American vs. European Crime Rates
Sat July 26th, 2003 18:38 MSTA German lawyer, in response to another blog entry (German Justice: 2 Days Per Murder), repeated the common European belief that the United States has a much higher crime rate than major European countries. The facts are quite different…
[UPDATE 8/15/2003 - For sources, see end of article]
[Warning: this article is politically incorrect. If you are likely to be offended by this, you need to read it!]
Here are Interpol 2001 crime statistics (rate per 100,000):
- 4161 - US
- 7736 - Germany
- 6941 - France
- 9927 - England and Wales
Thus the US has a substantially lower crime rate than the major European countries!
Here are the Interpol 1995 crime statistics (rate per 100,000):
- 5278 - US
- 8179 - Germany
- 6316 - France
- 7206 - England & Wales
Hence the trend in the US is towards a lower crime rate, while the trend in Europe (except Germany) is towards an increasing crime rate.
It is true that we (USA) have a high murder rate, mostly of criminals killing criminals, but a distressingly large number of people killing their spouses in anger, and the rate of “stranger killings” is rising.
However, the homicide rates have been dropping dramatically as we have been increasing penalties:
Homicide Rate/100,000 by Date in US:
- 1980 - 10.2
- 2000 - 5.5
Also, our murder rate is high largely due to the multicultural nature of our society. Inner city blacks, members of a distinct subculture, have a vastly higher criminal and victim homicide rate than our society as an average:
Homicide Offender Rate/100,000 by Race in US (2000):
- 3.4 - White
- 25.8 - Black
- 3.2 - Other
It is often hypothesized that blacks are overrepresented in murder statistics due to racism on the part of police and the justice system. If this were true, one would expect that the race of victims would have significantly different distribution than the race of the perpetrators, but this is not the case:
Homicide Victim Rate/100,000 by Race in US (2000):
- 3.3 - White
- 20.5 - Black
- 2.7 - Other
Thus if you remove homicides committed by blacks (total: 21862, Blacks:9316), and assume a proportionality between number of offenders and number of offenses, you can extrapolate US homicide offender rate of only 2.6/100,000, lower than Germany (3.27) and France (3.91).
One might ask why blacks are singled out. The reason is that inner city blacks are not representative of our culture. The black population is only about 13% of the total, and many blacks do not live in the inner city welfare cultures. Also, dividing the raw numbers into “white”, “black” and “other,” as was done by the Justice Department, shows that there are more black murderers (9316) than there are white and “other” combined (8346). I do not have statistics breaking out homicide by race AND location, but since most homicides committed by blacks are done in the inner city, the overall black statistic should be a good proxy.
Many, including myself, blame the high inner city crime rate on several factors:
- Misguided welfare policies, which have helped to create a culture of irresponsibility.
- The ideology of racial separatism (black power, etc.) and its relative, multiculturalism and the cult of victimology.
- Centuries of slavery and oppression, which really only came to an end in the 1960-current time period.
That the dramatic increase in the black crime rate came after the rise of the welfare state and the creation of black racial separatism and victimology suggests the causative nature of those factors.
NOTE: Statistics used here are not “cooked” in the sense of using the years that best support my argument. They are simply the oldest and newest years available from the sources, with the exception of the US homicide rate in 1980, which was a maximum over a long time, but not atypical of the period.
NOTE: I found one relatively obvious error in the data above, and have replaced that with accurate data. Also I have slightly changed the wording to better reflect the methods of calculation, and adjusted the non-black rate slightly with the new data. 7/31/2002.
NOTE: The following article by Theodore Dalrymple, a prominent British social critic, would tend to indicate that indeed, as suggested by some commenters, the high violence rate in France may be also due to ethnic minorities (although I was unable to find actual numbers). 10/25/2003.
SOURCES:
International data come from these Interpol documents.
U.S. Data by Ethnicity comes from this Deparment of Justice document. Note that it has separate linked pages, and you need to go into it aways. Also you can get raw numbers by clicking on the graphs.
Crime Wave
John Moore has a fascinating set of non-PC statistics up at Useful Fools. If nothing else, they are guaranteed to annoy Euros, lefties, and other useful fools who just hate nasty things like facts.
and why does none of this come as a surprise?
if things, crime wise, were so much better/safer in germany, why do so many germans working for the auto companies want to move here on assignment? ditto for the british.
if things, medical, were so much better in europe and britain, then why do so many of these people want to come here?
the truth is that when the pot of money for a given group in britain runs dry, then needed surgeries and treatments are simply not done or postponed until the pot of money is filled again. this means that women who have reproductive issues can go untreated and/or undiagnosed in many areas of britain. and do. (i’ve spoken with several). this means that people with conditions such as cushings go undiagnosed as often in europe and britain as they do in the united states.
in the united states, we routinely travel without guards, without soldiers guarding our streets.
we can buy where we choose, what we choose, when we choose, so long as we have the money to make the purchase. that includes health care.
as for crime…. since 9/11 in particular, even criminals have taken a second look at what happened and how they choose to practice their profession.
1) “Inner city blacks are not representative of our culture.”
Who’s culture is “our” culture to which you are referring here? Rich folks? White folks? “Inner city blacks” are as representative of our culture as the next group of ten million people. There are about 35 million African-American US residents, and this population is concentrated in large cities and in the South. We created this segment of “our” culture and it is dead wrong to claim that this is not a part of the American culture.
2) “Thus if you remove homicides committed by blacks, you get a US homicide rate of only 2.3/100,000, lower than Germany (3.27) and France (3.91).”
Take the time to now remove from Germany and France’s statistics whichever ethnic group has the highest homicide rate and compare those new numbers. Otherwise, this is a meaningless statistic which compares apples to oranges.
2) “Many, including myself, blame the high inner city crime rate on several factors:
- Misguided welfare policies, which have helped to create a culture of irresponsibility.
- The ideology of racial separatism (black power, etc.) and its relative, multiculturalism and the cult of victimology.
- Centuries of slavery and oppression, which really only came to an end in the 1960-current time period.”
Wow… centuries of slavery and oppression came in third place! I’m impressed that you were able to grudgingly put it that high on the list of reasons behind it. I’m surprised that “baggy jeans and sideways hats” didn’t sneak in ahead of it.
The comparisons between countries are really pointless. If one looks at the statistics for crime by state one sees enormous variation. See for instance here and here and here and here to get a sense of just how much murder and other forms of crime vary between states. The murder rates vary by over an order of magnitude between states.
The US is obviously made up of a number of subpopulations that have wildly different propensities to commit crime. Comparison between countries that have different ratios of different kinds of subpopulations doesn’t really tell you that much unless one looks at the behavior of the subpopulations.
The comparisons between countries are really pointless. If one looks at the statistics for crime by state one sees enormous variation. See for instance here and here and here and here to get a sense of just how much murder and other forms of crime vary between states.
The US is obviously made up of a number of subpopulations that have wildly different propensities to commit crime. Comparison between countries that have different ratios of different kinds of subpopulations doesn’t really tell you that much unless one looks at the behavior of the subpopulations.
Crime Rates
America has a crime problem. But the Europeans are worse, despite the claims that America is a dangerous place peopled with gun-toting maniacs. The entry…
The violence levels are massively concentrated in a few urban areas.
Ever asked why that is?
Gun control in the US has always been directed primarily at minorities, especially blacks. Until fairly recently (1950s forward and even then spotty), black-on-black crime wasn’t taken seriously at all; so long as no white bodies turned up, racist inner-city cops didn’t care. The actual police slang term for violence in the black areas of town circa 1890 to well into the 20th century was “just another niggertown Saturday night” which is where the gun-banners get the term “Saturday night special” for low-end handguns. NOT an accident, that.
While gun control laws appeared to be written in a race-neutral fashion after the passage of the 14th Amendment of 1868, the reality was different. As Justice Buford of the Florida Supreme Court noted in a 1941 case involving a white guy *freed* despite packing without a carry permit put it:
“I know something of the history of this legislation. The original Act of 1893 was passed when there was a great influx of negro laborers in this State drawn here for the purpose of working in turpentine and lumber camps. The same condition existed when the Act was amended in 1901 and the Act was passed for the purpose of disarming the negro laborers and to thereby reduce the unlawful homicides that were prevalent in turpentine and saw-mill camps and to give the white citizens in sparsely settled areas a better feeling of security. The statute was never intended to be applied to the white population and in practice has never been so applied.” ó Watson v. Stone, 4 So.2d 700, 703 (Fla. 1941) from Clayton Cramerís ìRacist Roots Of Gun Controlî:
(Note: Buford partially lied. What happened in 1893 was that a Klan raiding party tried to hit a black township just outside of Gainsville. The “brothas” shot the bejeezus out of ‘em with leverguns and revolvers (yea!). Guess which guns were specifically targeted for permits in Florida in 1893? Yup. Leverguns and revolvers.)
So here’s what’s happening today: the cities with the highest black populations also have the heaviest gun control: New York, Boston, Washington DC, Chicago, Los Angeles and similar, and until very recently (2001) Detroit. The cities with the least gun control such as Dallas, Seattle, Portland OR and similar have the lowest minority populations.
You think this is an *accident*?
When gun control is enforced in a poverty-stricken area, the result is to provide criminals with easy LOCAL access to unarmed victims. When Florida reformed their gun control in 1987 and allowed anybody able to pass a background check and training to pack on the street, the state average percent of such “packers” was the typical 3% or so, but in inner-city Miami people locked’n'loaded at a greater rate, up to about 15% in some areas. That drove the criminals out and for a while they preyed on tourists until renta-car bumper stickers and other insignia was outlawed. (Got that? They protected the tourists by blending them in with the armed population. Other than that one issue, crime has dropped steadily in FL since ‘87.)
Want hard stats? Here’s a breakdown of the number of gun carry permits issued in each California county in 1997, and a racial breakdown of the counties. The data is crystal clear: if you live in a county with less than the state average black population (6.7%), your odds of having a permit in your pocket and a gun legally concealed is FIVE TIMES HIGHER than the residents of the “blacker counties” (regardless of your race). A five to one disparity ain’t accidental:
http://www.equalccw.com/ccwdata.html
Or take Fresno County: in 1995, the Fresno Bee newspaper got ahold of the list of all 2,500 permitholders. They sorted out what percent had Latino surnames: 3%. The county is FOURTY FOUR PERCENT HISPANIC per US census data!!! The unedited article:
http://www.equalccw.com/fresno.html
Gun control isn’t the solution. IT’S THE CORE OF THE PROBLEM. Well, admittedly, one core - the other is the idiotic “drug war”, see also the movie “Traffic” for all that needs to be said on that one. The various drug bans ALSO started out as “minority control” in the 1930s plus they needed to give the former Revenuers something to do (sheesh).
End the drug war, you yank the money to the gangs and remove the “greed factor” (turf wars, etc.). End gun control, you allow the honest people still in the “hood” to complain about crime, work with the police and in general help restore order as responsible adults, instead of the “I didn’t see ‘nuthin” of scared sheeple.
Jim March
Equal Rights for CCW Home Page
http://www.equalccw.com
Hi Jim, good to see you are still writting!
I still haven’t heard if the MMM’s every paid the back rent to SF. General Hospital? That will be the day HELL freezes over!
Good commentaries; guns “kill” three ways: suicide, murder, and genocide. Accidental deaths also, but the figures are not much different than other common household items. Suicide doesn’t change with gun control laws. Murder seems to increase slightly, if it is affected at all. The biggie is genocide; not only does the genocide toll dwarf suicides, accidents, murders, and terrorism combined (genocide accounts for nearly 5 thousand innocent deaths per day, and has kept up that average for about 100 years), but genocide is ONLY possible with gun control, which always begins with the seemingly harmless “first step” of “registration” “to control crime.”
We have some good resources to use on-line under our “favorite links” page at Doctors for Sensible Gun Laws - www.dsgl.org - I especially recommend Kates and Suter’s articles from the law and medical journals.
Andrew Johnstone, RPh/MD
Doctors for Sensible Gun Laws - www.dsgl.org
“‘First do no harm’ - gun control LAWS lead to far more innocent deaths than ‘easy availability’ ever could…”
John - could I trouble you to post links to the data or studies you used to put this excellent post together? Your post is bang on target for an ongoing discussion at Samizdata, and I would love to pass along the source materials.
What a load of rubbish.
Here’s some extracts for other countries
Here’s some other crime stats for various countries, per 100,000 citizens: (1997)
SWEDEN: 13516
NEW ZEALAND: 12591
IRAQ: 149 (1994)
MAURITIUS: 32928
INDIA: 179
ITALY: 4
CHINA: 131
BELGIUM: 8035
USA: 5375 (1994)
http://www.uncjin.org/Statistics/WCTS/trc000927.pdf
The reports that (ALL) these figures are based on CLEARLY state that no comparison between countries is possible - the only comparison between countries that is VALID is in the TRENDS.
BUT that wouldn’t serve your agenda, no doubt……..which is probably why you omit it?
Here’s another way of looking at the figures:
Figures for 2000, per 100,000 of population.
Police numbers:
Canada: 180
Germany:290
France: 211
England & Wales: 233
USA: 243 (1999)
Number of Prisons
Canada: 0.7 (1999)
England & Wales: 0.44
Germany: 0.27
USA: 0.55
Number of Spaces in Prisons:
Canada:109
England & Wales:144
Germnany :93
USA:370 (Second only to Estonia: 447)
Persons Incarcerated:
Canada:114 (1999)
England&Wales:123
Germany:96
USA: 638 (WOW)
Russia: 632 (WOW)
France: 87
Number of female convicted prisoners on given day
Germany: 2.9
France:1.69
England & Wales:5.55
USA:29.67
http://www.unodc.org/pdf/crime/seventh_survey/7pv.pdf
Since this article previous did not attract many attacks, I had neglected to put in sources. I have now done so.
Mr Rubbish… note my sources. The international numbers are from interpol. The ethnicity numbers in the US are from the Department of Justice. If I got them wrong, point it out.
My agenda was simple: to counter the assertion, made in the original discussion to which this article refers, that the US has the highest crime rate in the world.
In researching that, I also came across numbers which startled me about the ethnic breakdown of homicides, and decided that they were worth posting.
You must your own agenda, because you have posted all sorts of irrelevant (although interesting in OTHER discussions) statistics. My sources are from well established official sources. I stand by them.
I have now added the sources of my data so all can read them.
Rather than looking at total crime statistics, it might be more helpful to look at statistics for crimes for which the use of arms is particularly suited, like murder, violent assault, and violent theft. A higher crime rate resulting from an epidemic of hubcap theivery in Finland for example, doesn’t really say much about policies which are ostensibly directed at the criminal use of weapons. Still, it’s interesting to note that for 2000 the murder rates in Scotland, England and Luxembourg (!) were almost twice as high as the United States; that one was more likely to fall victim to a violent theft in France, England, or Spain than in the United States, and that one was about twice as likely to be the victim of aggravated battery in Australia than the United States.
It took me awhile, but my take on this topic is finally up: RACIST!™
Oh, and I added you to my blogroll. We Arizonans need to stick together!
I went to Intepol and noticed that no data for Mexico is available. Did I miss it, or did Mexico decline to submit data?
To all of you politically correct freaks:
Blacks are more prone to violent crime anywhere in the world. Let me re-qualify this statement: I don’t mean “black skin color” but rather “negro”.
Dark skinned Hindus, for example, do not count. You can continue looking into years of oppression and slavery and will never ever understand the true reasons. It is nothing but convenient excuse that could never end even after years of favorable treatment, affirmative action and other programs. Rather use common sense and your own eyes. Will you feel safe and comfortable in a typical black neighbourhood?
I like the way you cleaned up the stats for the US by omitting the black criminal element. However, you failed to use the same approach for Germany and France. You should be made aware that most European countries are becoming a melting pot like the US. There are ethnic groups in these countries that also skew the data for crime. (Turkish and Morroccan groups are causing a real shift in the crime stats for these countries.
For example, 55% of Morrocans in the Netherlands are on long term disability, milking the Dutch system for all its worth. As a result, bored Moroccan youth are causing a disproportionate spike in the crime rate stats for that country.
So, your little US stats hocus pocus should also be applied to the countries like Germany and France, etc.
I tried to clean it up for France, and found no data online (and I spent quite a bit of time searching). I didn’t try for Germany, as I ran out of time. I know that in France the north Africans increase the crime rates - that was true when I lived there.
I would like to see data by ethnicity for Germany and France. Are you volunteering?
Notice, by the way, I only cleaned up the murder stats. The other crime stats are equivalent across all countries. And I made it clear that what was done with the data, so it is hardly fraudulent.
Get rid of the blacks and crime rates will go down, fact!
Crime: US v. EU
A blog entry comparing US vs. European crime rates . If one excludes blacks from the US crime statistics, either as victims or as perpetrators, we have a lower murder rate than in several European countries. Jim March, of the Equal Rights for CCW Home …
Cris:
I read your article about American vs. European Crime Rates and I have a question for you, but first let me make an statement: I just visited Easter Russia and I was informed that 50% of the orphans who “graduate” from orphanages are criminals. Has anybody studied the up bringing of criminals in the USA?
Jose Maria.
Your article smacks of racist rhetorics,and i believe somebody has concluded your racist thoughts for you.”get rid of the blacks and the crime rate will go done”.
It is wellknown that the propensity for the police to report crime committed by blacks is higher than that of whites.Have you checked that?
For your article the issue is not the American versus the European but rather the Black VERSUS the White.A world against itself.Shame unto humanity.
George:
Your rant would indicate you didn’t read the whole thing very well at all. For example, I comment in the piece that:
It is often hypothesized that blacks are overrepresented in murder statistics due to racism on the part of police and the justice system. If this were true, one would expect that the race of victims would have significantly different distribution than the race of the perpetrators, but this is not the case:
Homicide Victim Rate/100,000 by Race in US (2000):
3.3 - White
20.5 - Black
2.7 - Other
SO this indicate both that I did think of the alleged police tendency to overreport by race, and provided evidence to indicate that this is not the case with these statistics.
Since you obviously missed that point, I have no reason to believe you either read the post carefully or gave it any thought.
Rather, you simply threw out the cheap shot implying that I am a racist.
As to European crime rate, as I said in the notes, I tried to get French numbers by race or ethnic group but the French don’t publish it (probably out of embarrassment). But if you had the article carefully, you would have seen the Note placed there just this month on that topic/.
It’s easy to call people racist.
It is also apparently true that the rising crime rate in France and England, at least, is significantly due to problems in immigrant communities. Of course, since immigrant communities in France resemble black ghettos in the US, this is not so surprising.
In England, however, there is also a serious breakdown of law enforcement, with the police simply not trying very hard.
Anyway, before you throw comment again, George, it would be apropriate to read everything you are commenting about!
TO Jose: This article is primarily about violent crime. However, the vast majority of criminals in the US come from fatherless families, or families without the biological father. This is especially true in inner-city black communities, where the welfare state has taken the place of fatherhood, and 85% of all children are illegitimate!
Good job on this topic. It’s hard to say it without sounding racist. I am personally to the point where I get pissed when people say that these types of conversations are degrading the black population as I have black family myself. It would be ‘nicer’ if one could look at someone and say “fatherless child making
It is true that police and the justice system are harder on blacks than on whites. However, the large gap in the statistics between black crime and white crime clearly show that blacks are the ones murdering people. However there is a bigger relationship with high murder rates committed by poor people. Most black people just ‘happen’ to be poor. Poor people need to find other means for money when they can’t afford college, and they don’t qualify for scholarships because the public schools in poor neighborhoods suck.Public education is really still based on income since it is based on what neighborhood you live in. When/if blacks graduate they have few choices between mcdonalds and gangs, then their children have the same choices. Because they choose gangs, alot of murder is black criminals killing black criminals. This is what some americans in high places want. Thats why we have the NAACP and ‘black power’ idealogies because we are still very much opressed. You may have guessed I’m black but I am also a woman. Women are opressed so we have feminist and other women groups. No one calls it reverse sexism for being involved in pro-women activities, so why is it reverse racism for being pro-black. Its just necessary. I like white people and men
I was with you until you said that some Americans in high places want the current situation that so many blacks are in.
The only Americans I know of who benefit from this situation are Democrat politicians and people who make money from white guilt (such as Jesse Jackson).
I also disagree that blacks are oppressed in the US. Blacks have a tougher time of some things (such as getting stopped for Driving While Black) but an easier time of others (such as getting into college with much lower scores than whites or Asians). I would hardly call this oppression.
As far as women being oppressed, that one I find truly amazing. Women constitute the majority of college graduates. They have rights that men do not have (such as the right to decide, by themselves, whether to abort a child conceived by both a man and a woman). My daughter certainly doesn’t feel oppressed.
Since you are a black woman, you are a double winner in the Affirmative Action sweepstakes, although I don’t know if you have taken advantage of it. As a white male, I am merely the bad guy in any discussion of race, even though I haven’t done anything wrong. And I don’t like it.
There will never be true equality of treatment, because it is human nature for some people to treat people differently based on their race (or religion, or whatever). Certainly my white daughter was treated differently on college admissions, as the best black kids in her school got into better schools than the best white kids, even though the whites had better grades and SAT scores. She went to a Catholic school which gives scholarships to people who can’t afford the tuition (which itself is far less than what the public schools cost per pupil) and my wife heads a charity which provides some more of those scholarships. They are awarded based on need and character, not race.
Personally, I think we should do our best to be race blind. I support Ward Connerly’s efforts to end official racism by preventing the government from requiring any kind of racial discrimination (including Affirmative Action), and even preventing the government from collecting racial information on individuals except in special cases (such as medical research).
The people whom I think are most to blame for the plight of blacks today are those who, with perhaps good intentions, built huge public housing projects for poor folks, created welfare rules which tended to encourage poverty and which discouraged marriage. The others who deserve much of the blame are blacks themselves, who adopt a separate culture, have an anti-white attitude, belittle black kids who study hard, and in general demand special treatment from the rest of us.
Statistics show that the people least likely to succeed are those who are raised in broken families, regardless of race. The men who are most likely to commit crimes are those who are not raised in a family with their natural father. In this area, blacks in the US have by far the worst statistics (with a 69 percent overall illegitimacy rate). The welfare system encouraged this (and may still encourage it).
To quote Ann Coulter:
The War on Poverty took a crisis-level illegitimacy rate among blacks in the mid-1960s (22 percent) and tripled it to 69 percent. It transformed a negligible illegitimacy rate among whites (2 percent) to emergency proportions (22.5 percent) – higher than the black illegitimacy rate when Daniel Patrick Moynihan heralded the War on Poverty with his alarmist report on black families, “The Negro Family: The Case for National Action.”
As you can see, the pathology in our society, as represented by the illegitimacy rate, has increased dramatically since the start of major federal welfare programs. It’s not just blacks, but blacks started out in worse shape and have reached a much worse situation.
If you really want to improve things, vote for politicians who will support school choice (vouchers, charter schools, etc). Then black kids won’t be trapped in crappy inner city schools.
If you really want to help, fight the attitude in the black culture that all problems are a result of oppression, and instead encourage people to take responsibility for their own success or failure.
If you really want to help, fight against the part of black inner city culture which encourages criminality (such as Gangsta Rap), and fight for the part of black inner city culture which encourages personal responsibility (black churches).
If you really want to help, be against Affirmative Action. Affirmative Action is a statement that some people, because of the color of their skin, can’t make it on their own and need discrimination in their favor. It taints people of color with the suspicion that their accomplishments are not their own. It leads to the suspicion that a black person’s credentials are not valid. I am also against “legacy admissions” which are another form of affirmative action that some whites (children of graduates) take advantage of.
I am tired of hearing people complain about oppression. I am tired of racial separatism. If you are going to live in the United States, become part of the society. Emphasize what makes us the same, not what makes us different. Don’t invent phony history and holidays (such as Kwanzaa) to support your separateness.
Blacks were brought here and treated badly. But there is not a white person alive today who held slaves, and few who still have benefit from the slave holding of their ancestors. And those whites who are bigots will never be cured any more than the blacks who are bigots. It is human nature for some people to take out their anger and frustration on those who are different from themselves.
So please, no more victimology. Don’t be a victim, be a winner!
Oh, and I like people. Period. I don’t care what color, I just care about their character.
If you really want to compare crime between several countries, try the International Crime Victimization Survey (ICVS). It’s the UN equivalent of the Justice Department’s NCVS. Although it might be a bit slow, as it’s in Italy, the data is in English. This data is published by UNICRI, the United Nations Interregional Crime Research Institute.
Since this data (like the NCVS) is based on surveys of crime victims, homicides are not covered (nobody left to interview!), but all other crimes are included and a certain amount of grouping and summarizing is done (e.g. violent versus non-violent).
A good summary of the data is here
This is the Appendix 4 - keyfindings from 2000 and compares 23 countries over several years, with some data going back as far as 1989.
where did you find those fucking figures?
first they don’t seem to be true. throwing some random rate just to find out that your mind is right isn’t politacly correct, and is really bad thinking way.
you know there’s many other way to say that you are racist, than to tell about wrong figures. you may have been more direct, you’d be more honorable.
This is because guys of yours that this world is so bad to live in, not that you break my breath. but you’re just of those silly minded people (generally americans) that think itself (and its fucking country) beeing big and then all-rights permited.
When would this big and beautiful country (at least before europeans came and destrcut all the life and culture) have a bigger brain, to understand that the world isn’t american one.
hope for a better world, cleaned of imperialism and fascism.
Well, Ejder, if you had bothered to read, you would know where I got the figures. But I guess some people are so unable to deal with politically incorrect statements, and feel so good when they can label someone a racist that they don’t even bother to notice that the answer to their own questions are right in the article they are responding to! For your information, the crime rates came from Interpol reports, filed by the countries involved. Go read them. It is safer to walk the streets of New York City than the streets of Paris - which is a dramtic change since I lived in Paris in 1991.
It fits right in with your anti-American rant, complete with false facts “europeans came a destrcut all the life and culture”, fits right in with the rest of your bias.
The US is not imperialist, and has not been since the start of this century, but I suppose history is not important to you either. And as far as fascism, the US was the most important country in fighting fascism world wide.
We aren’t perfect, we have some bad people, and we make some mistakes.
This blog is entitled “Useful Fools” for a reason: because there are fools like you in the world; fools who listen to any propaganda.
It is ironic that you are posting from France of all places. France whose Navy we had to sink as part of our battle against the Nazi fascists. because French collaborators force it to fight us in Africa? France, where anti-Semitism is growing rapidly and Jews are being attacked and persecuted? France, the country which actively worked to keep the Fascist/Stalinist regime of Saddam Hussein in power so you could sell things to him. France which rejoices in telling the world how to behave, even as its importance in the world has faded from a major power and center of diplomacy and science in the 19th century to an irrelevant, corrupt, but nuclear armed, little country whose only good characteristic is its food and art! France, which still intervenes in Africa for colonialist reasons. France, which until WW-II had many colonies, all of which were brutally ruled?
How do you feel, being in part of a country that is an apologist for one of the worst fascists since fascism was invented?
Of course, you may not *be* French. Your name implies otherwise, if that is your name. But while France is the most hypocritical European countries, many others are not far behind.
Also, it would appear that you are posting from an institution of learning (Informatique et Mathematiques Apliquees de Grenoble). One would hope you apply more rigor to your studies than you do to your posting on the net!
Excellent. I am a black libertarian (often called a house nigger and an Uncle Tom).
I know that the war on racism and poverty is about economics. It is not about sit ins or stupid symbolic or downright harmful legislation. Good education, entrepreneurship, and high standards are the weapons for the battle for equality in the 21st century.
I hate to see those statistics because it offends me to look at them. It makes me feel helpless and impotent. But it is something we all know and are afraid to talk about.
Nice article, but, unfortunately, most of us will never listen to you. We would rather be spoon fed by some white “compassionate” asshole who will tell us that none of it is our responsibility and we don’t need to do anything about it.
“Warning: These statistics cannot be used as a basis for comparison between different countries. They do not take into account:
national differences in the legal definitions of punishable acts
the diversity of statistical methods used
changes which may occur during the reference period affecting the data collected.”
Straight from the Interpol Website. You can’t use these stats because the way they are collected is different for each country. You can only compare the countries who collect the data the same way. I assume you didn’t see this HUGE BOLD warning on the interpol stats page?
I know for a fact that Sweden reports heaps more rapes and assualts then other countries because each one can be counted more then once. If a child if raped 1000 times over a 10 year perid then it is reported as 1000 rapes and 1000 assaults for the year that sick f*ck was finally caught. (See 1993 for a 25% jump in Swedish Rape statistics as this actually happens.) The same thing occurs for assaults. If 10 men beat one man then 10 assaults are reported. It is not the victim they count but the actual number of crimes.
Some of your political views are based on facts, however you have to register that white people have fucked up the world…..
slavery
introduction of aids to africa
introduction of crack production(which back fired)
invasions/ colonism
Wars are still going on in africa because europeans mixed up tribes and groups after invasion.
Also have you noticed it was all the poor countries that had the richest material i.e india and africa which all the whites robbed.
So when you think of black criminals, robbers/muggers, think of it like this, we are only robbing our goods back.
Most of what you state is paranoid nonsense. Examples include “white” invention of slavery (it was common in Africa before Europe used it, and it was Africans who captured and sold the slaves to the European and American slavers). That whites used black slaves was a terrible thing. That it justifies the current crime rate of blacks (who, by the way, prey on other blacks) is absurd.
AIDS came FROM Africa via a crossover of the Simian Immunodeficiency Virus (SIV). The KGB planted a story that the CIA started AIDS, a story you obviously fell for. It is absolute nonsense. The science did not exist in any country to create AIDS when it occurred (first cases go back at least as far as the ’50s).
Crack production was a result of cocaine dealers who needed a cheaper product for the poorer customers. I assume you are blaming it on the CIA again, which is nonsense. Furthermore, crackheads are responsible for their own behavior. If they take crack, it is their fault, not anyone else’s.
Invasions/colonialism. The United States did not engage in colonialism. Don’t blame us - go after the French, Belgians, Portuguese and British.
Furthermore, it is racist to blame todays whites for the action of past whites. We did not do what you accuse us of, and should not pay for it.
If you rob a white person because of his race, you are committing a hate crime, for which you should go to jail. You cannot justify crime with your pathetic attempts to do so.
Crime in Britain in 2003
The US is a violent, crime-ridden society with (if you read Michael Moore) it’s citizens cowering in fear. Meanwhile, other…
Comparisons of Criminal Justice Statistics 2000″ by Gordon Barclay and Cynthia Tavares for the RDS, dated 12 July 2002:
“Although most countries collect information on the number of crimes recorded or reported by the police, absolute comparisons of crime levels are often misleading. Recorded crime levels will be affected by many factors including:
a) Different legal and criminal justice systems;
b) Rates at which crimes are reported to the police and recorded by them;
c) Differences in the point at which crime is measured. For some countries, this is the time at which the offence is reported to the police while for others recording does not take place until a suspect is identified and the papers are forwarded to the prosecutor;
d) Differences in the rules by which multiple offences are counted;
e) Differences in the list of offences that are included in the overall crime figures;
f) Changes in data quality.” (p. 2)
Source: Gordon Barclay and Cynthia Tavares, “International Comparisons of Criminal Justice Statistics 2000,” UK Home Office, Research Development & Statistics Directorate, dated July 12, 2002, available online at http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs2/hosb502.pdf, last accessed Dec. 17, 2002.
I’ve read extensively into the subject of poverty. I’ve read that there is an 80% correlation between IQ and the average purchasing parity per capita, income, of a nation. I’ve also read that this correlates to numerous other social ills such as murder rates, robbery, illegitamacy, etc.. They’ve measured the IQ of different peoples numerous times and they consistently find that the western european population has an average iq of around 100. The Japanese/Korean population has an average of around 105. The average sub-saharan african has an IQ of around 75. If you then use the varying standard deviations and find what percent of the given population has an IQ of under 85 you find that it almost perfectly correlates with known crime rates. Where western europeans commit twice as much crime as do the Japanese/Korean and blacks commits on average three times as much crime as do western europeans.
For those of you that would label me a racist yes many of the earlier tests were conducted and funded by white supremicists but in modern times in response to a resurgance in such studies many black organizations have conducted studies to oppose the information but they have concurred. The courts have ruled it illegal to use IQ testing to divide classes up because they see it as a way of resegregating schools on socio-ethnic lines. But the problem with this is that the most intelligent people are not allowed to reach their full potential and the less intelligent arent given the slow steady pace they need thus they become frustrated and possibly turn to crime. If you consider that the murder rates among chimpanzees are as high as 33% then you see that the only cure to crime is a more intelligent populace. They believe the discrepencies in IQ’s between different ethnicities arises from the more demanding environments of cold temperate climates. For example i’m stranded in a tropical jungle i could last for months possibly years on fallen fruits and in the trees where as if i were stranded in Scotland in the middle of winter I would last less than an hour.
I don’t know what the cure for un-intelligence is but if you consider that the average African american has an IQ of 85 that would mean that we, as americans, have the most intelligent afro population in the world. If we continue current trends of reintegration the gap will completely close due to the more rigorous stimulating environment that white culture provides, social multiplier affect. Instead of pretending there are no differences I believe we should acknowledge our differences and accept them. As a black person I have much more explosive muscles and much higher sexual verility which would mean i’m sexier and much more athletic. Where as if i were asian or white i would have better endurance and slow strength capabilitie which would mean i would be better at lifting weights and running far.
accept and celebrate our differences if we are to remedy our problems we must address the true problems that all arise from one central problem
vote democratic 2004
im doing a debate on affirmative action for one of my classes and was hoping you could site the sources of your information so that i can use your statistics as empirical data.
You say that “inner city blacks are not representative of our culture”.
I will not accuse you of racism, as I understand that you simply feel yourself to be part of another (”our”) culture than the sub-culture inner city blacks could be said to be representing.
If you use the term “our” culture however, you must mean something else than “American” culture. It could be that you identify with some part of European culture, or with something you feel to be western culture rooted in antiquity, or with the particular culture your own ancestors were a part of.
But how would you exclude inner city blacks from American culture ? As true as it may be that here is a population segment with much higher crime level than in the remainder of the population, yet they are still a part of American society.
I see them rather as a segment of the American population displaying relatively extreme characteristics (you could indeed make up a list of characteristics or criteria describing population segments, and chart the totality of American population against them, and no doubt you will find the population you describe as “inner city blacks” lumped together at some spot on this chart).
It would do much to clarify your thought,I think, if you could define or describe what “American culture” and “our culture” is to you, and how “American culture” differs from “American society”, and I would also better understand your meaning.
In your reply to George Annan, you state :
“It is also apparently true that the rising crime rate in France and England, at least, is significantly due to problems in immigrant communities. Of course, since immigrant communities in France resemble black ghettos in the US, this is not so surprising.”
To be able to have an unbiased understanding of the situation, it is necessary to analyze statistically crime level vs. immigration level (percentage immigrant population plus at least their first-generation descendants in total population) as evolving through time.
Do you have such data ?
I never said that inner city blacks are not part of our culture. I said that they are not representative. Do you understand the difference?
Only someone not familiar with America would deny the radical differences in living conditions and attitudes between inner city blacks and the rest of the country.
There are many works which have detailed the pathologies of the inner city black culture. I am sure you can find them if you are interested. Those inner city blacks lead successful lives are fighting against a large set of disadvantages, most of which are from that culture.
however, a civilized country such as France has a strong obligation to regulate crime,living conditions, etc… to those who Immigrate too their country. A crime chart based on cultural demographics showing that in France (as a fictitious example) 58 murders occur from blacks does not mean that France is not to blame! (not to pick on France) One cannot use a cultural trend as an excuse for crime rates.
Interesting. However, if you adjust figures for the U.S. to only include white crime, then you must also do that for Europe. I suspect that if Turkish, Russian, and other non-German crimes were screened out from German stats, there would be a large adjustment as well. This would also go for France, which has a large black Moroccan population, and England, which has been allowing many foreigners in. I am not afraid to state the obvious - that increases in black populations always correlate to increases in crime. Let’s call a spade a spade.
Scott
Scott,
You are of course correct.
I could not find the data to do so.
John
Basically its like this Black people think that there is a war of whites against them. This shows its just Cafers kiliing Cafers
John Moore, as a white British man, I would like to point out that, while reading this page, I have seen more racism, specifically from you, than ever before in my life, as well as patriotism, arrogance and blatant ignorance, choosing to point out only the facts that suit you rather than viewing the entire picture.
here are some examples of, firstly, racism;
“north Africans increase the crime rates - that was true when I lived there” from this, you appear to imply that you have lived in all of France, I highly doubt this, but of course, it is possible, so I will not yet rule this out, but have you considered that maybe it is just that it is only these North Africans that you would allow yourself to see, as your mind omits any possibility of anyone like you being able to commit crimes.
“but the French don’t publish it (probably out of embarrassment)” This is some of the most blatent racism I have ever heard, as you imply that France should be embaressed to have a diverse and rich culture, views like yours are what caused Hitler to exterminate the Jews because he viewed them as causing impurities in their culture, which is exactly the message you imply by that statement.
“It is also apparently true that the rising crime rate in France and England, at least, is significantly due to problems in immigrant communities. Of course, since immigrant communities in France resemble black ghettos in the US, this is not so surprising” Have you perhaps neglected the fact that these people are caught due to the improvement in the police, ergo the crime rate appears to increase as the effectiveness of the police force also increaces, although, refugees are often contributing to the crime rate caused by these people as they can often be considered to be criminals, and therefore added to this charter due to their mere presence in the country being illegal.
“I also disagree that blacks are oppressed in the US. Blacks have a tougher time of some things (such as getting stopped for Driving While Black) but an easier time of others (such as getting into college with much lower scores than whites or Asians). I would hardly call this oppression.” These people are not given equal opportunities forcing them to resort to crime, (remember, it costs money that they don’t have due to not having the equal opportunities to go to college) so therefore they are oppressed as they are stuck within a cycle of poverty;
to get a higher paid job, they need to get beter education, to get better educatiopn, they need more money, and to get more money they need either a rich parentage/background or get a better education, which lleads us right back to the begining, where they don’t get the scholorship as they canot be recognised for something when they have no way to prove it as they have not been able to get the education in the first place and so on.
“The others who deserve much of the blame are blacks themselves, who adopt a separate culture, have an anti-white attitude, belittle black kids who study hard, and in general demand special treatment from the rest of us.” First, your first statement here is, even if said with good intentions, racist. Second, these “blacks” deserve any preferential treatment that can be given to them, considering that your and my ancestors oppressed their ancestors, and they lived in total poverty, with little hope of escape, and their only hope of living free, was to kill. Can you blame these people for being aggressive, when the most of those left are the ones whose ancestors fort against their masters, and children, believe it or not, learn from their parents. I do not wish to offend any African Americans here, I do not presume that all African Americans are prone to violence, merely that many are.
“If you really want to help, be against Affirmative Action” without your “Affirmative Action”, slavery would never have ended. You would do better to state that specifically discriminating “Affirmative Action” should not be encouraged, as opposed to all “Affirmative Action” not being encouraged, which we call Human Rights (you may want to note that Americans have had human rights removed) next time use the phrase Human Rights, it may save a lot of bother (and don’t think im a pompous, rich, American stereotype of an English man because of the language I use, because that is, would you believe it, racism.
“But there is not a white person alive today who held slaves, and few who still have benefit from the slave holding of their ancestors” many a fortune from slavering still lasts today, its just well hidden under a few hundred years of history. Also, many are at a disadvantage due to their ancestors having been slaves, because their families simply don?t have a financial background.
“It is ironic that you are posting from France of all places … France, the country which actively worked to keep the Fascist/Stalinist regime of Saddam Hussein in power so you could sell things to him. France which rejoices in telling the world how to behave, even as its importance in the world has faded from a major power and centre of diplomacy and science in the 19th century to an irrelevant, corrupt, but nuclear armed, little country whose only good characteristic is its food and art! France, which still intervenes in Africa for colonialist reasons. France, which until WW-II had many colonies, all of which were brutally ruled?” Firstly, of what I know, American leaders have post-poned attacking these so-called fascists for the sole reason that this way, they could a)sell weapons to them and b)keep hold of oil
When this oil began to be threatened, guess what happened? the son of the person who sold the weapons to them, comes along and finishes daddy’s war, he comes along to get rid of these weapons, which didn’t exist anymore, and Bush has, in-fact, tried to put a leash on the world by attempting to enforce a fascist dictatorship over the world by making sure that all possible world powers are snubbed out before they are any real threat. At least The French have morals, they don’t support the murder of 17,000 innocent Iraqi people (yes, those are the latest figures, most of which were INNOCENT civilians) I don’t know about you, but I personally think this is completely immoral. It is an attempt to be the playground bully of the world, holding the biggest sack of sweets, and only has the biggest sack, because they kill everyone else with them. America has nuclear weapons in plenty, enough to destroy the entire world, but won’t let anyone else have any.
I believe that this is more than enough racism to prove you a racist hypocrite.
As for patriotism, arrogance and blatant ignorance, here are a few more points I wish to make clear, mainly to do with arrogance;
“Personally, I think we should do our best to be race blind.” Can I just say that you should keep with your own ideals, and not to try to enforce them on others when you can not manage to achieve your own ideals.
“This article is primarily about violent crime. However, the vast majority of criminals in the US come from fatherless families, or families without the biological father. This is especially true in inner-city black communities, where the welfare state has taken the place of fatherhood, and 85% of all children are illegitimate!” Doesn’t this imply that their must be a major problem in American society that causes all this, also, the more outwardly violent (i.e. more public, gruesome etc. examples) are more likely to be caught than those who do this type of activity in a secluded way (i.e. covering their tracks etc.) meaning that they are less likely to be caught due to being less violently inclined due to your evidence.
“Examples include “white” invention of slavery (it was common in Africa before Europe used it, and it was Africans who captured and sold the slaves to the European and American slavers)” the Europeans may not have started the slavery in Africa, but they certainly encouraged it, and they did enslave the natives of the areas were the plantations were found, as well as across all of North America, and there was absolutely no slavery there before British, Portuguese and French settlers, though the French were more civil, and for some time Canada was a safe haven for Natives escaping captivity or death from the English.
” It is safer to walk the streets of New York City than the streets of Paris” your crime figures do not refer entirely to street crime. Please get me some figures which refer entirely to street crime.
” The United States did not engage in colonialism. Don’t blame us - go after the French, Belgians, Portuguese and British.” the French, Belgians, Portuguese and British are your ancestors, therefore more you than us, and you are the direct descendents of these French, Belgians, Portuguese and British who invaded America, so yes, you should blame yourselves, because many disreputable Brits settled in America after making a fortune from taking advantage of others, and showing many of the traits we see today in your great president Bush, who actually had less votes than the opposition, and should not be your president, and if he had not become president, many lives would have been saved. Ergo, the slavers are not us, but you.
I can tell you are in the top 5% of your country, culturally , because only 5% of your population owns a passport.
On a separate issue, allowing guns can not in any way lower the number of homicides, and anti-arms laws should be enforced in all countries, and for the record, there is no such thing as the death sentence here, and is a terribly inhumane thing, and no matter what anyone says in films, made by Americans, no one can be but to death, even for mass homicide.
Dominic writes:
John Moore, as a white British man, I would like to point out that, while reading this page, I have seen more racism, specifically from you, than ever before in my life, as well as patriotism, arrogance and blatant ignorance, choosing to point out only the facts that suit you rather than viewing the entire picture.
I admit to patriotism and perhaps a bit of deserved arrogance. But you are going to need facts, not standard leftist cant, to prove racism or blatant ignorance.
here are some examples of, firstly, racism;
“north Africans increase the crime rates - that was true when I lived there” from this, you appear to imply that you have lived in all of France, I highly doubt this, but of course, it is possible, so I will not yet rule this out, but have you considered that maybe it is just that it is only these North Africans that you would allow yourself to see, as your mind omits any possibility of anyone like you being able to commit crimes.
I imply no such thing. But I did read French newspapers and traveled around. I also continue to follow the French crime problem, along with the British problem. While our crime rate is declining significantly, yours is going up dramatically.
It is well known that the highest crime rates in France are in the Arab housing projects around the major cities.. It has been written of by a number of journalists and writers who know. The French certainly know it.. Please explain how presenting this fact is racism. Do you know the definition of racism?
“but the French don’t publish it (probably out of embarrassment)” This is some of the most blatent[sic] racism I have ever heard, as you imply that France should be embaressed[sic] to have a diverse and rich culture, views like yours are what caused Hitler to exterminate the Jews because he viewed them as causing impurities in their culture, which is exactly the message you imply by that statement.
This is one of the worst misreadings[sic] I have encountered.. Are you familiar with the psychological phenomenon of projection? Maybe that causes your bizarre interpretation of my words. My statement about embarrassment of the French is that they don’t want to admit ethnic differences in crime rates. I have no problem with France being diverse – that’s nothing to be embarrassed by. After all, I live in one of the most diverse countries on earth. I grew up in the southwest, in a university environment, which itself was very diverse. The city, and my school, also had many Hispanics and Native Americans. Arizona, where I live, is very diverse, except it has relatively few black people.
“It is also apparently true that the rising crime rate in France and England, at least, is significantly due to problems in immigrant communities. Of course, since immigrant communities in France resemble black ghettos in the US, this is not so surprising”
Have you perhaps neglected the fact that these people are caught due to the improvement in the police, ergo the crime rate appears to increase as the effectiveness of the police force also increases[sic], although, refugees are often contributing to the crime rate caused by these people as they can often be considered to be criminals, and therefore added to this charter due to their mere presence in the country being illegal.
Yes. This was the first excuse of the multiculturalists in the United States when trying to explain away black inner city crime. Unfortunately for them, it was clearly false, because the victimization rates were also highest in the same area. Common criminals are most likely to prey on those nearby. Look at the black homicide rate in the US for example – the fact that a huge percentage of the murders is of black people and the perpetrators are black people cannot be so explained away with a wave of a hand.
“I also disagree that blacks are oppressed in the US. Blacks have a tougher time of some things (such as getting stopped for Driving While Black) but an easier time of others (such as getting into college with much lower scores than whites or Asians). I would hardly call this oppression.”
These people are not given equal opportunities forcing them to resort to crime, (remember, it costs money that they don’t have due to not having the equal opportunities to go to college)
That is total nonsense. Do you really believe that? Where are your statistics? Nobody is forced to resort to crime. Many, many blacks in that situation are not criminals. In fact, most of the criminals in that setting are young males. But many come out of that situation, take advantage of the opportunities presented to them, and become ordinary citizens. If they can do it, why can’t the others.
But you are correct, they are not given equal opportunities. They are given far more than equal opportunities. Corporations are forced to hire minorities even if they cannot find ones with the right qualifications. Universities admit minorities with test scores and grade point averages far below that required of non-minorities (which really means: whites, especially white males, Jews, who in my mind are white anyway, but maybe not in yours, and people of Asian descent). Generous scholarships are available to fund college, even at the most prestigious schools, for minorities. The insanity is that many of the blacks (and other minorities) who take advantage of race based scholarships are from the middle or upper classes, and don’t need assistance. Racial thinking is what causes this silliness – if we are to give certain people advantages, it should be on the basis of need, not race. Oh, perhaps you didn’t know that the United States has a large and rapidly growing black middle class – ordinary citizens who are not criminals and not on welfare.
In addition to this, if they are poor, they are eligible for free medical care, government support (welfare), and many, many special programs.
Nobody is forced to resort to crime. That is an absurd proposition when talking about America or other western countries. There are too many systems to help people without means.
We aren’t oppressing these people. They are oppressing themselves through a subculture (almost always urban) which attacks achievement, glorifies crime, and does not hold fathers accountable for taking care of or even providing for their children. Some of this is due to ill-advised welfare systems. In the inner city in the US, 85% of all black children are illegitimate. It isn’t my fault or our system’s fault that their parents choose to not marry (and generally, the father chooses to not stick around) – it is the fault of this very defective urban subculture. And that single factor – non-presence of a father - is more predictive of failure or criminality of children than any other – race, economic status or educational opportunity. That the incidence is so high in the black inner city is a simple fact, and it is a cultural issue – nobody is forcing those young men to not marry, and nobody is forcing them to have babies by several women whom they then abandon. That is a pathology of the subculture. And it is a new one – the black population of the US, before it was given welfare and all the other opportunities, had a more vibrant and more healthy culture, with the children growing up with values that helped them in their lives. Not anymore.
Now, I am addressing America. Perhaps you Europeans have failed to provide for your poor, although it is my understanding that you have many of these same sorts of programs.
I would suggest you back up your accusations with information, because I know both from personal experience and reading, and from the vast research my wife has done into the literature while preparing a book on education, that blacks and other minorities get tremendous advantages in going to college, from admissions with lower scores, to pre-college prep classes, to great scholarships. My daughter had a Korean friend whose parents took a Hispanic surname so that she would have an easier time getting into college. It worked.
so therefore they are oppressed as they are stuck within a cycle of poverty;
Their culture sticks them in a cycle. We have tried all sorts of aid to break this without success: Many recent black immigrants do not get caught in this cycle. They come here poor, do not join that inner city welfare culture, and they do okay.
to get a higher paid job, they need to get beter[sic] education, to get better education[sic], they need more money, and to get more money they need either a rich parentage/background or get a better education, which lleads us right back to the beginning[sic], where they don’t get the scholarship[sic] as they canot[sic] be recognized[sic] for something when they have no way to prove it as they have not been able to get the education in the first place and so on.
If you are talking about America, you obviously are unaware of the educational opportunities, the job opportunities, and all the other special advantages given to people purely on the basis of race. The above paragraph is remarkable in how many falsehoods it packs into so few barely intelligible sentences. Tell me why one is twice as likely to be a victim of violent crime in London than in New York City?
“The others who deserve much of the blame are blacks themselves, who adopt a separate culture, have an anti-white attitude, belittle black kids who study hard, and in general demand special treatment from the rest of us.”
First, your first statement here is, even if said with good intentions, racist.
Oh really. Please explain how that statement is racist. I don’t take that insult lightly.
Second, these “blacks” deserve any preferential treatment that can be given to them, considering that your and my ancestors oppressed their ancestors, and they lived in total poverty, with little hope of escape, and their only hope of living free, was to kill. Can you blame these people for being aggressive, when the most of those left are the ones whose ancestors fort against their masters, and children, believe it or not, learn from their parents. I do not wish to offend any African Americans here, I do not presume that all African Americans are prone to violence, merely that many are.
This argument is absurd. My ancestors were oppressed in Germany and Ireland. Does that mean I should get preferential treatment? Does it give me a license to victimize others? Is it right and fair to punish the far removed descendants for the crimes of the ancestors of other people with the same color of skin? Should my daughter be given special privileges because she is descended from a Native American who was persecuted by the British? How about my Japanese sister-in-law? Who does she owe? My half-Japanese nephew? What are his sins? How about my British brother-in-law? Do you have any racial or ethnic diversity in your family? If not, I suggest you present yourself for flagellation.
All your argument does is to remove individual responsibilities from human beings. It is demeaning to them to assume that because their ancestors were mistreated that they cannot behave themselves in a civilized way. It is also patently false, since so many have bettered themselves and are in normal position at all levels of our society.
“If you really want to help, be against Affirmative Action” without your “Affirmative Action”, slavery would never have ended.
Do you actually understand what you are talking about? Affirmative Action started in the late 1960s. Slavery was abolished 100 years earlier. You have proven what I suspected – that you are seriously misinformed.
You would do better to state that specifically discriminating “Affirmative Action” should not be encouraged, as opposed to all “Affirmative Action” not being encouraged,
My terminology is consistent with the usage of the term. In the United States today, Affirmative Action means discrimination.
which we call Human Rights (you may want to note that Americans have had human rights removed) next time use the phrase Human Rights, it may save a lot of bother (and don’t think im a pompous, rich, American stereotype of an English man because of the language I use, because that is, would you believe it, racism.
Actually, you pompous British person, it is not racism, since you are of the same race as I am. But the rest of your sentence is without meaning. What “human rights” have we had removed? You have had removed your right to self defense.
“But there is not a white person alive today who held slaves, and few who still have benefit from the slave holding of their ancestors” many a fortune from slavering still lasts today, its just well hidden under a few hundred years of history. Also, many are at a disadvantage due to their ancestors having been slaves, because their families simply don?t have a financial background.
This is also true in England. Are you hunting down those whose ancestors benefited from slavery and making them pay for it. Again, using this sort of historical grievance opens the door to ridiculous claims. If you think we mistreated the blacks, check with the Indians – we didn’t enslave them but we killed a lot of them and took their land. And so did the British, who also used biological warfare against them, before there ever was a United States.
Shall we give them back all the land we took away *after* we freed the blacks. Land which in some cases was taken by the blacks? Are you seeking reparations from the Romans who conquered your country 2000 years ago and held it in bondage for a few centuries?
“It is ironic that you are posting from France of all places … France, the country which actively worked to keep the Fascist/Stalinist regime of Saddam Hussein in power so you could sell things to him. France which rejoices in telling the world how to behave, even as its importance in the world has faded from a major power and centre of diplomacy and science in the 19th century to an irrelevant, corrupt, but nuclear armed, little country whose only good characteristic is its food and art! France, which still intervenes in Africa for colonialist reasons. France, which until WW-II had many colonies, all of which were brutally ruled?” Firstly, of what I know, American leaders have post-poned[sic] attacking these so-called fascists for the sole reason that this way, they could a)sell weapons to them and b)keep hold of oil
Well, that shows how little you know. It is true that the west (not just Americans, you British benefactor of this policy) preferred stability in the oil producing region and made some unsavory friends. But if you really want to find people who benefit from dealing with dictators, check out your country’s dealings with the Ayatollahs of Iran, the Russians and French who sold most of the weapons to Saddam and who tried to block the gulf war. Then go check out who of your parliamentarians and who in France and Russia were being bribed by supposed Oil For Food money.
When this oil began to be threatened, guess what happened? The[sic] son of the person who sold the weapons to them, comes along and finishes daddy’s war, he comes along to get rid of these weapons, which didn’t exist anymore,
As we say in the west, you are all hat and no cattle. Bush Sr. did not sell weapons to Iraq – he invaded Iraq – don’t you remember? He drove them out of Kuwait with help from your betters in British society – your soldiers. As for the weapons, every intelligence service in the world thought they were there, including yours, the French and the Italians. The Iraqi generals thought that their flanking divisions had chemical weapons ready to fire (remember the 45 minutes – THEY believed it). I defy you to present a method that would have determined the true status of those weapons. I would also point out that we did find weapons and weapons programs that violated UN sanctions. The most deadly poison on earth is botulinum toxin. An Iraqi scientist was told to hide the seed-stock for that in his refrigerator, where we found it (Hanz Blix, of course, did not). Another Iraqi scientist was ordered to bury parts of a uranium separation centrifuge, along with the plans, in his rose garden. Research on ricin toxin (which Al Qaeda keeps trying to use in London) was carried on in Iraq until the invasion started. Iraq had three prohibited missile systems under development – two IRBM’s which could have targeted Israel and parts of Europe, and a cruise missile system. He attempted to purchase IRBM’s from North Korea but was foiled in that attempt by the U.S. The North Korean’s kept the down payment. There was an extremely dangerous amount of biological agents which Iraq could not show had been destroyed. This included enough Anthrax spores and botulinum toxin to kill everyone on earth. This material still hasn’t been accounted for.
and Bush has, in-fact, tried to put a leash on the world by attempting to enforce a fascist dictatorship over the world
ROFLMAO. You’d better look over your shoulder. Fascism only works when there is a secret police to keep the people in check. Our world-wide thought police are after you, but you can save yourself by putting tin foil around your small cranium. This is frankly the most ridiculous assertion I have ever run into in blogging.
by making sure that all possible world powers are snubbed[sic] out before they are any real threat.
Just which world powers are we “snubbing out?” I assume by this you mean something other than insulting them out of doors. We certainly do reserve the right to stop those who would do us harm. And we have done so with Iran and the Taliban. Hopefully the people of Iran will rise up and achieve freedom without our having to attack Iran. But I suppose you would be perfectly happy with a nuclear armed Iran, right?
At least The French have morals,
ROLMAOOAO – Only on days when the sun rises in the west. The French government has been the most deceitful and self-interested government of all the western democracies. They lied to us about their intent with regard to Iraq, promising that they would support the second resolution and then, months later, reneging. During the time we were fighting in Iraq, France invaded two countries in Africa without asking for the UN approval you insist we get. There is a reason we are angry with the French and make fun of the country. It is immature and corrupt. It cares not for freedom in the world, and it would rather put its head in the sand and ignore the very real threat of terrorists armed with weapons of mass destructions (Al Qaeda was caught in Jordon this week as they were preparing an attack that would have killed 20,000 with poison gas). But someday Al Qaida will blow up the TGV and maybe the French will wake up.
they don’t support the murder of 17,000 innocent Iraqi people (yes, those are the latest figures, most of which were INNOCENT civilians) I don’t know about you, but I personally think this is completely immoral. It is an attempt to be the playground bully of the world, holding the biggest sack of sweets, and only has the biggest sack, because they kill everyone else with them. America has nuclear weapons in plenty, enough to destroy the entire world, but won’t let anyone else have any
I’m not going to waste my time answer these fantasies in detail. You should know that France sold 13 times as many weapons to Iraq as the United states, while the USSR sold over 50 times as many. The US accounted for only 1% of Iraqi military related purchases. Denmark sold more than we did.
You are right about our nuclear weapons policy. We’ve got the bomb (like you do) and we don’t trust a lot of other countries with it. If you have any connection to reality, you wouldn’t either. Oh, and we do not have enough to destroy the world, but I wouldn’t expect you to understand quantitative issues.
Are you really so insane that you think we should let everyone have nuclear weapons? I think you may be, which is really, really pathetic. You don’t approve of individuals having firearms, but you would let Saddam or Iran have nuclear weapons? Don’t you see how utterly idiotic (not to mention suicidal) this is?
And you are imagining we are enforcing a fascist dictatorship over the world? What nonsense. I think you have a fascism fetish – it pops up all over the place where sensible people, even those who agreed with your opinion, would find better words.
I don’t know where you got the 17,000 innocent Iraqi number, since the Iraqi human rights organizations only found 3000. But it doesn’t matter, because in the last year far fewer Iraqi human beings died than they would have under Saddam, and if you have access to any unbiased information, you will know that. Furthermore, if you know anything about military technology (and I know a lot and have used it), you know that the United States was exceedingly careful in this campaign. Our Rules of Engagement cost the lives of American troops in order to protect the innocent. Furthermore, many of those claimed as “innocent” were not. But of course innocent people died. Hell, in Iraq, innocent people were killed every day, some just for the fun of it by Saddam’s insane sons. I haven’t noticed you condemning Saddam lately. Or the Iranian Mullahs. Or any of the other bloody dictators of the world. How about Castro, do you love him? How about the Chinese, who not only have capital punishment, but have roving vans to carry out executions in a way that the body parts can be preserved for transplantation into the elite if they need them?
And the French have great morals. They left us the Vietnam quagmire because their colonial rule was so brutal. If you look around the world, you will find former British colonies in general are far better off and more likely to be free and prosperous than former French colonies. Also, the French were being bribed by Saddam through the UN Oil for Foods program, so it was they who had a monetary interest in Iraq, not us. I am curious what morality you imagine rules French foreign policy.
We just spent 87 billion dollars and 600 American lives to liberate Iraq. We will never get that paid back. First, we are not levying reparations against them or taking their oil revenue. Second, it would take a long time to earn that much oil revenue because Iraq has a rather low production rate. Third, look up the term “fungible” in a dictionary. It applies to oil. It means that no matter who we buy oil from, it comes from a general pool that all producers are contributing to. The people who had a strong interest in keeping Iraqi oil off the market were its neighbors and Russia, because Iraqi oil would reduce their profits. It always amazes me the willingness of people to import evil motives into Americans. I guess its just envy or something. George Bush is a moral man. He isn’t a thief and he doesn’t make money off of this (unlike the French politicians). But so many people thing he is the devil incarnate. It just shows that propaganda works on those who don’t bother to inform themselves.
Frankly, I think you, like the French, are just unhappy because the United States, instead of listening to France like a good former colony, chose to defend itself. You are unhappy that the US is the pre-eminent power in the world and Britain isn’t (even though we consider Britain our best ally and friend).. Nobody can make a better case for our invasion of Iraq than Tony Blair – have you listened to his reasoning?
I believe that this is more than enough racism to prove you a racist hypocrite.
Name calling is much more fun than providing facts and logic, isn’t it. I believe there is more than enough evidence to pronounce you extremely ignorant and surprisingly rude. First, you have failed dramatically to prove either racism (check your dictionary) or hypocrisy. In fact, I haven’t seen a feeble attempt to prove hypocrisy, so I’m a bit baffled by it.
As for patriotism, arrogance and blatant ignorance, here are a few more points I wish to make clear, mainly to do with arrogance;
Oh goodie. Nothing give me more pleasure than to anger idiots with America’s great accomplishments.
“Personally, I think we should do our best to be race blind.” Can I just say that you should keep with your own ideals, and not to try to enforce them on others when you can not manage to achieve your own ideals.
Oh? And what am I trying to enforce on whom exactly? Oh, you mean trying to get Iraq to achieve a democracy instead of the horrible regime they were under? Or do you have some other silly idea? Frankly, some values are better than others. You may be a complete cultural relativist and not recognize that, but I know for sure that a democracy is far better than Saddam’s government. If you don’t, you are pathetic. I know for a fact that democracy is better than Communism. Is it arrogant to assert that Saddam’s government was worse than ours or yours?
“This article is primarily about violent crime. However, the vast majority of criminals in the US come from fatherless families, or families without the biological father. This is especially true in inner-city black communities, where the welfare state has taken the place of fatherhood, and 85% of all children are illegitimate!”
Doesn’t this imply that their must be a major problem in American society that causes all this, also, the more outwardly violent (i.e. more public, gruesome etc. examples) are more likely to be caught than those who do this type of activity in a secluded way (i.e. covering their tracks etc.) meaning that they are less likely to be caught due to being less violently inclined due to your evidence.
Oh, once again the silly “more likely to be caught” nonsense. Like I say, study the correlation between victimization rates and conviction rates by race. It will blow that argument to pieces. I provided the information, too bad you didn’t understand its meaning.
Also, what this implies specifically is what I stated. There is a major problem in a subculture of America – the black, inner-city subculture in particular. This is not a problem for most Americans or even most blacks. It is a problem of a particular set of people in a particular area. You also have subcultures with serious problems. So does France. In England, there is a growing subculture of non-ethnic people on the dole, and it is developing the same social pathologies as our black inner-city culture.
“Examples include “white” invention of slavery (it was common in Africa before Europe used it, and it was Africans who captured and sold the slaves to the European and American slavers)” the Europeans may not have started the slavery in Africa, but they certainly encouraged it, and they did enslave the natives of the areas were the plantations were found, as well as across all of North America, and there was absolutely no slavery there before British, Portuguese and French settlers, though the French were more civil, and for some time Canada was a safe haven for Natives escaping captivity or death from the English.
Your point? Actually it was Britain and the Catholic Church that ultimately were largely responsible for the abolition of slavery. But in the United States, we fought a war where 600,000 of our citizens died, and that war freed the slaves. My point, in context, is that those who claim we invented slavery were wrong. You are wrong about there being absolutely no slavery before the settlers. They Mayans were brutal slaveholders in Mexico. A number of American Indian tribes had slaves, although they usually only kept female slaves and killed the male. Slaveholding was common among Arabs for a long time. The only reason you don’t see a lot of black or mixed blood people in most Arab states was because they castrated the male slaves (as they do today in the Sudan) and killed any children of the females.
Another point you might be interested in is that slavery is still underway in the Sudan, where Muslim northerners are enslaving Christian and animist black southerners. This is not routine oppression, but full chattel slavery. Why don’t you go try to stop it?
” It is safer to walk the streets of New York City than the streets of Paris” your crime figures do not refer entirely to street crime. Please get me some figures which refer entirely to street crime.
Look them up yourself. I have work to do, and I am not going to look it up for every rude visitor who pops up. Especially when you have proven yourself incapable of interpreting the information I already came up with. The information isn’t hard to find.
” The United States did not engage in colonialism. Don’t blame us - go after the French, Belgians, Portuguese and British.” the French, Belgians, Portuguese and British are your ancestors, therefore more you than us, and you are the direct descendents of these French, Belgians, Portuguese and British who invaded America, so yes, you should blame yourselves, because many disreputable Brits settled in America after making a fortune from taking advantage of others, and showing many of the traits we see today in your great president Bush, who actually had less votes than the opposition, and should not be your president, and if he had not become president, many lives would have been saved. Ergo, the slavers are not us, but you.
In the past, Britain provided a superior education than America to its citizens. That is no longer true (facts again easy to find) but you are certainly a shining example of that lack of adequate education. How do you know if I am the ancestor of a former slave holder? Do you know my ancestry? If not, why should I be guilty? If so, why should I be guilty? I guess I owe the Brits a lot because I am a descendant of William the Conqueror – where do you want me to deliver the gold?
Since you threw in the obligatory hate-Bush comment, I’ll answer that. Bush won the election according to our rules. I really could care less if you don’t like our rules, but I do suspect you don’t have the faintest understanding of what they are and why they got that way.
I’m curious about the “many lives would have been saved” comment. Is that a net reduction in killings, or just different people who would have been killed? Because Iraqis, even with this month’s uprising, are dying at a significantly lower rate than before we invaded.
Also, if you do not favor our invasion of Iraq, then you must favor Saddam Hussein’s continued rule. Please justify that position.
I can tell you are in the top 5% of your country, culturally , because only 5% of your population owns a passport.
I’ll accept that statistic because I am not going to bother to look it up. But people don’t own passports because they are culturally superior. They own them if they want or need to go places which require them. Any American can go to Mexico (which is a radically different country) or Canada without a passport. I happened to have traveled a lot more than that, partly as a result of work, partly as pleasure, and partly as a soldier. Furthermore, the United States is a huge place, and there is a lot of traveling to e done within it, and a lot of diversity to be found here. But I do go to Mexico periodically (it’s only 3 hour drive away), and I don’t need my passport for that.
On a separate issue, allowing guns can not in any way lower the number of homicides, and anti-arms laws should be enforced in all countries, and for the record, there is no such thing as the death sentence here, and is a terribly inhumane thing, and no matter what anyone says in films, made by Americans, no one can be but to death, even for mass homicide.
Why do you always have to put multiple issues in one sentence? I guess it’s that British educational system again.
You have no idea what you are talking about on guns, but that’s not surprising. You should be interested to know about the great increase in muggings and home invasions in Britain since guns were outlawed. Here in Arizona, where it is legal to kill anyone who burgles your home if it is occupied, people don’t break into occupied homes. Ain’t it funny how that incentive works. The result is many fewer confrontations between homeowners and burglars, and when they do occur, frequently it results in a reduction in the number of burglars. Having personally fired a weapon in self defense in the United States, I know what firearms are good for. And no, nobody was hurt, because I did fire those shots. Otherwise I would have been badly hurt or killed.
Somewhere up above you mumbled some nonsense about Americans losing civil rights. I have no idea what you mean. But you folks just lost a right we consider precious: the right to self defense. I have firearms, and I carry one in my car for self defense, and I use others for target practice just for fun. You don’t have the right to do that. If a gang of burglars decides to break into your house and rape your wife or daughter, there’s not a damn thing you can do about it. If they do that in my house, there’s a good chance they will end up in jail and a significant change their blood will stain my carpet. I am not ashamed of that.
And it turns out you are right on one little fact. The law for which England had the death penalty until recently was thrown out as part of the EU process. Of course, I didn’t get that from movies (because I know the difference between fiction and fact – something you should practice), I got it from reading. There was an obscure law making it a capital offense to inhibit the movement of the Royal Navy. It lasted until the EU forced Britain to get rid of it.
As for your lack of death penalty, the criminals certainly know that. I wouldn’t brag about it though, but then that’s a difference of culture. You are free to have your opinion, and we are free to kill people who are wasting oxygen.
In some cultures it is considered nomal to have several wemen on the go at one time, and denying this, is denying these people of their heritage.
“Their culture sticks them in a cycle” again, you deny them of their culture. Would you like to have their culture forced upon you?
“Affermative Acction” started *officialy* in the 60s, but affermative acction has to happen, and “Affermative Acction” is bassed on affermative acction, inherent in the words themselves.
” My ancestors were oppressed in Germany and Ireland” you are not of the same race as me, and we all come from the same routes in affrica if you go back enough millions of years, so where do you draw the line, and say “here, you are a different race”?
The Romans did not invade my country. Their tactics were not to inforce total control and to isolate all the natives. What they did was to interbreed with our population, which eventualy ballanced out, and we started fighting what could be considered civil war with the French.
” We certainly do reserve the right to stop those who would do us harm” you live in a very christian contry, but Christ was againt the an eye for an eye philosophy. forgive and forget, as we Brits say.
has a french man ever done anything to you? why make fun of the french, when it is their gouvernment you oppose, not the people?
by destroy the world, I ment destroy the population. Five 15 megaton nuclea bombs would kill almost all life on earth. We may have the bomb, but you have multiple.
“Oh? And what am I trying to enforce on whom exactly?” me
“Since you threw in the obligatory hate-Bush comment, I?ll answer that. Bush won the election according to our rules. I really could care less if you don?t like our rules, but I do suspect you don?t have the faintest understanding of what they are and why they got that way.” I merely implied that Bush got less votes, not less seats.
“I guess it?s that British educational system again.” I am not a collage, or high school graduate. I am 14. I have studied history to a lower level that most people viewing this, and most of my knowlage I picked up myself. I go to a public school, and constantly have to fight just to learn. if I had an Oxford degree, I would be as highly qualified, if not higher, than a person with a Harvard degree. And the most intelegent person in the world, Stephen Hawkings, is British, and teaches in England. I am in the british educantional system, and the only flaw with it is that it tries to improve the less intelegent, and tends to ignore the more intelegent ones, and I have what your countery loves, statistics, which prove i am in the top 10% if my year for all achedemic subjects, but you are just going to use that to prove the inadequesy of our education system, but I dbout you can find an american better at maths, or if you must math, than me, ore with a marger vocabulary than me, in a public school, and I will bow down to all your arguments, and kiss your feet if i am ever in the same country as me at any time.
Dominic, you are tiresome.
In some cultures it is considered nomal to have several wemen on the go at one time, and denying this, is denying these people of their heritage.
Yes, if they wish to live in the United States. Furthermore, those cultures also take care of their children – they don’t have absent fathers.
“Their culture sticks them in a cycle” again, you deny them of their culture. Would you like to have their culture forced upon you?
No, their culture is defective. It hurts them a lot more than it hurts me. And we aren’t forcing our culture on them, although many choose it. If we did, in a couple of generations the problem would go away.
“Affermative Acction” started *officialy* in the 60s, but affermative acction has to happen, and “Affermative Acction” is bassed on affermative acction, inherent in the words themselves.
Word play. Pure word play.
” My ancestors were oppressed in Germany and Ireland” you are not of the same race as me, and we all come from the same routes in affrica if you go back enough millions of years, so where do you draw the line, and say “here, you are a different race”?
There are ways that people have historically drawn the line. There are (contrary to the politically correct view) significant genetic subtypes, so that race is not a meaningless concept. However, my issue is with the defective inner city cultures that breed violence, dependence on the state, and many other ills. In the US, those environments are mostly black. But the culture is that does the damage can be adopted by any racial group or any other group, should they choose to live poorly. Furthermore, that culture is not some old, sacred culture. It has developed since 1960.
The Romans did not invade my country. Their tactics were not to inforce total control and to isolate all the natives. What they did was to interbreed with our population, which eventualy ballanced out, and we started fighting what could be considered civil war with the French.
False. See this or google up 100 other references.
” We certainly do reserve the right to stop those who would do us harm” you live in a very christian contry, but Christ was againt the an eye for an eye philosophy. forgive and forget, as we Brits say.
There is a difference between revenge, retaliation and self defense. Maybe someday you will learn the difference. Maybe you will also realize that Christ also condoned wars under some circumstances.
by destroy the world, I ment destroy the population. Five 15 megaton nuclea bombs would kill almost all life on earth. We may have the bomb, but you have multiple.
Do you just make this stuff up? Please cite a source for your assertion.
Your idea that 5 15 megaton nuclear weapons would kill almost all life on earth is preposterous. There have been many more than that already detonated. If every nuclear weapon now on earth were detonated, the radiation outside of direct fallout zones would not be lethal and would not even make you sick, although it might slightly raise your risk for later cancer.
There have been 1054 nuclear weapons detonated by the United States. The Russians detonated 221 nuclear weapons in the atmosphere. One was a 50 megaton bomb. The U.S. detonated a similar number. That last series of atmospheric nuclear tests was by the French in 1996.
You have multiple thermonuclear warheads also, 384 of them. The French have 449
“Oh? And what am I trying to enforce on whom exactly?” me
“Since you threw in the obligatory hate-Bush comment, I?ll answer that. Bush won the election according to our rules. I really could care less if you don?t like our rules, but I do suspect you don?t have the faintest understanding of what they are and why they g