Fred Reed writes:
Who is this President? How did we get him? Does he have anything in common with me? Is there anything even American about him? He is an African of Islamo-Indonesian culture, deeply hostile to America and white people and ruling with a dictatorial style more like that of Shaka Zulu than Thomas Jefferson.
Yet I confess to a grudging admiration. He, belonging to one of the virile peoples—blacks, Hispanics, and Moslems–has keenly diagnosed the weakness of American society:
There is no one who will say ”No.”
The Supreme Court? Nine corpses in a wax museum. Congress? If they all poisoned themselves nobody would notice. Though it would still be worth doing.
A President with brass balls—and god knows Hussein Obama has them—can do anything with an executive order. Anything. And we obey. “Yass, Bwana. What you say, Bwana.” Gun control? No problem. The Constitution? Say what? Wars anywhere and everywhere? Congress can read about them in the papers. It is astonishing.
More correctly, the European population–pale, white, feeble things wriggling like fly grubs in the corruption of a putrefying body politic—obey. Blacks and Moslems do not allow themselves to be pushed around. They are, whatever else they are, virile. They look to be history’s winners. Though not civilization’s.
Hussein Obama is something new, a President completely unconcerned with law, the principles of American governance, or the wishes of the majority. Most presidents engage in corruption and pillage within the Constitution, or at least within commuting range of it. This is the American way: Malfeasance, but within the rules. There are proprieties.
Hussein simply ignores the rules. He has no affection for European culture because he has no roots in it. Africa did not develop democracy or constitutional government, perhaps because doing so would have required writing. The Moslem world is equally dictatorial. Neither culture is much given to abstractions. Obama wants what he wants. Period.
Now he wants gun control. This means disarming people he doesn’t like. Controlling guns doesn’t prevent crime. Mexico has strict gun control Does anyone get shot in Mexico?
Nah. Never.
Guns? What have guns got to do with our problems? I, having a romantic attachment to the far-off days of constitutional government, law, low crime, and what was once called “civilization,” find myself asking:
When murders are overwhelmingly committed by blacks and Hispanics, do we have a gun problem, or a black-and-Hispanic problem?
When terrorism is overwhelmingly committed by Moslems, is the problem Islamophobia, or Moslems?
When malls are looted and cities burned overwhelmingly by black mobs, is the solution to outlaw malls and cities, or to control the mobs?
When Moslems mutilate their daughters, is the problem Patriarchy, or Moslems? (I have daughters. For such mutilation there should be a death penalty.)
We know the answers to the foregoing. However, there is the now-standard American approach of refusing to admit the obvious nature of problems. This precludes solving them. The downstream consequences are going to be fascinating.
I know, Hussein knows, we all know, that outlawing guns means disarming whites. Nobody is going to go into the depths of darkest Chicago and try to de-gun the occupants. As the looting and burning and destruction grow, as the looters and burners realize that no one is going to stop them, wise people want guns, for when. This will not have a happy ending.
Hussein, in what looks like racial vengeance brings in, as fast as he can get away with, large populations of his two ethnic groups, Africans and Mohammedans and, apparently because they are not white, Hispanics. This will have, is having, enormous consequences for the country, all brought about by one man with the will to do it. No popular vote, not a whimper from Congress. When poked, the vaunted American polity turns out to have the strength of a continental beached jellyfish.
In Third World countries with high rates of violence, the civilized population moves into gated communities with guards, often armed, at the entrances. It is what happened in the declining days of the Roman Empire, the gated communities being called “castles.” It is happening in America.New York Times: ”The phenomenon of walled cities and gated communities is a dramatic manifestation of a new fortress mentality growing in America….”
As the kids say, “Duh.”
Now I see that American whites are buying “safe rooms.” “A safe room or panic room is a fortified room that is installed in a private residence or business to provide a safe shelter, or hiding place, for the inhabitants in the event of a break in, home invasion….”
Now, who do you suppose the people in their safe rooms are afraid of? Is it Norwegian tourists of Viking persuasion waving swords, or feral Girl Scouts selling exploding cookies? Or hunting bends bands of savage rabbis armed with lead-weighted violins?
In reality of course it is blacks and Obama’s imports who drive the enfortressification of America. In a white neighborhood, or for that matter Chinese or Indian or Korean, you don’t need “safe rooms.” (Only occasionally are innocents found beaten to death with Ming vases. Usually wearing a helmet is sufficient protection because the porcelain is thin.)
Here we have yet more symptoms of America’s descent into the Third World. At all levels America’s governments cannot or will not enforce the laws. Standards of living fall, a rich oligarchy rules for its own benefit, merit gives way to racial nepotism, moronic students control the universities, and educational standards fall sharply to disguise the failures of, of course, the affirmative-action classes.
“Safe Rooms” are the last, pathetic, contemptible line of defense of frightened, passive white people against uncontrolled crime. The first and best defense is a culture that doesn’t commit crime and slams hard any intruding criminal. But this is racism. The second is a Ruger Redhawk and the will to use it, but if the remains are of the wrong color it’s a hate crime. Gated communities are subject to being found racist and forced to let in inner-city hunter-gatherers at subsidized rent. That leaves Safe Rooms.
Realistically–Oh! Odious word!—what can be done about the crime and looting of shopping centers? Nothing. Nothing, anyway, without igniting an epochal conflagration. The only way to stop confident looters is with force—and twenty cities would go up in flames. Who is going to risk it? And, one might ask, how is all of this going to help blacks?
It would be nice to have the rule of law, the same laws for everybody, but it is not the American way. Fly larvae. I’ll write from Mexico.
