Category Archives: murder

Defunding police will leave a bigger void than leftists realize

Leftism is a rules-based system, not a morals-based system. Societies with only morals can manage without police; societies with only rules cannot.

Growing up in San Francisco, I navigated through the geography of my community by the compass. The Pacific was to the west, the Bay was to the east, the Golden Gate Bridge was to the north, and San Francisco State, Stonestown Mall, and Lowell High School were to the south. These were absolute values. No matter where I was in the City, if I could just find one of my compass points, I wasn’t lost.

Absolute values are even more useful when you’re in an unfamiliar place. If someone tells you to go left on Main, left on State, right on Laurel, and left on Oak, you’ll do fine as long as you keep your left and your right properly aligned at all times. But woe betide you if you get turned around, because then right is left and left is right, and before you know it, you’re re-living Thomas Wolfe’s Bonfire of the Vanities. However, if someone tells you to go east at the intersection of State and 1st, or to turn west after you pass the donut shop, you’ll always know where you go.

Morals are compass points. They function as blazing neon lights that keep us from getting lost in a complicated world. They’re not situational, except in the greatest of extremes. For the most part, the Eighth Commandment (Thou shalt not steal) is clear. If it’s not yours, don’t take it, whether it’s money, a toy, a package in front of someone’s house, another person’s freedom, or someone’s life. We understand that exigent circumstances, such as survival in war or famine, create exceptions but mostly it’s pretty clear. If you steal from greed, laziness, boredom, or a desire for thrills, you are not moral.

The Sixth Commandment (Thou shalt not murder) is also clear. Murder’s most basic definition is intentionally killing another for no reason other than to achieve a wrongful benefit or to satisfy a sick or intemperate pleasure. The commandment allows for killing in self-defense or to defend another, or to fight in a (presumably just) war. Our laws carve out other exceptions, such as negligence or insanity, but everything is still a subset of that big moral imperative: Don’t murder people.

The great thing about these large moral principles is that they’re always there. They’re there if you’re in the city or the country, if you’re black or white, if you’re male or female, gay or straight, or whatever other condition you want to put on yourself. Don’t steal. Don’t kill. You’re not lost with these moral directives; you can always find your way.

Morals are our compass points.

But morals don’t exist in a vacuum. What all angry mother’s eventually holler — “Because I said so” — is not a sound basis for a continuing moral system. If you can say so, that means everyone else can say so too. Morals become opinions. That might work for a single generation, with people tend to cluster around the same opinions, but mere opinions eventually lose their persuasive powers.

That’s where God comes in. Significantly, you don’t need to have everyone in society believing in God. Instead, it’s like herd immunity. If enough people believe that these vast principles come from an external, timeless, source, the principles will integrate into societal behavior. The non-believers may discount God but will rationalize their way to accepting that the principles silly people believe come from God are still good things.

In a society that is committed to these principles, the moral equivalent of herd immunity works to keep the majority of the people in line. Policing can indeed be community policing, with a minimalist police force, if the majority of people share the same moral values. That works best in a small, like-minded community. The bigger the population, the lower the herd immunity, the more people will deviate from the big rules and the more help you need armed help to constrain bad actors who reject the rules.

And then there’s leftism. Leftism has no fixed principles. Well, that’s not quite true. The fixed principle is power. Everything else is an ever-changing system of rules that help carry out whatever objectives the state happens to have on that day. In a leftist society, it’s impossible to be “moral,” because there are no compass points that define moral behavior. Today you can rob from the rich because they oppose the state. Tomorrow you can’t rob from the rich because they are the state. There’s no moral principle attached to stealing. The rules simply apply to who’s in and who’s out.

Power accrues to the rule-makers, who are careful to change the rules constantly in order to stay one step ahead of everyone else. Stand still and someone else will be making the rules to prove that they have the power and suddenly you’re the one in the gulag or staring down the wrong end of a gun — and you definitely need the gun to enforce the rules because they are not internal rules. They’re arbitrary and capricious, and you need neurotic people bouncing around frantically to stay one step ahead of “the law.” When they’re doing that, they’re not trying to overthrow the power brokers.

What’s so funny about Minneapolis, which just voted to do away entirely with police, is that the leftists-in-charge belief that people will simply behave well because of “the community.” What they fail to grasp is that “the community” is not a value. It’s just a collective.

This new Minneapolis community will end up having rule makers, but no rule enforcers. And because it’s leftist, there won’t be any external values to constrain people’s worst instincts. The members of the collective will do what they want. And as the lawbreakers realize that there’s nothing to hold them back, their victims will get very violent in an attempt to stave them off.

I’ve noted before that the Twin Cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul get away with their virtue signaling because they’re pretty, nice cities. Their garbage gets picked up, people have virtue-signaling signs in their yards, and homes are spacious and pleasant looking. That’s going to end with remarkable speed.

I keep thinking of Zimbabwe and it’s total collapse after Mugabe announced that he was going to give all the farms to black people because whites were evil colonialists. Unfortunately, the blacks didn’t know how to farm. In less than a decade, Zimbabwe went from being one of Africa’s more prosperous nations to being an economic basketcase, with people starving in the streets. The fall, once it happens, is fast.

Just listen to the immoral — whoops! I meant immortal words of Minneapolis’s uber-white, anarcho-socialist City Council president, Lisa Bender, discussing the fact that it’s “privileged” to expect police protection.

The woman has no morals. She’s just a sea of soft-sounding words and, behind it all, a lust for power. Minnesota is going to have a white-flight the likes of which has never been seen in America, even in areas such as Detroit in the 1970s. The only thing that makes me sad is that the leftists leaving those cities, like the Bourbons, will have learned nothing and forgotten nothing. They’ll head to safe conservative communities (made up of both blacks and whites), and work hard to destroy those communities’ moral underpinnings and replace them with leftism’s power-based, morality-free rules.

Democrats: Enabling dangerous pathologies in black America

If Dems were parents and black Americans were their children, we would clearly see that Dems are enablers cultivating their children’s worst behaviors.

Although I no longer post on my real-me Facebook account, I still lurk periodically. One of the most interesting things about doing so is seeing what my Proggie friends are posting. For two years, they posted non-stop about “Russia! Russia! Russia!” and were open with their belief that Trump was either an idiot or an evil mastermind. Ever since the Mueller report emerged, though, they’ve pivoted away from Russia entirely, and are focused solely on getting an open border for America.

Interestingly, though, my pet Lefties have been completely silent about Trump’s awesome suggestion that all the people flooding the border be placed in sanctuary cities and communities that support illegal immigration. Oh, and if you haven’t seen Tucker Carlson on that issue, you must:

But I digress….

One of my old Proggie friends posted the following on her Facebook page:

My first thought when I saw that poster is that I don’t trust European data. I’m sorry, but I don’t.

I became suspicious years ago when I learned how different countries treat their infant mortality information. America is one of the few countries (or maybe the only country) to count every infant born alive as “alive,” even if it dies within minutes of birth. You’d think that every country would count “live” births that way, but you’d be wrong. Most other countries count as live births only those babies that are certain to live. It makes their numbers look better.

My second thought was that, even if I assume that the data is correct, it simply reflects a stable, old, homogeneous culture. And this is where I wandered into thinking about what Democrats have done to American blacks.

You see, in America, while it’s true that guns contribute to more murders than is the case in Europe, there’s one sad and horrible fact behind that statistic: The American numbers are driven almost entirely by black on black crime. If you remove blacks from the statistics, white America has more or less the same gun crime rate as the rest of Europe.

My next intellectual leap was to think that there’s probably something very similar going on with abortions — that is, that black Americans are one of the primary drivers behind America’s high abortion numbers. After all, we already know that in major American cities, more black babies are aborted than are born. We also know that, when it comes to out-of-wedlock pregnancy, blacks also lead in that metric. More than 70% of black children today are raised in single parent — i.e., poor, single mother — homes.

Those numbers — inordinate numbers of murders, abortions, and out-of-wedlock children — are pathologies. When they happen within a single community, they are sick, self-harming behaviors. And please note that they are behaviors. They have nothing to do with skin color. They are choices not genetic destiny.

If we think of America as a family, large sectors of black America are the troubled sibling whose always coming home in the back of the police car or hanging at in the local Planned Parenthood. Some of the other siblings in this family — Caucasians, Asians, East Indians — are the high achievers, who get all the praise. Hispanics might be the sibling who can’t decide if he wants to hang with his good brothers or his bad ones.

If we continue the family metaphor, the different political parties can be the parents. Republicans are the mommy and Democrats are the daddy. Imagine these parents going to a family counselor for advice about this child who is harming himself and causing ripples of harm to the whole family.

This is the point at which I imagine a good counselor turning to that Democrat daddy and saying, “You’re an enabler.” If Democrat daddy pretends ignorance, the counselor would explain,

Enabling is “removing the natural consequences to the addict of his or her behavior.” Professionals warn against enabling because evidence has shown that an addict experiencing the damaging consequences of his addiction on his life has the most powerful incentive to change. Often this is when the addict “hits bottom” – a term commonly referred to in Alcoholics Anonymous.

Codependents often feel compelled to solve other people’s problems. If they’re involved with addicts, particularly drug addicts, they usually end up taking on the irresponsible addict’s responsibilities.

Their behavior starts as a well-intentioned desire to help, but in later stages of addiction, they act out of desperation. The family dynamics become skewed, so that the sober partner increasingly over-functions and the addict increasingly under-functions.

This builds resentment on both sides, along with the addict’s expectation that the over-functioning partner will continue to make things right when the addict doesn’t meet his or her responsibilities.

When black sibling comes home pregnant or gets involved in crime, Republican mommy says, “I love you, but I am not going to protect you from the consequences of your actions. You know the difference between right and wrong, and you made the wrong choice. I’ve nagged you forever about staying in school, not sleeping around, not running around with the bad kids, getting a job, being reliable, etc. I’ll always love you, but you need to accept responsibility for what you’re doing.”

Democrat daddy, on the other hand, says, “It’s not your fault that you got pregnant or got involved in crime. It’s your white sister’s fault. Or it’s your Asian brother’s fault. They made you feel bad about yourself, and you had to act out to get my attention and have me prove my love for you by giving you a pass and blaming someone else for your behavior. Or maybe it’s your Hispanic brother’s fault because he encouraged you to be bad. Anyway, I’ll take you get an abortion and I’ll tell the judge you’re not responsible for robbing that grocery store. You ought to be given a pass for your bad behavior because it’s just not fair that you’re not like the rest of your siblings. And that’s how much I love you.”

If that dysfunctional family were in your neighborhood, you would look at the Democrat daddy and know in an instant that, by constantly excusing his black child’s behavior, he’s giving black child not just permission but actual encouragement to be bad. Meanwhile, while you’d sympathize with Republican mommy’s efforts to make things right, you’d tell her one of two things: “Either kick Democrat daddy out on his ass or . . . . Well, there is no ‘or.’ Kick him out. He’s destroying your black child by being an enabler.”

I believe strongly that Candace Owens is right that the American black community is in trouble. Sadly, though, just like the junkie in the quotation above, while large segments of the American black community hover near rock bottom, which is the point at which they would realize that they have to change, Democrats keep enabling them. Democrats excuse every type of malfeasance by blaming other people for black pathologies.

Just as with the junkie, though, all that the Democrats are doing is destroying their child. The Democrats’ love of self (and, in the case of political Democrats, as opposed to my hypothetical Democrat daddy, their love of power) far outweighs their concern for their child. Either they’re faking love or their love is the worst kind of enabling that, by stroking the parent’s ego, destroys the child.

Dear black Americans: Please save yourselves because the Democrat party, out of self-love and a lust for power, is bound and determined to destroy you.

The post Democrats: Enabling dangerous pathologies in black America appeared first on Watcher of Weasels.