The blacks of the festering, simmering slums clearly do not share the values of European whites, and will loot when they can get away with it. I might also if I saw the surrounding country as my enemy. The difference between the looting in England and that in the US seems to be that in London it was more a matter of stealing electronics, whereas in the US it involves much more of racial hatred.
Where does this lead? What do we do? The approach both tacitly accepted and firmly enforced has been one of bread and circuses, or rather welfare and television, to keep the lid on in the “inner city,” as we say; this, accompanied by heavy pressure from government and salon not to notice what is happening. It was perhaps the best response—best for whites, anyway. It left the slums hopeless, depraved, but quiescent. Affirmative action kept the pressure down, and smart, ambitious blacks were admitted in small numbers to the salons and became superstars, like Jessie Jackson. This kept them from becoming real revolutionaries. The blacks of the slums stayed chiefly in the slums and, while welfare produced a terrible dependency, all of these measures ensured a static, artificial calm.
But now bankruptcy looms, and Congress threatens to cut social spending to pay for the wars. There is no longer enough money is a divided nation to buy everyone off. Whites will not revolt, not violently, but blacks will. I don’t think the faculty lounges understand how much anger there is among whites. I’m sorry, Ms. Couric, but it is not just twelve louts in the KKK and a few militias in Idaho that are very pissed at blacks. It is pretty much the blue-collar world, the cops, the firemen, and most (I really think) educated conservatives. Plus a whole lot of journalists who keep their mouths carefully shut.
This is not good. Not good at all.