Blacks are outraged, outraged that George Zimmerman shot Trayvon Martin to defend himself against Martin’s aggravated assault. But had this not occurred, would they be less outraged? Did Zimmerman’s crime, as viewed by blacks, not start before then?
Zimmerman actually became a racist, and committed crimethink*, when he thought Martin might be up to no good. To think ill of any black person, or to suspect they may have any ill intent, is racist, but it is not so much racist as simply unacceptable. Blacks, however, are generous masters. If we will only practice crimestop* and immediately suppress such thoughts, without any action or expression, we will be let be.
Zimmerman failed this and confronted Martin both indirectly- by calling the police- and directly, by attempting to question him about his identity and activities. Understand this- for blacks and the system, this was in the end the real crime. Shooting Martin was a crime only as it was a consequence of this confrontation.
You will say this is bizarre and can’t possibly be true. The system, however, has many bizarre attributes and rules. The killing of a black person as such is of no matter to the system. Black people kill black people all the time, and not only does the system not care, black people are actively opposed to the most effective efforts to prevent it, which is put black criminals in jail. Even a white person killing a black person, as long as it is in a non-racial context such as a robbery, either as perpetrator or in self-defense, is not a problem. Blacks don’t recognize the right of lethal self-defense but the system does, although it is more restricted in the most liberal jurisdictions.
Black’s fundamental right within the system is to go unchallenged in any matter or any situation, especially by whites but even by blacks. This evolved in the context of the civil rights movement, in which any satisfied demand was immediately met by a new and greater demand. This comes partly from the chase response and partly is just basic gangster behavior you would find among more sophisticated criminals. That explains it from the black standpoint, but what about the system standpoint?
From the standpoint of the system- or BRA, or YKW, or whereever you’re coming from, it’s not really important- the role of blacks is to create chaos. Black aggression creates fear, disruption, and confusion among lower class whites who have to cope with it. The most immediate beneficiaries of controlling black chaos would be blacks themselves. Imagine a world where blacks could go to peaceful, orderly schools dedicated to learning. Where they could live in their neighborhoods free of the fear of black layabouts. Where they could go to work, and white people did not fear them and deal with them passively but they were engaged as workers and human beings. Sounds great, doesn’t it? I don’t hate black people, I hate the system that uses them as a tool to hurt others. A paternalistic white regime could make this happen in a couple years- that’s what most white people thought was happening in the 60’s- but the white regime we have is not paternalistic and not for the benefit of black people, which is why it’s not really BRA.
White people wrapped up in the double-bind of coping with black aggression can’t oppose the system. Waiting until a black person is engaged in a crime to tell him to stop the monkeyshines is too late. We need to develop a culture of confronting black people and holding them accountable. Think about how you react to black people. When you work or deal with one, and you find out he’s not a stupid thug, you probably treat him pretty well, right? Even if you’re a white nationalist. You are relieved that you’re not getting jacked in some way. This is how intimidation works. You’re not getting strong-armed all the time, you’re getting charmed most of the time, and give up what is wanted out of relief. Once in a while, like an abused wife you’ll forget your place and get checked, but not too often. That’s how intermittent reinforcement works. The sword of Damocles works by dangling, not by falling.
But it does fall sometimes, which is why we’re having a massive chimpout over what should not even be a front-page item. Rest assured any self-defense shooting of a black, even in an aremd robbery where he fires shots, will lead to an arrest and a grand jury from now on. Unless we break ourselves out of this response cycle- black aggression, white defense, black chimpout, white retreat. We need to get in the habit of questioning blacks, not avoiding them.
A suggestion is to greet blacks you wouldn’t normally. Or at least make eye contact, nod, and smile. That’s deferential, you say? No, you’re letting them know you are there, are aware of them, and are observing them. And you can’t be accused of racism for being friendly to a black person! Blacks would like you to keep your eyes down and only speak when spoken to, like a servant in the old days. They then have the opportunity of ignoring you or dealing with you with kind condescension, like a lord in the old days. Be the black’s cool white friend, the WN who is kind to good blacks, not the white doofus who feels honored a cool black person is being kind to him and not jacking him up.
More crimething, Less crimestop. Let’s let blacks know that we are keeping an eye on them, they are not keeping an eye on us.
*Crimethink comes from “Nineteen eighty-four” by George Orwell, and is usually rendered “thought crime” or “thoughtcrime” but the actual Newspeak term is “crimethink” which matches with its just as important companion “crimestop”.