Tuesday, December 02, 2014

How to Make Your Own Race Riot

The angry rioter is a sacred figure in the progressive pantheon of social justice. The shirtless men in bandanas carting away cell phones are so outraged by injustice that they are willing to take to the streets and do what progressive hipsters taking social justice selfies of themselves in souvenir t-shirts plastered with the face of the latest victim of “white supremacism” can only dream about.

But the saint of the looted convenience store is as mythical a figure as the selfless community organizer. The race riot isn’t a bubbling stew of outrage out of which wounded souls emerge to cry out for justice. It’s a complicated criminal conspiracy in which the perpetrators rarely suffer any consequences.

Here’s how a race riot is actually put together.

3. Riots aren’t fed by outrage, but by opportunism

The rioters aren’t outraged, they’re usually bored young men, frustrated and lacking in empathy. Many of them have gang ties or a criminal record stretching back to kindergarten.

They’re the same people who commit crimes in any other non-outraged context.

The rest are there to get some attention while providing them with protective coloration. 9 out of 10 people screaming frenziedly while holding up “Black Lives Matter” signs would eagerly scream and hold up “Justin Bieber 4 President” or “Ferguson Loves the KKK” signs if it got them positive attention and a shot at being on television.

Everything you need to do know about why the riots fizzled out can be read on a thermometer. On Monday, when the grand jury failed to indict Officer Wilson, the temperature hit a high of 57 degrees. The next day it was still in the forties. Now that the temperature is in the twenties, the riots have fizzled out.

Weather breaks up a riot faster than appeasement. It’s hard to riot when your teeth are chattering.

There’s a reason that riots usually happen in the summer. If the grand jury verdict had been issued in January, it would have been met peacefully.

The riots in Ferguson didn’t happen because of outrage, but because the gathering mobs were told by everyone from CNN right up to Governor Nixon that angry protests were expected and would be tolerated. That was as good as throwing a match into a spreading pool of gasoline.

No one was stealing beauty supplies or starting fires in Walgreens because they were upset that Michael Brown got shot. They were stealing for the same reasons that Michael Brown stole; because they believed that they could get away with it.

2. The rioters and looters aren’t burning their own community

A riot has two components. There are the bored and irritated locals who begin swarming streets because they have no jobs, it’s hot outside and there’s nothing good on television. They will loosely agree with whatever issue is on the table, but they aren’t all that worked up about it.

And then there are the outsiders.

Before the riot, community organizers, citizen reporters and assorted activists show up to coordinate, spread slogans and justify the coming violence. They want violence far more than the locals do and they taunt police and try to create incidents, but they usually avoid personally engaging in violence.

(In the early twentieth century the group stirring up riots was usually some arm of the Communist Party. Later a variety of leftist groups, many closely entangled with the Democratic Party took over. The Ferguson protests are somewhat unique in the sizable Muslim presence with their activists playing the same role that the Communist Party used to play a century ago.) Most of the damage is done by looters and rioters from other areas looking for an opportunity to burn and steal. Some locals will tag after them, but they are usually responsible for the worst of the violence.

Being outsiders they’re unknown to the police and rarely have to worry about being identified afterwards. And they don’t care about burning down someone else’s community.

The media usually sticks to its narrative of an outraged community that engages in excesses, especially when it can’t tell apart the locals from the outsiders. Local cops can, but no one in the media listens to them. Arrest records usually show that most of those charged in the more violent crimes aren’t locals, but the media remains immune to facts that conflict with a favorite narrative.

1. Riots are about power, not for the rioters, but for the establishment

"We must not reprimand our children for outrage when it is the outrage that was put in them by an oppressive system," Al Sharpton had said, in the aftermath of the murder of a Jewish student by an angry black mob.

This same rhetoric was used by the inciters of the violence in Ferguson and has been used in similar riots going back generations. Its major theme is that the rioters are free to do whatever they want. They carry no moral responsibility for their actions.

And what they want is to smash and steal anything they can get their hands on. This isn’t outrage. It’s textbook amoral behavior. The riot doesn’t release anger; it frees the perpetrators of their morality.

The real purpose of a riot isn’t to benefit the rioters. It’s to benefit those who incite the riot. The rioters and looters react in response to riot-friendly conditions created from above. If you build the political infrastructure for a riot, the rioters and looters will come.

Sharpton’s riots weren’t about helping anyone except himself. By associating himself with violence, he sold the idea that he was an influential figure in the black community. Whether or not Sharpton was actually popular, his rise to the top of the political establishment became a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Riots are about perception, not reality. The ringleader tries to keep his hands clean while convincing the establishment that he can turn the violence on or off any time he wants to.

Ferguson is the product of a new generation of Sharptons, ambitious activists feeding hate, of the New Black Panther Party’s obsession with becoming relevant, of the ragged hipster ends of Occupy Wall Street drifting from occupation to occupation, of Muslim agents dreaming of turning African-Americans into a fifth column and of Obama’s clumsy efforts to keep on playing community organizer by feeding racial grievances and then pretending to rise above them.

Those who gain from unleashing chaos and violence are not the powerless, but the powerful. Sharpton rose to his important role as Obama’s liaison on a trail of bodies. Someone operating in Ferguson hopes to be the next Sharpton. Meanwhile Obama is playing a perverse fusion of Sharpton and MLK, amping up a bad situation and then telling blacks and whites that they need to rise above it.

It’s an old and cynical game that has been played in and around the Democratic Party for too long.

The answers to Ferguson can’t be found in its streets. The problem didn’t come from there. It came from a black political establishment that lights the fuse for its own power and profit.


Anonymous said...

At least some of them are local. While switching around between CNN and MSNBC I caught the MSNBC correspondent saying that he was in the liquor store and saw the guy who lit the fire. He RECOGNIZED the guy as local. When he asked him why he was starting the fire, he said "Because we're sick of this shit."

So at least one fire set by locals....

Anonymous said...

Manning says it bluntly like it needs to be said.

Whoopie said...

Poor dumb blacks, never anything but tools. First the slave owners usedthem, then the commies. then the Democrats and now the Moozlums.

Naresh Krishnamoorti said...

Daniel, you have it nearly right.

There is a reason that the political leaders in question and their media toadies only encourage rioting over cases like Brown's, Trayvon Martin's, and Rodney King's. They don't organize national protests over Tamir Rice or John Crawford -- blacks who were murdered by white police officers habituated to the excessive use of force, especially in the black community.

If they organized protests over Tamir Rice, they know that a lot of mainstream Whites would join in, and the real problem of the excessive use of force by police will finally have to be addressed. They don't want that.

Instead, they organize protests over cases where they know that mainstream Whites and Blacks will have diametrically opposed reactions to the cases, and diametrically opposed conclusions regarding the justice of police acts.

In other words, the people inciting the riots have the goal of creating racial animosity and hatred, because they benefit politically and financially from racial division.

Daniel Greenfield @ the Sultan Knish blog said...

polarization is the key to everything the left does

Y. Ben-David said...

Very good points. To take an extreme example of what you said about the Establishment benefiting from the violence, Hitler used his SA paramilitary thugs t ignite violence on the streets. and then he presented himself to otherwise moderate, skeptical Germans as the only one who could restore "law and order"..
In an international context, Arafat did the same and Leftist Israelis fell for it. He was presented as the only "strong leader" who could make peace with Israel and reign in the terrorists, and then he unleased the terrorists saying he was "too weak" to contol them and so Israel had to make more concessions to "strengthen him". Journalist Dexter Filkins said the Pakistani military does the same with the Taliban. They created this terrorist organization, turn it loose and then tell the Americans they need billions of dollars in handouts in order to get the army to suppress them, which in reality they have no interest in doing.
Finally, I heard a report that the Nigerian military has a smiliar relationship with the Boko Haram terrorists. They need them to exist in order to get billions of dollars from the oil revenue.
Why do otherwise good people allow themselves to be lead by the nose by these gangsters who pull these tricks?

Chris said...

Well said, sir. One paragraph cogently captures things nicely:

"The real purpose of a riot isn’t to benefit the rioters. It’s to benefit those who incite the riot. The rioters and looters react in response to riot-friendly conditions created from above. If you build the political infrastructure for a riot, the rioters and looters will come."

And oh how these -- what shall we call them? Ah! "Community Organizers! -- hope against hope (and change?) that the rioters and looters will come and, as quoted in Blazing Saddles, "Go do that voodoo that you do so well!"

It's also true that many local tag-alongs and ne'er-do-wells joined in the festivities with "zeal, but not according to knowledge." Whereas most animals instinctively avoid crapping in their own abodes, others ---- not so much.

Mary Higgins said...

White lives matter too...Most violent crime against whites are by blacks.
SEE these STATS:

LFMayor said...

Someday maybe, there will be another bout of average caucasian men rioting. Remove their empathy by rubbing all this political correctness in their faces. Incessantly. Eventually you'll get another phase like LeMay and his band of merry flying pyromaniacs.
Now progressives, tell yourselves that history won't repeat, that it cannot happen again. And keep up the good work! We're waiting, impatiently, but still waiting.
I'm fed up with your noise, how many like me are there now?

Edward Cline said...

Re the first photo: Can't these jerks even spell "Dream" correctly? It's misspelled twice. I at first thought they were boasting they had hickies on their left ankle bones. Goes to show how much a federally managed public education benefits anyone. Then there are the go-go girls in the second photo; did they perform a song-and-dance, too? The third photo was laughable: with so many homicidal cops on the loose, one almost expected to see the street and sidewalks littered with the bodies of children.

Anonymous said...

"And then there are the outsiders."

American equivalent of Israel with the ISM and Peace Now.


Anonymous said...

I agree with Edward on the photos, especially the second one. Maybe Brown had his hands up, maybe he didn't. No matter, they're mocking the fatal shooting. IF Brown really did have his hands up, they're making a mockery of the last moments of his life and think it's fun. It's sort of like dancing one someone's grave.

Also, I'm pretty sure Brown's stepfather is under investigation for inciting the riots. Lovely thing to do in his stepson's memory. One man dead, another man's career ended and IMO he probably will suffer some PTSD from the experience.


Anonymous said...

Edward: I went to Urban Dictionary. Had to LOL at the first spelling of dream:

A stately term to express a metaphysical subconsciousness. Also another way to express "Dream" but in a more badass sense.
"Did you see the piano cover of Requiem of a Dream?"
"It's DRAEM. Idiot."

Metaphysical subconsciousness. That's what these riots are all about.


Anonymous said...


Deram Records, a former subsidiary record label established in 1966 by Decca Records in the United Kingdom
Đeram or Stari Đeram, a district of Belgrade, Serbia
Darram or Derām, a village in Iran
Deram, Isfahan, a village in Iran
Deram, Mazandaran, a village in Iran



Daniel Greenfield @ the Sultan Knish blog said...

maybe we're meant to unscramble the word

Johnny said...

Obama has a history of going a little too far with things, beyond utility, and I suspect they are getting to that point with this black misbehavior, and that really is what this is, misbehavior. Even if you suppose that cops are given to shooting suspects who are having violent confrontations with them, it is an easily solvable problem. All that is required is to avoid getting into violent, physical confrontations with armed officers of the law. Apparently even that minimal hurdle is to high a bar for our black community.

Anonymous said...

Protests are all crap. Someone makes money, and everything is about money all the time. Sharpton should be in jail. Berkley should be hit with an air strike and all those rich yuppy kids forced into the military. When I went to college at the start of the first Gulf War, I was a combat vet and older than most everyone. There was a protest and I heard two girls with purple and orange hair talking.
"Let's go to the protest," one said.
"What's it about?" the other said.
"Who cares...we can get on television."
That was over 20 years ago, and still no one cares what they protest. You see the kids with money in the picture above with the black lives matter sign. Bet they don't live in a black neighborhood. Some have probably never met a black person. They are all smiles as they protest something they could care less about. It's something to do to get on film. The simple solution to all the protests and riots in Ferguson and other black areas is to announce they are cutting off checks to anyone involved as being contrary to law and order. Or make all announcements that will cause riots in the dead of winter. No one wants to protest or riot in the snow. The bottom line is blacks burn down their own neighborhood because most are outsiders, and if they try in the white areas they will get blown away.

Anonymous said...

I would believe all of those "black lives matter" posters a bit more if the folks holding them were standing in front of the local Planned Parenthood office. The number of abortions in the black community far outnumbers those who have been killed by the police.

Northern Observer said...

White supremacism is a reality in America, no matter how inconvenient it is to the political right. Don't dilute the truth about islam with denialism about the history and reality of American society. Black non muslims and White non muslims will need to stand shoulder to shoulder to defeat the armies of Allah and the current political treatment of blacks in America needs to be fixed before that can happen.

Unknown said...

The article is excellent, but we need to probe further beneath what is observable. I think I can put it in terms in today's reality. What is really at work in Ferguson as the proximate underlying cause of Black and White conflict is not difficult to perceive. It comes down to what is a universal problem: It reflects the difficulty -- or most likely the impossibility-- of assimilation between peoples. Whenever one shouts the term "discrimination"--religious, racial, political, social--whatever--what one is witnessing may be called discrimination -- if you like -- but for the most part it is reflecting of two groups of people with differencing physical or social attributes. For example, it is a fact that most Whites do not want to assimilate with Blacks but Blacks, for the most part, would find no difficulty assimilating with Whites.

Please note this nonreversible socio-political concept is universal and is equally applicable , to illustrate the point, to the conflict between the Arabs and the Jews. To wit: Arabs do not want to assimilate with Jews but Jews do not care if they assimilate with Arabs. You may substitute the words "Arabs" and Jews" for any other term for social groupings-- say, Muslim and "X" -- and the formula has predictive value. On the principle of Occam's Razor, the simpler less complicated theory to explain reality, the better.

The difficulty becomes especially compounded --and destructive --when a government intervenes to modify the inter-personal social relations between people. This the Supreme Court did in Brown v Board of Education. That was an unfortunate blunder amounting to a social revolution which intensified racial divisions resulting from earlier national economic developments involving slavery. [ That's a long -grossly misunderstood - story by itself.] Every social revolution creates unintended consequences. It took only 6 years following the Court's opinion for the appearance of intensified race riots to make appearance in the United States. Riots are always and everywhere an organic response to the pain of assimilation.

Whether assimilation is difficult or impossible measures either the likelihood of an eventual diminution or withering away of the conflict in due time to reach a tolerable social equilibrium In which case the only solution to the fact of the unassailable impossibility of assimilation is population transfer or found a new country. That may be difficult but was not an unusually rare occurrence in early European history, or more recent Middle Eastern history after the first world war.

Assimilation is not possible between races and is the root cause of inter-racial conflict. White and Black are two races. White and Black cannot not assimilate. QED.

Martin Kessler

Unknown said...

"Your comment will be visible after approval"

Really, whose approval? I say what I say. If not illegal your approval is not required. Just publish what I say or forfget it!

Anonymous said...

"forfget"... woo hoo, my day is complete

Anne said...

How do you suggest we go about doing that? I don't think the people Mr. Greenfield is criticising are doing what you request.

Post a Comment