Deolexrex sent me the link to the video below along with the question, "What should one do if he finds himself here...?"
Good question, and I must say that in Jr. High School (Middle School, as you youngsters call it), I was there. The racial component was missing, but the brutality, the cheering for the hoodlums and the total disdain for the victim by passengers and bus driver are familiar.
If you think this bears further comment, let me know. There is much to say here, but I find it hard to keep my cool when I see this stuff and remember . . . .
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
21 comments:
O.k., where's the outrage? Answer: don't be silly, only whites can be guilty of racially motivated crime.
Gravelbelly,
I've been there too. About all you can do is fight your way to a wall, put your back against it, and use your feet to keep people off. And pray someone in authority intervenes.
I am so glad I have never been to public school. I've had to put up with packs of blacks too many times just in stores "across the tracks' when we still lived in Fla. I can only imagine the poor kid if he tried to do that to me........
"O.k., where's the outrage? Answer: don't be silly, only whites can be guilty of racially motivated crime."
Exactly, everyone knows that white rednecks drag blacks behind pickup trucks MUCH more that black kids beat up on white kids in black alleys, or a black man mugs a white man, or so on and so forth. It is white people who are the ones with the racism problem.......
Side note, please don't take any of the above comments as me being racist.....
One thing that I find interesting is the absence of at least one friend of the guy that was beat up.
Something similar happened locally several years ago when a group of black teenagers cornered three white boys in the locker room. Unbeknownst to them, they were picking on a logger's son, a potato farmer's son, and a coal miner's son. (No, this is not a joke.)
The white guys fled with some cuts and bruises but several of the blacks had broken limbs.
My parents never allow any of us to go anywhere alone.
Let me reiterate that my experience was with white guys. No race has a corner on violence. Before Christianity came to the Norsemen, they raided, raped and pillaged from northern Europe to the coasts of Africa and to the east as far as Russia.
Violence is not a racial problem; it's a sin-nature problem.
I absolutely agree with you.
Gravelbelly,
While I of course agree with you that no race has a 'corner' on violence, the black race is nevertheless responsible for 80% of the violent crime in this country, and they are only 14% of the population. Those stats are from the D.O.J. There's a reason why racial profiling works.
It is both a universal sin problem, and a race problem IMHO. History has shown that whenever markedly different races live in close proximity, there is, ahem, social unrest. Race is only one factor among many, but denying it is a factor at all seems to be way too fashionable these days.
Randall,
Let me be sure I understand you. What I'm hearing is that plain old violence arises from the sin-nature, but excessive violence is racially (genetically) determined?
I am saying some people groups (races) are naturally more violent then others, yes. One need only look closely at our inner cities and F.B.I. statistics to understand why I draw that conclusion. I think white populations used to be much more violent, but have been socialized for centuries by the christian gospel.
As an analogy, think of the way we have selectively bred canines. Some are more aggressive then others because they are bred that way. It is part of their nature. Fortunately there is also nurture to consider, of course. I've met pit bull terriers who were perfectly trustworthy around strangers and pomeranians who were not. This doesn't change the genetic nature of either breed, however.
Clear as mud? I understand your desire to focus on things directly related to self-defense. So, if you want me to avoid this topic in the future, it is your blog, and I'll respect that.
I'm enjoying your books by the way, thanks for writing them.
I think white populations used to be much more violent, but have been socialized for centuries by the christian gospel.
I think the answer is right there. If and when there is a difference in such things (violence rates in different "races"), it comes from the culture. Young black men are often raised without fathers, often in gang "hoods", and even their music reflects the depraved nature of the gangbanger lifestyle. It only takes a minute of watching MTV to see that.
We are all capable of violence. It's merely the culture that brings it out in certain people groups. (NOT "races"--we are all ONE race.) Like Gravelbelly said, the Norse culture was horrifically violent.
Culture. I can't buy any genetic theories on this. We are responsible for our actions. Evil is not hard-wired into our genes, rather evil is what we are born into.
OTOH, I've luckily evaded all attempts of these kinds of people from attacks. In all cases however, I didn't run, though....
Spencer
Great discussion, y'all!
Spencer,
You speak as though race and culture aren't basically the same thing. One is the cause, the other is the effect, and the two are inextricably bound together. Culture is not imposed on a people against their will; people groups create culture out of a shared understanding of the world. Culture is like a mirror; it reflects who we are. And part of who we are is our ancestry. No white man could have or would have invented rap and hip-hop. And no black nation did or could produce a Beethoven. Think about it. That's why I maintain that western civilization will not survive once white europeans die out. OUR culture is also a reflection of US, that is, our people. And we are dieing out.
While all people are indeed descended from Adam, and are created in the likeness of God, different races of men do in fact exist and are a scientific fact. Ask any coroner if he can identify a subject's race by DNA, and he will say 'of course'. This would not be possible if race were merely a social construct or merely 'skin deep'. Race is real, it goes right to the middle of the DNA in every one of your cells. As a matter of fact, you can send scrapings from the inside of your cheek to a lab, and they can tell you which part of the world your ancestors came from. They can nail it down to exact percentages even. They can tell you you're 20%english, 15% french, 18% italian.. etc.
Genetic inheritance, though, doesn't get anyone off the hook. We are still 100% responsible for what we do, every one of us. I'm not implying that the actions of the black students on the bus were somehow excusable, because after all they couldn't help themselves, they're black. That's not what I'm saying at all. What I am saying is that we used to consider honestly and rationally the factor of race in human behavior; but now we just deny it.
No one doubts that nurture has a very important impact on the life of any person. But nature has just as big an impact. When we observe differences in the behavior of different groups, though, our tendency today is to attribute ALL of these differences to nurture alone. At worst this is dishonest, and at best, naive.
I am sorry sir, I must disagree with you.
My point is that, say, if all black people moved to a new country, left all of their heritage behind and started new, in another couple hundred years, we might just have something very different (take this as a hypothetical, btw).
I was born into a culture of slimy young males (not even men) who live to drink, party, do drugs, and have sex with any and every girl in sight.
Yet I do not follow that path. Just the same, many excellent black men do not follow the path usually delineated to them.
And I never claimed that there was no way to tell people apart by DNA. Of course there is. But you can also tell if you're related to another person in your family. Does that make each family their own race? No. It's the basics of population science. When groups are "separated" and interbreed, then you have shared genes, etc. Over time, we got whites, Asians, Arabs, Latins, blacks, etc.
We are all still part of the human race. It's not a black vs. white, etc. world. We are all God's children and I don't see much of a difference beyond outer looks.
I believe it is nurture.
Spencer
Spencer,
Sorry my young friend, you're not getting off that easy. In your first reply to me, you put the word 'race' in quotes, as though it was some fictional concept that doesn't matter. It's not, and it does. God established the different races, and put them in their own lands with their own languages.
"Remember the days of old; consider the years of many generations; ask your father and he will show you, your elders and they will tell you. When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance, WHEN HE DIVIDED MANKIND, He fixed the borders of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God." Deut. 32:8,9
St. Paul says basically the same thing in Acts 17:26.
"And He (God) made from ONE MAN EVERY NATION OF MANKIND to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place.."
God established racial diversity first, clear back in Genesis. Then, out of every nation, God is calling a people for Himself through the preaching of the Gospel. But, nowhere in scripture does he command the physical amalgamation of all the various races into one. God has created diversity (the various nations) within unity (the Kingdom of God). This is because God Himself, the Holy Trinity, IS diversity within unity, holy, perfect and eternal. As christians we should understand this better then most.
I repeat: Jesus did not die to make everyone the same. We are obviously not all the same. Inequality is a fact of life in the world God created. Jesus did die to free His people from their sins. Therefore, the human desire for freedom mirrors the very plan and purpose of God. But only if it's freedom UNDER God, and not freedom FROM God. (see Psalm 2) The human desire for equality, however, has it's roots in the sin of envy, and is of our enemy, Satan. Satan, you may recall, sought to be equal with God. Modern multicultural political correctness is all about equality, not freedom. Now you know which side you're on, when you say things like: "We are all God's children, and I don't see much difference beyond outer looks." You've learned your multicultural lessons very well.
Multicultural thought seeks to deny the obvious. Being a member of mankind and made in the image of God doesn't mean racial differences don't exist. And racial differences are obviously more substantial then 'outer looks'. If they were not, Chinese, Indian, and African culture would look just like ours. Or, our's would look just like their's. But we both know that isn't true. And nurture simply can't account for all of these differences. Obama had a white mother who loved him, just like my white mom loved me. But guess what, we couldn't be more different, and he's only half black.
One last thought: white denial coupled with black and brown envy doesn't bode well for our republic, or our people. No multicultural state has ever lasted for very long in all of recorded history. The one that did survive for a considerable length of time (Rome) gradually descended into chaos under an all-powerful tyrant.
It's awful how much damage the ideas which Charles Darwin made wide-spread has done to our world and our culture. They have killed untold millions. It makes me sick just to think about it.
Well then, I must say that I still disagree and fully believe that we are all one race, plain and simple. My respect to you but I must disagree with your position, sir.
I have not "learned [my] multicultural lessons well" and I reject such philosophy straightforward. But the picture the Bible paints is not one of various races of men at different levels, rather, this smacks of Darwinism. What I see in the Holy Scriptures is a God and His people--all of them.
Spencer
Emil & Spencer.
Now gentlemen, my position has nothing to do with darwinism. I am not saying the races 'evolved' or even that some races are 'better' or 'higher' then others. I am only saying that God established each race and gave a unique mix of characteristics to each race. Not all of these characteristics are good, not all are bad, but together, they tend to define the people who possess them. If this were not true, racial stereotypes would not exist, and police profiling would be entirely ineffective.
Some racial stereotyping from the Bible:
"One of the Cretans, a prophet of their own, said 'Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons.' This testimony is true..." Titus 1:12,13
"..For you suffered the same things from your own countrymen as they did from the jews, who killed both the Lord Jesus, and the prophets, and drove us out, and displease God and oppose all mankind by hindering us from speaking to the Gentiles that they might be saved - so as always to fill up the measure of their sins. But God's wrath has come upon them at last!" 1Thess. 2:14-16
The last quote is particularly interesting, for Paul is criticizing (and some would say stereotyping) his own people, the jews. But, contrast what he says here with Romans 9:1-3. It is possible to love deeply and yet stand in opposition to those you love. By the way, if you say what Paul said about the jews today, you will be quickly branded 'anti-semitic'. But I say, let God be true and every man a liar.
Mr. Gerard,
Actually, I wasn't referring to you.. it was a comment referring to the way the world views it... :-)
My view on 'race' depends upon what your definition of 'race' is... :-)
I believe that there are 'races'. I believe we are all of one 'race' I know that 'races' are real, because of the isolation of DNA in geographical areas. I believe that 'races' and the dispersion which you talk about were caused by the dispersion of people at the Tower of Babel. (did that make sense? I actually used the word 'race' in that paragraph with two different meanings)
Emil,
Thanks for that clarification. Sorry about casting too wide a net.
Post a Comment