A Scholar of Dindu Nuffin Studies

by Douglas Mercer

COVERING ITSELF with glory has not exactly been the strong suit of Yale University for quite some time now; but on May 18, 2021 they hit a new low. On that date was published a book by one of their (ahem) scholars which argued, in nuce, that Whites give Blacks massive handouts. But we all know that Blacks want more and more, and when they “only” get a lot more (what this “scholar” dresses up as “investment”), and not absolutely everything, they loot, burn, go marauding, and riot; the “scholar” then calls this rioting “resistance” and “rebellion,” and when the crackdown comes (of late it doesn’t come at all) she calls this “White supremacy.”

What this argument lacks in intellectual rigor it makes up for in criminal fallaciousness.

When the time comes, we’ll pick up ugly mulatto Elizabeth Hinton in the first wave of arrests.

* * *

The Kerner Commission was a commission made up of Jew-picked Jews, Blacks, and anti-White Whites who essentially said no matter what the Blacks do in terms of destruction in point of fact they didn’t do nothing. Not their fault. It’s all the White man’s doing, you see? Heap massive amounts of cold hard cash on their crack-addled brains and they’ll spend it down a sinkhole, ask for more, and blame us when they torch the place when the extra boodle is not immediately forthcoming.

The report was released in 1968, after seven months of investigation. As for the cause of the riots, it blamed “lack of economic opportunity,” “failed social service programs,” “police brutality,” “racism,” and the “white-oriented media.”

The 426-page report was a bestseller.

God help us all.

In asking that the commission be gathered, that big fat goon Lyndon Johnson had three basic questions about the riots: “What happened? Why did it happen? What can be done to prevent it from happening again and again?”

We here at the National Alliance could have saved him a lot of money and effort:

What happened? Negroes being Negroes.

Why did it happen? Negros are Negroes.

What can prevent it from happening again? Short of shipping the Negroes back to Africa or, even better, an inaccessible island in the middle of nowhere, nothing. Nothing at all. Ugly truths are the most important truths.

The commission’s final report, the Report of the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders or Kerner Report, was issued on February 29, 1968, after seven months of investigation. The report became an instant bestseller, and over two million Americans bought copies of the 426-page document. Its finding was that the riots resulted from black frustration at the lack of economic opportunity. Martin Luther King pronounced the report a ‘physician’s warning of approaching death, with a prescription for life.’

“The press has too long basked in a white world looking out of it, if at all, with white men’s eyes and white perspective.” The report’s best known passage warned: “Our nation is moving toward two societies, one black, one white — separate and unequal.” The report was [so they lied — D.M.] a strong indictment of white America: “What white Americans have never fully understood — but what the Negro can never forget — is that white society is deeply implicated in the ghetto. White institutions created it, white institutions maintain it, and white society condones it.”

We see a pattern here. In 2020 Blacks burned our cities down and were lavished with praise, given billions of dollars, put on a pedestal, worshipped by the weak-kneed, had streets named after their movement, were embarrassingly kowtowed to, had a stupid holiday proposed for them, were give their own personal holocaust in the form of Tulsa, went to the front of every government spending line, and journalists went scouring and scurrying for every past example of Whites standing up for themselves against the Black menace and calling it a “racist” catastrophe. Why, way back when one Negro even had the gall to touch a White woman in the aforementioned Tulsa, and when Whites took the necessary course of correction, and when Whites defended themselves after the Blacks started shooting to kill, a hundred years later every media outlet in the nation was highlighting it as if the Negroes didn’t have it coming.

They did. They did have it coming. In spades.

And in 1968, nearly the same thing happened, Negroes torched the place and Whites were asked to feel guilty — and to pay up. “Investment,” don’t you know. “Structural change.”

The Kerner Commission’s results suggested that one main cause of urban violence was white racism and suggested that white America bore much of the responsibility for black rioting and rebellion. It called to create new jobs, construct new housing, and put a stop to de facto segregation in order to wipe out the destructive ghetto environment. In order to do so, the report recommended government programs to provide needed services, to hire more diverse and sensitive police forces and, most notably, to invest billions in housing programs aimed at breaking up residential segregation.

Money money money money money.

Among other points, the commission’s suggestions included:

Unless there are sharp changes in the factors influencing Negro settlement patterns within metropolitan areas, there is little doubt that the trend toward Negro majorities will continue.

Providing employment for the swelling Negro ghetto population will require opening suburban residential areas to Negroes.

Cities will have Negro majorities by 1985 and the suburbs ringing them will remain largely all white unless there are major changes in Negro fertility rates, in migration settlement patterns or public policy.

Talk about your Hobson’s choice. Either let the groids flood into the near last redoubt of White people, the suburbs, and make only the backwoods wilds a fit habitation for our race, or congregate the Congoids in our once-majestic cities where they will form unbreakable majorities and elect Black mayors and turn a blind eye to Black crime.

You see, it’s a time-honored and time-tested truth of social science that wherever Negroes go, they turn billions in real estate into twenty-five dollars in cash. And then promptly blow it on 40s and weaves.

Appointed by Johnson to serve as the commission’s executive director, David Ginsburg played a pivotal role in writing the commission’s findings.

Ginsburg, did you say?

I notice a pattern.

* * *

Daniel Patrick Moynihan is probably best known for having been a big booze hound and liberal from the Jewish state of New York, but he has a more fascinating history working for Richard Nixon and even before that as an iconoclastic academic who famously said, in high-sounding words of course, that the Negro problem stems from Negroes being Negroes. That is, just as you can’t get blood from a turnip, you can’t get civilization from Blacks. That’s a biological law.

Moynihan issued his research in 1965 under the title The Negro Family: the Case For National Action, now commonly known as The Moynihan Report. Moynihan’s report referred to a “tangle of pathology” in the Negro family as being the basic reason that Blacks were so far behind White society. That is, Leroy did a bang-up job fathering multiple children, but when those children needed love, care, and attention it was “Leroy who?” To put it in low-sounding words, Leroy was off to the next squalid love nest knocking up another one. Like shuffling, shucking, and jiving, this is something at which these creatures excel.

Critics on the left attacked it as ‘blaming the victim,’ a slogan coined by psychologist William Ryan. Some suggested that Moynihan was propagating the views of racists because much of the press coverage of the report focused on the discussion of children being born out of wedlock.

Much of the press coverage focused on the bastards Negroes create because that was at the heart of the report; and there are so many Black bastards. They were not burying the lede, they were hunting where the ducks are (or, in this case, where the bucks are).

Despite Moynihan’s warnings, the (AFDC) program included rules for payments only if no ‘man was in the house.’ Critics of the program’s structure, including Moynihan, said that the nation was paying poor women to throw their husbands out of the house.

Oh Daniel, Laquanda and her ilk weren’t throwing husbands out of the house; first off they weren’t husbands, they were just the latest buck in a long string of them they’d shacked up with (see squalid love nests, above), and they were gone far into the night before anyone could even think of throwing them out.

Later, in 1994 (too late, alas), after that year’s Republican sweep of Congress (fat lot of good that did us), Moynihan agreed that correction was needed for a welfare system that “possibly” encouraged women to raise their children without fathers: “The Republicans are saying we have a hell of a problem, and we do.”

Still do. Thanks to the traitors and cowards of both parties.

Moynihan’s work on the Negro family began in the staid corridors of the Department of Labor, where he toiled away as an unknown menial drone. He was charged, he said, with establishing statistical conciseness for what “everyone already knew,” namely, that “economic conditions determine social conditions.” He found, to the shock, disgust, and dismay of Jews and their lackeys, that what everyone already supposedly knew was evidently not so.

Who would have guessed?

Anyone with two good eyes and the courage to use them, that’s who.

The day that report was issued was at least one day without Jewish tricks.

The essence of the report was that it wasn’t economics and it certainly wasn’t a “lack of investment” (the gods know that by then there had been much more than enough of that). It was low IQ, high levels of aggression, promiscuity, innate criminality, and the ever-present morals of an alley cat.

You can toss all the money you want at a feral pig and it will still wallow in its filth.

While writing The Negro Family: the Case For National Action, Moynihan was employed in a political appointee position at the US Department of Labor, hired to help develop policy for the Johnson Administration in its war on poverty. In the course of analyzing statistics related to black poverty, Moynihan noticed something unusual: Rates of black male unemployment and welfare enrollment, instead of running parallel as they always had, started to diverge in 1962 in a way that would come to be called ‘Moynihan’s scissors.’

…In the mid-1960s, a social scientist noted something ominous that came to be called “Moynihan’s Scissors”: Two lines on a graph crossed, replicating the blades of a scissors. The descending line charted a decline in minority male unemployment, the ascending line charted the rise of welfare cases.

Hitler knew that the economy was always secondary to the renewal and rebirth of the German spirit.

The broken correlation of improvements in unemployment and decreased welfare dependency shattered confidence in social salvation through economic growth and reduced barriers to individual striving.

How hard is it to shatter eggheads? When the time comes we’ll pick them all up in the first wave of arrests.

So a few began thinking that perhaps the main factor in combating poverty and getting people to lead decent and productive lives were not economic but cultural and spiritual, habits, mores, and dispositions.

This was extremely bad news for the “investment crowd,” those Negroes and Negro-indulgers who wanted snow blowers to traverse the ghetto, spitting out freshly minted greenbacks. But they needn’t have worried; no one had any intention of following the prescriptions in this report — the cash cow was too juicy to jettison for something as flimsy and inconsequential as truth.

Gibs galore, that’s the ticket!

In the event, the Moynihan Report was buried many fathoms deep and is remembered, if it is remembered at all, as a revanchist and “racist” relic.

When Moynihan published his report in 1965, the out-of-wedlock birth rate among Blacks was 25 per cent., much higher than that of Whites. Now out-of-wedlock births for blacks are upwards of 70 per cent., which explains why your Blacks like Juneteempf as a holiday better than the nearly contiguous Father’s Day.

In the introduction to his report, Moynihan said that “the gap between the Negro and most other groups in American society is widening.” He also said that the collapse of the nuclear family in the Black lower class was the cause. This of course is the classic Rushtonian R strategy of love them and leave them, a legacy from when picking fruit in the midday sun of the humid tropics was about as strenuous as it got for Blacks, when life was cheap and the future uncertain, so best to spray out as many spawn as you can and hope for the best, or just not hope at all.

Moynihan concluded, “The steady expansion of welfare programs can be taken as a measure of the steady disintegration of the Negro family structure over the past generation in the United States.”

The report concluded that the structure of family life in the Black community constituted a “tangle of pathology capable of perpetuating itself without assistance from the white world,” and that “at the heart of the deterioration of the fabric of Negro society is the deterioration of the Negro family. It is the fundamental source of the weakness of the Negro community at the present time.”

The ugliest truths are always the most important ones.

Writing to that big fat goon Lyndon Johnson,

Moynihan argued that without access to jobs and the means to contribute meaningful support to a family, black men would become systematically alienated from their roles as husbands and fathers, which would cause rates of divorce, child abandonment and out-of-wedlock births to skyrocket in the black community (a trend that had already begun by the mid-1960s), leading to vast increases in the numbers of households headed by females.

Our scholar of dindu nuffin studies, Elizabeth Hinton, writes that many came to view Black poverty “as a fact of American life, and black crime and violence as innate. Their ideas helped push the Nixon administration, several years later, toward a belief that black cultural pathology, not poverty, was the real cause of crime.”

A tangle of pathology.

That there’s a bingo.

So when you see images of that old Irish booze hound from the sorry Jewish state of New York, remember that once upon a time he dropped an ideological ten-ton neutron bomb in the squalid nests of Black and Jewish race hustlers and grievance mongers.

But over time his words were drowned out by the cacophony of American negrophilia, and nobody listened any more.

So you had two reports emanating from the same time period. One blamed Whites for all the ills of Blacks; the other placed the blame where it belongs, squarely on the backs of Blacks themselves. But for American “elites,” the latter was consigned to an ever more obscure oblivion, and the former carried everything before it.

* * *

Elizabeth Hinton is that mulatto-looking female who is making the rounds of late, peddling her blood libel nonsense that Whites are to blame for the Black man’s social and moral retardation. There she was with Jew Amy Goodman (her grandfather was an orthodox rabbi) on Democracy Now!; and there she was being introduced by NBC Jew Bianna Golodryga (born to a family of Bessarabian Jews in Moldova) who is married to Jew and Obama Administration hack Peter Orszag; and there she is as the unworthy recipient of a puff piece in the magazine of Harvard University. The occasion? This Yale professor is currently serving up some intellectual slop in the form of slanders against the White race in the guise of a book called America on Fire. Look, she even has scholarly apparatus and a bibliography! This must be serious business. Left out of this literary nullity, I’m sure, is that time not too long ago when her fellow Blacks torched the place and one poor homeless fellow got asphyxiated and burned to a crisp in the crossfire. But ugly truths, or even any truth, is not the province or bailiwick of half-breeds.

America on Fire!

Hinton’s research focuses on the persistence of poverty, racial inequality, and urban violence in the 20th century United States.

If you take a look at what the shills with the blurbs say on Amazon, you’re met right off the bat with this doozy:

Not since Angela Davis’s 2003 book, Are Prisons Obsolete?, has a scholar so persuasively challenged our conventional understanding of the criminal legal system.

Now Angela Davis has a lot of gall penning that title, seeing as she gave the gun to the Negro who killed the White judge; but in weak-kneed America she walked free to show her ugly mug all over the place and talk about “justice.” So you can see why she thinks prisons are obsolete. If all the Negro criminals like her walk free, who will need them?

Having penned the best book since Angela Davis wrote hers is like having produced the best artwork since that special needs four-year-old palmed the crayon and made a few incoherent slashes.

From one of our top historians, a groundbreaking story of policing and ‘riots’ that shatters our understanding of the post–civil rights era.

Riots in scare quotes is a red flag; it’s like putting “reality” in quotes; you know someone is about to hose you.

As the acclaimed historian Elizabeth Hinton demonstrates in America on Fire, the events of 2020 had clear precursors ― and any attempt to understand our current crisis requires a reckoning with the recent past.

Boy, they sure do love them some reckoning. And they’ll have a Hell of a surprise when we give it to them.

Hinton’s sweeping narrative uncovers an altogether different history, taking us on a troubling journey from Detroit in 1967 and Miami in 1980 to Los Angeles in 1992 and beyond to chart the persistence of structural racism and one of its primary consequences, the so-called urban riot.

“So-called,” yes indeed that’s what you call it when cars explode and the walking bacilli with the turned-backwards baseball hats stroll out of the burning store with flat screens in tow.

Hinton offers a critical corrective: the word riot was nothing less than a racist trope applied to events that can only be properly understood as rebellions ― explosions of collective resistance to an unequal and violent order. As she suggests, if rebellion and the conditions that precipitated it never disappeared, the optimistic story of a post–Jim Crow United States no longer holds.

Don’t believe your lying eyes, White man — just because you turn on your television and see those mud people waltzing out of the store with their brand-new sneakers and stereos and flat screens, just because you see those pyromaniacs burn whatever they can touch, just because you see boarded-up storefronts and burnt-out ones, don’t for a moment think that some rioting has been going on. That’s one of those “tropes,” you know, and a racist one at that. Say it with me slowly: r-e-s-i-s-t-a-n-c-e a-n-d r-e-b-e-l-l-i-o-n.

Black rebellion, America on Fire powerfully illustrates, was born in response to poverty and exclusion, but most immediately in reaction to police violence. Facing increasing surveillance and brutality, residents threw rocks and Molotov cocktails at officers, plundered local businesses, and vandalized exploitative institutions.

They dindu nuffin.

The central lesson from these eruptions ― that police violence invariably leads to community violence ― continues to escape policymakers, who respond by further criminalizing entire groups instead of addressing underlying socioeconomic causes.

She must have missed the Moynihan Report. Or misread it. Or, more likely, hoped no one would read it.

This mulatto creature is clearly an “Affirmative Action” baby; no question, she’s been the beneficiary of race preferences in the past. The tripe about tropes and the drivel about reckoning wouldn’t have passed muster in a community college freshman essay exam just a few decades ago; but these Negro “scholars” now play an important role in the anti-White ecosystem. Every so often they trot out some African with a PhD who claims White people are evil, and it supposedly gives the entire racket legitimacy. But you can put a chimpanzee on roller skates as easily as you can put some letters behind a Black female’s name. Just because you dress Godzilla in a sports coat doesn’t mean he won’t tear the town apart.

* * *

Today, roughly two million people are incarcerated in this country, 60 percent of them African American or Latino. The United States, with 5 percent of the global population but 25 percent of its prisoners, is home to the largest prison system in the history of the world, with an incarceration rate that is five to 10 times that of peer nations. Altogether, the federal, state, and local penal systems cost taxpayers $80 billion per year, and some states, Hinton writes, spend more money imprisoning young people than educating them.

First off they are not “peer states”; you subtract out our non-Whites and we stack up pretty even on issues of incarceration and crime, just like when you subtract them out from our test scores and find that we do as well as Europe in terms of educational attainment. It’s the Blacks and the wetbacks that weigh us down. They clog the system like a form of social diabetes. And when Hinton says we spend more money on putting Blacks in prison than educating them in colleges, it makes me wonder what they would have us do with the Black thug who points that gun at the convenience store clerk — hand him a Harvard application?

* * *

It’s not surprising that even a little research reveals that Hinton hails from a family steeped in crime. You’d think all the arrestees and jailbirds littering her family tree like soiled garbage infesting a vacant lot would be a source of shame and regret, but she seems proud of it — because, of course, they didn’t do nothing. The White devil made them do it, you see. The White devil made them do it by not giving them a lot more money than he did give them. The White devil made them do it by trying to stop them from doing it. But for sure it was the White devil who made them do it.

Amid the joblessness and hopelessness and worsening crime, some of Hinton’s cousins began to get into trouble. They were using drugs. They were in and out of prison, in and out of recovery and relapse.

“And I understood why,” she says. “I mean, Big Papa bought this house and had so many hopes and dreams. And was soon living next to a crack house. The environment itself told the story.”

First off, let’s get real. This is her accounting and I’m sure the dude she calls “Big Papa” wasn’t squeaky clean. And the White devil didn’t put that Black crack house there; Blacks with crack for brains did. But in her childlike understanding of the chain of causation, it was the White man who made the Black crack-for-brains types become crackheads in that crack house. It’s deranged dogma dressed up as daring scholarship. And it sure beats virtue and taking responsibility for yourself.

For most of her childhood, she’d known family members who cycled in and out of jail, caught up in drugs and addiction and poverty. Their experience was a large part of why, as a little girl, she had wanted to become a criminal defense attorney, and later, why she was drawn to African-American history and explorations of crime and punishment. That path would lead eventually to a career in a field that was just beginning to coalesce: the study of mass incarceration.

“Most of the incarcerated were African American or Latino, and nearly all the guards were white. And I looked around and saw all these black and brown families,” Hinton says.

A normal and principled person would see jails filled to the gills with members of his own race and feel shame and want to do something about it, not lie about it constantly and use it as the tip of the spear for unprecedented grift. But not Hinton and her ilk. The default position is that every cop is a (White, needless to say) racist criminal and all the Black and Brown sinners are saints, that Blacks and Browns are always and everywhere good — so if that many of them are in jail, some colossal and cosmic injustice must have occurred. The White man is their go-to and all-purpose villain, the gift given to them by “liberal” White society that forever keeps on giving.

* * *

Just as they parade their criminal families like a perverse badge of honor (woe is us!), and think that large populations of Black and Brown prisoners show the evil of Whites rather than their own penchant for destruction and mayhem (it’s not a riot, it’s a rebellion; it’s not a riot, it’s resistance); in the wilderness mirrors in her mind she’s able to look at Black dysfunction and pathology and see noble heroes — very similar to the way those shacks in Tulsa marvelously became “Black Wall Street.”

Amazing. Amazing that we let them get away with it, and without any shots even being fired.

When conservatives want to show they are not “racist” these days, they often glom on to “criminal justice reform.” Their “First Step Act” was the first step towards perdition.

It is fashionable among Negro “scholars” now to call burning, looting, and rioting by the new made-up names of “rebellion” and “resistance,” as in the Los Angles Rebellion of 1992 or the Martin Luther King Rebellions of 1968. Blacks are constantly running away from reality like they run from soap. Count on the Jewish media and bought politicians soon imposing this terminology on all of us, beginning with helpless White children in the public schools.

And also, you know, many of the people who participated in these instances of collective violence understood themselves as rising up, as rebelling, not as rioting, not as something that was criminal. And we’ve really got to get out of this criminal framework through which we understand these forms of political violence.

I’ll bet she wants to get out of this “criminal framework.” Only by that alchemical process can what happened in Los Angeles be termed a rebellion; Korean rooftop shooters know better than that.

It was only in the 1960s, when Black people rose up against repressive and exploitative institutions, that these incidents of collective violence became labeled as criminal and as riots.

Or, conversely, it was only when we saw the smoldering ruins and the death count.

And, you know, by my count, from that — what I call the crucible period, after that major piece of federal legislation, the Safe Streets Act — so, from June 1968 through 1972 — there were about 2,000 rebellions in segregated Black communities and about 200 in Puerto Rican and Mexican American communities.

And, in fact, the rebellions became more disruptive, causing more civilian deaths, the deployments of more National Guardsmen, and — in the case of Detroit and cities like Washington, D.C., and Chicago, and Baltimore during the Martin Luther King Rebellions — federal troops.

Rebellions, rebellions, rebellions. This is the dire and bitter fruit of generations of students growing up with that picture of Che supposedly looking dashing in their rooms; all that “one struggle,” all that anti-colonialism, all that Dead White Male nonsense takes its toll; for us not having killed that Jewish propaganda in its media and academic cribs with extreme prejudice 50 years ago, now we have a billionaire- and taxpayer-funded “global uprising” against us whose purpose is to kill us all.

It was that hero of “color-blind conservatives,” Martin Luther King, who said that “rioting is the language of the unheard.” No, it is not a language at all; it is the violence of the uncivilizable wielded by the genocidal.

Thomas Jefferson knew well the dangers of letting go of the ears of the wolf.

* * *

The war on poverty, importantly, did not represent a major structural transformation in American society, because of the pathological understanding that policymakers had about Black poverty and crime, deeply influenced by social scientists like Daniel Patrick Moynihan, who recognized the socioeconomic factors that led to disparate rates of Black poverty, but ultimately argued that Black poverty was a problem of Black behavior.

Yale must be very proud; this is the high point of the “I’m rubber you’re glue, what you say bounces off of me and sticks to you” school of social theory. Cutting edge stuff, to be sure.

You know, we have to go back to that critical moment in the late 1960s with the Kerner Commission. Johnson’s own National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders basically called for exactly what you’re talking about, that kind of structural change. They said to the Johnson administration and the nation that if we wanted to — if we’re serious about preventing rebellion in the future, we needed a massive investment in low-income communities of color, and not in the form of policing and surveillance and prisons, which is what ended up happening, but in a robust job creation program that — made possible by the mobilization of both the public and private sector, a complete overhaul of urban public schools and a complete transformation of public housing, and the continued support of community action programs that would empower the grassroots to address problems in their community on their own terms with funding from the federal government.

By “structural change” she means lavishing money earned by others on Black people and communities; by “overhauling urban schools” she means the same; by “mobilization of both the public and private sectors,” ditto; by “massive investment” she means more of the same.

From the beginning, for politicians and Negroes, “civil rights” were always a grift. (To Jews, they were a weapon.)

No sooner did our fake President pay homage to the “victims of Tulsa” than he started claiming that voter ID laws are a Black Shoah — even though “the Shoah” never happened.

Protests and vigils were held across the US to mark one year since the police murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis. Floyd’s death sparked a national uprising and global movement against systemic racism and police brutality.

Elizabeth Hinton, an associate professor of history and African American studies at Yale University and a professor of law at Yale Law School, connects the Black Lives Matter protests to a long history of Black rebellion against police violence in her new book America on Fire and notes that the US has had previous opportunities to address systemic racism and state violence, but change remains elusive.

Hinton, Loeb associate professor of history and of African and African American studies, tells the story of how federal policies — shaped by presidential administrations and endorsed by Congress — ratcheted up surveillance and punishment in black urban neighborhoods from the 1960s through the 1980s, how criminalization was steadily expanded, and how all of this was driven by deeply held assumptions about the cultural and behavioral inferiority of black Americans.

Loeb did you say?

Loeb or Löb is a surname of Yiddish origin. It is derived from the word lion in Yiddish in different historic and dialectal forms (Löwe, Lewe, Löb, Leb, Leib). In Yiddish it is mostly written לייב (Leib).

Most interesting.

In her first semester in Cambridge, Michael Brown was killed in Ferguson, Missouri. She remembers packing for her move amid the protests and watching in amazement as a new national consciousness coalesced around the issues at the heart of her work.

Hinton’s first chance to do original research came in high school. She took an American studies class her junior year and wrote a paper, based on her reading of slave narratives collected in the 1930s, arguing that the Declaration of Independence legitimized slave revolts — ‘basically, that, under its principles, they had a right to rebel.’

When in the course of human events Haitians cast off the White man’s rule, they set up in its place the rule of voodoo animal and human sacrifice.

We have to support and bring about that kind of systemic transformation that the Kerner Commission suggested more than 50 years ago. We can only imagine what the United States might look like today had policymakers invested in those kinds of robust social programs rather than in policing and prisons. I would be certain that George Floyd would still be with us today.

So it comes full circle. Back in the late 1960s, Blacks were sainted and Whites were pilloried from pillar to post. And this scholar of dindu nuffin studies hit her putrid stride just as the evil flowers of that thinking reached unheard-of heights. Google trends showed that the phrase “White fragility” spiked in 2014 at the time of big fat Michael Brown (may he rest in Hell) and then soared once again in 2020. She’ll certainly have a lucrative career as a “credentialed” liar and huckster of Victimhood, Second Class (with Crack Rock Clusters).

Unless, of course, we get to what surely will be a very busy day — the day of the first wave of arrests.

Because, needless to say, the next George Floyd alive would be a crying shame.

* * *

Source: Author