Back in 2015 I posted a link from a blog called "Ex-Army" which itself was a repost of a blog called Deconstructing Leftism. The topic was "Blacks and the Domination of Social Space" which is even more relevant in the era where violent niggers who deserved it like George Floyd and Jacob Blake are elevated to sainthood, as their savage kindred continue to rape and murder the adopted country that did them pretty well.
So what has Ex-Army been up to these days? Nothing, they're gone.
Deconstructing Leftism? Yep, also gone. As a result, it's probably for the best to post thrasymachus33308's entire original article. First, the summary by Ex-Army:
White liberals live in a dream world. I just read a little exchange on Facebook that included this from a Canadian:
I've talked to Americans who are terrified of blacks. Totally terrified. They claim blacks are responsible for huge amounts of crime, without taking into consideration that by using racial profiling blacks get arrested more often.Indeed. The fact that Blacks are arrested more often cannot possibly be a result of Black behavior, because Everybody Is Equal, and behaves exactly the same way. The only exception to that is, of course, ordinary White people, who profile Blacks, and make it look like they commit a lot of crimes. And cops, by and large are ordinary (unenlightened, non-liberal) Whites. So the crime statistics are in no way an indication of any blame due Blacks, but are entirely a proof of White racism. Got that? Every time you hear that a Black has murdered somebody, you should chalk it up to White racism, because he really didn't murder anybody, but was profiled for it, while the real murderer, some Archie Andrews type, wasn't even considered for arrest.It's a strange theory, that. All races and ethnic groups exhibit identical behavior, but "bias" causes them to be regarded as behaving differently. It's bias, then, that makes us think that Muslims are into honor killing, when, obviously, an identical percentage of honor killings are performed by Norwegian Lutherans and Tibetan Buddhists, but the cops ignore all that and just report on the Muslims.But I've found a dissenting view from this theory, that states that statistically, Blacks do behave in at least on small way somewhat differently than Whites, Hispanics, and Asians. This may be hard to believe, especially if you're a Canadian, but bear with me. This is from:
And the full Deconstructing Leftism article (apologies for the formatting, paragraphs within quoted text that has also been shrunk apparently is beyond the new Blogger interface's abilities:
Stories about blacks getting into confrontations with cops, security guards, store owners and others are so common as to be hardly worth mentioning. And yet there is a basic reason for this, which should be understood by all who share any social space with blacks.
A former cop, FBI agent and current criminal defense attorney, Dale Carson, wrote a book called “How to Arrest-Proof Yourself”. I read this and found it very interesting, as it talks about what cops are actually doing on the street. According to Carson, cops look for certain high-profile behaviors and stop those people.
I mentioned the book in comments on Lion of the Blogosphere, and he read it and became a big fan. Living in a high-density urban environment where this plays out every day, but where most of the population studiously ignores that it is happening, I can see how this would be very interesting to him.
To summarize the book- if you are going to do anything illegal, do it inside, out of public view. Don’t drive an old, beat-up car, and definitely not with a bunch of people in it, that is a cop magnet. If you are stopped by a cop, be polite and try to end the encounter as quickly as possible.
Toward the end Carson digresses and addresses the issue of why blacks have much more trouble with the police than whites. His answer is that whites mostly follow his advice, and blacks don’t. Whites of the type more likely to have legal trouble- Carson works in Florida, so these people would be called crackers or rednecks- drink or smoke dope inside their homes, rather than on the street, carry knives rather than guns, drive by themselves or with one other guy in a pickup, have wives or girlfriends who help keep them out of trouble, and don’t get confrontational with cops. Blacks do frequently the opposite- drink or smoke dope on the street or in their front yards, carry guns, ride with four guys in an old sedan, and have girlfriends or baby mamas who really don’t care if they are locked up or not.
Carson seems to ascribe this behavior to ignorance by blacks, but I think there is a totally different cause. For blacks, dominating and acting out in public, social space is an end in itself. It is about power and control for them. And they are very successful at it, because any space where a black person appears will mostly be controlled by that black person- they will intimidate whites and Asians in that space, although maybe not Latinos.
Think about it- if you see a black in a public space, you are going to steer clear of him. He might not be trouble, but he might, and the hassle is not worth it. It could be something major, it could be something minor, but that’s up to him, and what kind of a mood he is in that day, and if he’s in a screw with whitey mood, you are in for some heartburn you don’t need.
Black behavior to own and control a social space varies from just hanging out, to hanging out and talking loudly, to being very physically active and boisterous, to play-fighting, standing in the middle of spaces intended for walking, walking four abreast down a sidewalk, walking in the middle of the street, stopping a car in the middle of the street to speak with someone walking in the street, stopping a car in the middle of the street to talk with someone in another car also stopped in the middle of the street- in general, many uses of social space not intended by the white designers, and regarded as inappropriate and selfish by white cultural standards.
Blacks get away with this first by their childishness and playfulness- reprimanding children is something whites do reluctantly, although blacks don’t hesitate to harshly punish misbehaving children. One black will not be challenged because whites rely on general social pressure to enforce most rules, rarely confronting people directly. Two or more blacks will not be challenged, because blacks play off and reinforce each other, and challenging them will most certainly result in a loud, angry confrontation. Challenge three blacks and physical violence is almost probable.
Blacks in social space are in their kingdom, but every kingdom has borders that must be jealously protected. Surrender is frequently the strategy. Too many blacks, and whites leave. Blacks are the reason for the demise of the indoor mall. In the ghetto, authorities tolerate and accept this kind of behavior, because most of the residents are black and the community supports it.
Sometime however there will be some push back. As Sailer has reported, in some middle-class black Detroit suburbs, the residents have reacted negatively to the arrival of ghetto blacks and their norms. Because all parties are black in this case, it can be described as a culture clash, although the middle-class blacks moved to the suburbs precisely for a white social environment.
Sometimes blacks will rub up a little too hard against whites, and store manager, security guard, or perhaps even a police officer will ask or tell the black person to move, quiet down, or leave, and the black person will respond aggressively. The ability to intimidate whites is very important to all blacks, and they work in concert to maintain this. I suspect that in each situation, the goal of the black is to create as much pain for the white authority figure, without actually getting into legal trouble. The black may not want a ticket, a summons, or an arrest, but is not particularly afraid of these either. A confrontation with a white authority figure is a great experience for a black, gives him status and prestige with other blacks, and if he is arrested gives him even more. From a white logical standpoint, legal trouble is to be avoided whenever possible, but from the black standpoint, while it has personal costs, it also has personal benefits, and benefits blacks as a whole, by discouraging confrontation by whites, however justified.
This kind of simple enforcement of social norms by authority figures is what is constantly attacked by blacks and white progressives as evil, racist police harassment. But as I have shown, it is normal for this behavior to be tolerated in most instances. It is sometimes still necessary to tell people to not do things. Blacks will complain that the police don’t ticket whites for drinking beer on the sidewalk, but that’s because whites don’t drink beer on the sidewalk- they do it on their couch, in their backyard, or maybe on the front porch, but never on the sidewalk. Blacks could do the same, but they like the idea of making the public space of the sidewalk into their own personal space.
I wrote about this in detail some time ago about the Trayvon Martin case. I find myself repeating myself because of a few more recent news items, each itself completely unremarkable, but showing this pattern. My answer is the same now- make a habit of questioning and confronting blacks, if only by eye contact. Blacks need to broken of the habit of casually intimidating whites, if only by letting them know they are being watched. Any obnoxious or illegal behavior should be referred to the police or other authorities.
Blacks like to use the word “peace”, but peace to them means exactly the same thing it does to Moslems, which is submission. You can be at peace with a black if you submit to him, he of course the sole judge as to whether your submission is complete or sincere enough. It’s a losing game, so don’t submit at all.
Bonus Deconstructing Leftism headline: "Trayvon Martin and the Chimpout- Question and Confront." Shame the Wayback Machine never got around to preserving the article, sounds like it would have been a good one.
