst of all from the right-wing standpoint:
THE UNINTENDED EFFECT OF MASSIVE NONWHITE IMMIGRATION HAS BEEN TO DEVALUE ALL RIGHT WING CORRECT IDEAS … BECAUSE NUMBERS ARE BEGINNING TO TELL, MAKING MYTH DISPLACE TRUTH/REALITY.
In other words, the very presence of millions of Muslims, Hispanics, illegals, Asian Indians, Chinese, is diluting any wisdom the whites might have had. I would argue they (we) had a great deal.
Currently, any FOB can spout left-wing rhetoric, and by being part of a very large (and growing) group can drown out the right wing, the way Trump supporters are drowned out by the “rainbow” of violent, vigorous protesters.
The new Goths are here — and they are bringing a spicy cuisine indeed.
* Chicago’s blacks feed at the Democrats trough and happily follow the section 8 voucher carrot to their new neighborhoods. The demolition of the Cabrini-Green and Taylor projects was necessitated by a plan, backed by Obama, Daley, Emmanuel, Jarret, Oprah and friends to host this year’s Olympics, a plan that fell through even though, Oprah and Michelle fronted the effort. Chicago’s black neighborhoods are so dangerous that Spike Lee’s last film was titled “Chi-raq”, a not so subtle comparison to the war zone that is Iraq. A web site, “Second City Cop”, will keep you up to date on the inner workings of Chicago. The politics of Chicago are best exemplified by the fact that there are 50 Alder/men/women on the Chicago city council, each making a minimum of 70k while the city misses contractual pension payments that have now ballooned to 30 Billion dollars ( that is not a misprint.) The non-black citizens of Chicago should agitate for a Chiexit. Oh, and Chicago is averaging nearly 2 murders a day, crime is down you know, and on a pace that could exceed 700 for the year.
* Except Steve, the policy has failed. At best its a band-aid, marginally better off and more together ghetto Blacks move to the suburbs, while the gang-hard-core stay. Meanwhile Rahm is handcuffed, narrowly missing the bullet of Bertha Lewis, who would have unseated him had she not undergone chemo/surgery for a brain tumor, with BLM making the police helpless.
There are a LOT of raids onto the shopping district of Chicago, and downtown, as there is good transport and less possibility of being shot by SWPL prey than rival hard core gang members in their neighborhood. Meanwhile the pickings are richer as the prey is easier in the Yuppie parts of Chicago.
The problem is the criminal behavior of the ghetto Black underclass. No solution has been found, and the core is not going to move; they are not willing to give up their social cohort and thus, power as a group. And as Whites in the richer areas grow softer and easier, they will be targeted more and more. This has been the result in Europe with Muslims also — its easier to victimize the unarmed White areas than fight fellow Muslims armed with AK-47s.
The future of Chicago is that iconic picture in the Daily Mail of the London riots, a huge Black thug forcing a skinny White hipster to strip out of his clothes. Chicago, NYC, they are all doomed to Detroit or Baltimore levels of prosperity.
* New Jewish visitors to iSteve usually take time to get the hang of Steve’s POV. This is particularly true for pro-Israel American Jews.
For example, the Irgun: Most Jews have never heard a non-Jew invoke the Irgun without it being a criticism from the left, slamming the Irgun as a proto-fascist terrorist paramilitary. This is almost always part of a more general critique of Israel as barbarous anachronistic ethno-state.
As I’ve said before, Steve is a peculiar gentile. American Jews will not have encountered someone of his POV before. So it takes time to get hip and drop assumptions that come from past discussions with more predictable folk.
* Israel also does much, much better with fertility.
One thing a lot of folks don’t understand is that a normative “two kids” means dramatic population loss.
We really need to have a “normative” “three kids” for college educated women just to hold. Some women won’t get married. Some will but will have fertility issues. Some will but too late to have three as fertility issues climb through the 30s. Our current “two kids” norm, ends up with college educated women averaging something around 1.5. Move to a “three kids” norm pushed in media, culture, government, social expectation, and you’ll probably average around replacement. Couple that with a strong campaign against single motherhood, mandatory sterilization in return for welfare and some other policies and you’d have something approaching eugenic fertility.
Israel’s Jews are running at something close to 3 now. Obviously a bunch of that is from orthodox loons–they’ve got some big problems from that sector. But i believe even normal religious and even secular Jews are running above\at replacement. Having a *nation* that you are part of, that your elites are also actually part of and not try to screw or sell out–it’s a good thing.
* I know you are rooting for your hometown to follow the path that NYC has (increasing gentrification), but based on a trip I took there two years ago, I think it is more likely to go the way of Detroit. I stayed at an expensive gold coast hotel. It was shortly after July 4, and the papers were filled with accounts of shooting which took place at or near the independence day celebrations. A block from the hotel, a black guy (who didn’t seem to be homeless or deranged) randomly screamed that “all white people should die.” In the middle of the day. No one on the street seemed to think this was odd at all. That wasn’t the only incident of that sort. I also saw a group of black teens fighting, punching each other in the middle of the street, kicking a kid who feel to the ground. This was next to expensive stores. All in a three day trip to the city.
You simply don’t encounter this kind of thing when you visit NYC or SF these days. Those are the cities will definitely make it. Chicago … I hope so, but I’m not so sure.
* Complete agree on *separation*. I think encouraging black nationalism would be awesome. I’m on board with black nationalism, white nationalism, Mexican nationalism–hey, it’s called Mexico it’s right down there! It’s clear the left has it in for folks like me … all the while milking all the good stuff white guys like me produce–prosperity, order, rule of law. Screw ‘em. Let’s separate. (And yes, good whites can go be good whites with their minority\immigrant pets.)
However, this is *not* going to make “blue” states “red”. (I hate the backwards colors the leftist media imposed.) Your solidly red southern states are red due to proximity and fear. They have 20%+ black populations, so the blacks are around everywhere and the whites are not stupid about reality–and how they must vote to maintain a decent civilized society. In contrast, Vermont is basically all white–there’s no threat so you can vote for utopian silliness. My ancestral homeland–Iowa–is still pretty white, but pretty purplish. Lots of sane rural folks, but also huge contingents of government employees–teacher and bureaucrat types–wannabe yuppies and personally normal but politically deranged ELCA good-thinking Lutherans. (The blacks there just feast on white naivete and stupidity–the prisons are full of them, amazing considering the demographics.) Just far too much lazy, silly, happy thinking–fine for say pre-Angela-Merkel Germany, but ridiculous in a multicultural society.
But … we can live with this. I’m happy to grapple with leftist, utopian, silliness *inside* of all white society. The problem is that these folks actually put their magical beliefs into practice and allow\import non-whites.
* What we should have is communities allowed to set their own immigration policy. If you want to move somewhere–the locals have to approve it. Then we could have a bunch of different communities or different sorts–actual diversity. And people could seek out the sort of community they want to be a part of.
This is the sort “let people manage their own business” ideology that is the only fair\decent way to manage a multicultural society. But needless to say it’s the exact opposite of what the left wants, which is to get in *everyone’s* business–harass, finger wag, denounce, bully and dictate. A boot stomping on a human face forever … that’s what we’re in for.
* Israelis ARE fighting terrorism from Islamic outsiders. And white Americans ARE fleeing the terrorism of black crime. The situations are perfectly analogous.
We have simply ended up with a white-on-white ideological divide on this issue for stupid reasons.
* A few years ago there was an NYT article about third kids as status symbol: proof that you had enough money to raise a third kid in Manhattan…
* One I can think of off the top of my head is to severely restrict immigration of refugee’s from African nations, special exception for Biafrans, but I’d require thorough background checks for those good folks.
As far as dealing with blacks who are already here, that’s a tough assignment, but I would err on the side of compassion when attempting to come up with solutions.
Probably initiating policies to curtail their increase in population, while initiating tax breaks on inter-racial marriage would be the compassionate, though extremely long-term approach. I would also look for ways to encourage a negative population growth in Africa proper. I, for one, am tired of black bodies piling up around the world, as well as the self-assigned parasites in politics and media who are fiscally dependent on those black bodies continuing to pile higher. These parasites should be objects of fierce derision, for every public move they try to make.
But again, first and foremost would be to curtail further immigration from sub-saharan African nations, since it’s good policy, when one finds oneself stuck in a hole, to stop digging as soon as possible.
* Many southern blacks moved to central cities to escape other blacks, i.e., the blacks who were too dumb to leave, and had established parasitical relationships with those black trying to escape them.
That’s why the newly formed and white-organized “black ghettos” seemed to do well for a while. The best of the blacks from the south understood that not being closer to whites would leave them destitute.
The problem is what the problems for intelligent, aspiring American blacks has always been: their stupid, deadbeat, lowbrow relatives follow them, and begin the parasitical process all over again.
Section 8 makes it easier for this negative, powerful aspect of black culture persist, since it’s easier for the deadbeats to rent an apartment near their more successful relatives, and visit their endless problems upon their relatives.
Scenario: You’re a poor black person who’s become relatively successful, and your wife’s sister just got kicked out of his section 8 apartment for drug dealing. She’s homeless. Do you let her stay at her place, as she begs and pleads on her knees in your living room to give her a chance?
Another Scenario: You’re a formerly poor black person who’s become relatively successful. Your wife’s sister just got a 3 year prison sentence. She has 2 kids who will be put in foster care unless you agree to take them in. The father is nowhere to be found. Your wife is crying and pleading with you to take the kids in.
What do you do, Converticus? What do you do?
Suppose you say let ‘em all rot. You have to live with your resentful, passive-aggressive wife. Do you divorce her? How’s that going to work with your paycheck?
Gee. You just bought your house with an FHA loan, and just barely make the payments. You you blow it all up? Or do you take in your sister’s loser relative, giving entre to her relative’s loser friends?
* Reminds me of my boss two jobs ago, a spinster woman of around 50. She decided to move from her downtown Baltimore deluxe rental to her deceased parents home in a middle class neighborhood uptown. She told me once about attending a neighborhood meeting in regards to crimes & a recent spat of shootings. As she put it her neighbors were a nice elderly black couple but they had grandchildren. Different sets would live them at various times & they were being raised in the ghetto fashion. Evidently this scenario was becoming common in the her hood. By now I suspect she cashed out and moved to the county.
