Essays

Poverty, Race and Crime

CrimeRatesExplained

by David Sims

THERE IS a correlation between poverty and crime. There is a rationale by which some crimes can be understood as having poverty as their cause. However, those on the political Left often go overboard, extenuating the poverty-causes-crime argument beyond the reason of evidence.

The idea is that poor people, seeking food and the bare necessities of life, are forced to commit crimes in order to survive. But Western societies do at least feed and shelter the poor. Mostly. If public assistance were ended — or overwhelmed, as it might eventually be as the result of immigration — then there might be a burst of crime from the struggling, dying people. But it would soon be over. The steady-state condition of never-ending boiling of the crime pot does not indicate poverty as the cause of crime.

If poverty were the cause of crime, the per capita crime rate among poor people would exhibit a strong correlation with socio-economic status, but no correlation at all with race among people who are equally rich or equally poor. But I’ve checked, and there’s an even stronger correlation between crime and race than there is between crime and social class. The best predictor of the crime rates in an area is almost always its racial demographics. The darker the average skin color is, the higher the crime rate is.

Note, however, that the skin color isn’t the cause of the crime, but rather that the criminality and the darker skin are correlated because both are effects of the same genetic package. I’d imagine that the evolution of human beings might have gone differently, but the way that it actually went on Earth caused this curious correlation to exist.

Each race has a characteristic statistical spread of behaviors. Poor Whites don’t behave as poor Blacks do. The conjecture that poverty is the major cause of crime is disproved by the evidence. It is a myth whose tellers hope to blame “social injustice” for racial differences.

On the contrary: Blacks and Whites simply aren’t the same kind of creature.

The poverty-causes-crime myth serves as the leftists’ road to political empowerment, which is their true goal. The Marxists want to be able to dominate, and thus to exploit, everybody else. They want to supplant the natural elite, the elite of merit, with themselves, and to enforce their rule by murdering dissidents and by starving defiant populations into submission. All of their talk about “social justice” is merely a hypocritical deception.

* * *

Source: David Sims

For Further Reading

Previous post

The Underdevelopment of European Pride

Next post

The Shadow of Empire: Francis Parker Yockey After Twenty Years

4 Comments

  1. WHITE_WARRIOR
    February 7, 2016 at 1:46 pm — Reply

    I will never accept that poverty is the major cause of crime. There is too much evidence against it – statistical as well as anecdotal.

    I was a poor kid, but I excelled academically and won many scholarships. When I was growing up my parents were old age pensioners – poor people – I was born very late in life when my mother was in her forties. In those days when you retired you immediately became an old-age pensioner – superannuation was for government employees and company CEO’s only.

    I lived in a working class town for twenty years. During this time there was only one murder and one bank robbery. There were no rapes or violent assaults, just the usual stuff – petty theft, shoplifting, minor vandalism – but again nothing major. The streets were safe and you could go for a walk at night without fear of being raped or robbed. I no longer live in the area. Due to an influx of Muslims and Congoids of the Sudanese and Somali persuasion everything has changed in the town – rapes, assaults, murders, drug peddling and major theft are now common place.

  2. Anthony Collins
    February 8, 2016 at 2:31 am — Reply

    It surprises me that the following argument is not more commonly used against the canard that “poverty causes crime”: many crimes are in no way economic. It’s hard to discern economic motives for crimes like vandalism, rape, and many if not most incidents of assault and murder. Furthermore, most economic crimes are motivated by greed rather than genuine necessity or hardship: very few people are compelled to steal in order to provide themselves with necessities.

    Aristotle observed in his Politics long ago:

    “There are crimes of which the motive is want; and for these Phaleas expects to find a cure in the equalization of property, which will take away from a man the temptation to be a highwayman, because he is hungry or cold. But want is not the sole incentive to crime; men also wish to enjoy themselves and not to be in a state of desire — they wish to cure some desire, going beyond the necessities of life, which preys upon them; nay, this is not the only reason — they may desire superfluities in order to enjoy pleasures unaccompanied with pain, and therefore they commit crimes.

    “Now what is the cure of these three disorders? Of the first, moderate possessions and occupation; of the second, habits of temperance; as to the third, if any desire pleasures which depend on themselves, they will find the satisfaction of their desires nowhere but in philosophy; for all other pleasures we are dependent on others. The fact is that the greatest crimes are caused by excess and not by necessity. Men do not become tyrants in order that they may not suffer cold; and hence great is the honor bestowed, not on him who kills a thief, but on him who kills a tyrant. Thus we see that the institutions of Phaleas avail only against petty crimes.”

    The savage is a savage because he is dominated by brutish and savage instincts, not because he is the victim of “poverty,” “racism,” “discrimination,” or some other excuse — excuses which are as feeble as the minds of those who accept them, and which are perhaps as insolent as the savages they are intended to exculpate.

    Aristotle’s remark that “the greatest crimes are caused by excess and not by necessity” is eminently applicable to “vulture capitalists” like those of Goldman Sachs. Their crimes aren’t caused by poverty, but poverty is caused by their crimes.

  3. Jeremiah Johnson, Jr.
    February 10, 2016 at 7:57 pm — Reply

    The Left wants us to believe that poverty, racism and discrimination are the causes of crime, and guns of course. They use that as an excuse to take from the haves and give it to the have not’s, making the latter dependent on and loyal to the Leftist government. They use crime as an excuse to take our guns when they really mean to deprive us of our independence and the means to resist them. They simply want total control. No wonder they admire communist dictators like Lenin, Stalin and Mao, they wish they could have that power.

    • Joseph Bruno
      May 9, 2016 at 8:26 pm — Reply

      Bureau of Justice Statistics

      Publication Household Poverty and Nonfatal Violent Victimization, 2008–2012

      Marcus Berzofsky, Dr.P.H., RTI International, Lance Couzens, RTI International, Erika Harrell, Ph.D., BJS Statistician, Lynn Langton, Ph.D., BJS Statistician, Hope Smiley-McDonald, Ph.D., RTI International

      November 18, 2014 NCJ 248384

      Presents findings from 2008 to 2012 on the relationship between households that were above or below the federal poverty level and nonfatal violent victimization, including rape or sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault. This report examines the violent victimization experiences of persons living in households at various levels of poverty, focusing on type of violence, victim’s race or Hispanic origin, and location of residence. It also examines the percentage of violent victimizations reported to the police by poverty level. Data are from the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), which collects information on nonfatal crimes, reported and not reported to the police, against persons age 12 or older from a nationally representative sample of U.S. households. During 2012, about 92,390 households and 162,940 persons were interviewed for the NCVS.

      Highlights:

      For the period 2008–12—
      Persons in poor households at or below the Federal Poverty Level (FPL) (39.8 per 1,000) had more than double the rate of violent victimization as persons in high-income households (16.9 per 1,000).
      Persons in poor households had a higher rate of violence involving a firearm (3.5 per 1,000) compared to persons above the FPL (0.8–2.5 per 1,000).
      The overall pattern of poor persons having the highest rates of violent victimization was consistent for both whites and blacks. However, the rate of violent victimization for Hispanics did not vary across poverty levels.
      Poor Hispanics (25.3 per 1,000) had lower rates of violence compared to poor whites (46.4 per 1,000) and poor blacks (43.4 per 1,000).
      Poor persons living in urban areas (43.9 per 1,000) had violent victimization rates similar to poor persons living in rural areas (38.8 per 1,000).
      Poor urban blacks (51.3 per 1,000) had rates of violence similar to poor urban whites (56.4 per 1,000).

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Slander, crude language, incivility, off-topic drift, or remarks that might harm National Vanguard or its users may be edited or deleted, even if unintentional. Comments may be edited for clarity or usage.