David Starkey and Black Culture

David , a good article - but very badly researched for a historian.

First of all - I was the first person to define these riots as a cultural problem, not a race problem, on Twitter.

Check out our twitter feed for the time of the riots.

We are The British Freedom Party.

Our twitter feed is here ;

http://twitter.com/#!/british_...

Now this is the research that you should have done and made use of to defend yourself ;


http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2007/apr/12/ukcrime.race


Tony Blair yesterday claimed the spate of knife and gun murders in London was not being caused by poverty, but a distinctive black culture. His remarks angered community leaders, who accused him of ignorance and failing to provide support for black-led efforts to tackle the problem.

One accused him of misunderstanding the advice he had been given on the issue at a Downing Street summit.

Black community leaders reacted after Mr Blair said the recent violence should not be treated as part of a general crime wave, but as specific to black youth. He said people had to drop their political correctness and recognise that the violence would not be stopped "by pretending it is not young black kids doing it".


http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2007/apr/11/immigrationpolicy.ukcrime


Tony Blair today called on Britain's black communities to speak out against gang culture, as he promised further new laws against knife and gun crime.

Following the violent deaths of seven black teenagers in London over the past three months, the prime minister said the killings were the "latest manifestations of severe disorder".
But he stressed: "We won't stop this by pretending it isn't young black kids doing it."





http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/8711621/UK-riots-Its-not-about-criminality-and-cuts-its-about-culture...-and-this-is-only-the-beginning.html


What a week! It’s not every day that you’re the subject of direct personal attack from the Leader of Her Majesty’s Opposition. On Tuesday, after he had spoken at his old school, Haverstock Comprehensive, about the riots, Ed Miliband was invited by a member of the audience to “stamp out” the now-infamous opinions I had expressed on the same subject on last Friday’s Newsnight.

Mr Miliband might have replied that he disagreed with what I said, but in a liberal democracy defended my right to say it since it broke no laws. Not a bit of it, I fear. Instead, Miliband – the son of a refugee who fled from Nazi Europe to preserve his life and freedom of thought – agreed enthusiastically with the questioner. Mine were “racist comments”, he said, “[and] there should be condemnation from every politician, from every political party of those sorts of comments.”

Strong words. But what do they mean? Well, the following statements are verbatim quotations of some of the principal points I made on Newsnight: “A particular sort of violent, destructive, nihilistic, gangster culture has become the fashion.” “This sort of black male [gang] culture militates against education.” “It’s not skin colour, it’s cultural.”

“Disgusting and outrageous”, are they? In which case, those who agree with Miliband must believe the opposite of all these. They are therefore convinced that gang culture is personally wholesome and socially beneficial.

But how, then, to explain the black educationalists Tony Sewell and Katharine Birbalsingh defending the substance of my comments on “gangsta” culture, as well as Tony Parsons, who wrote in the Labour-supporting Daily Mirror that, “without the gang culture of black London, none of the riots would have happened – including the riots in other cities like Manchester and Birmingham where most of rioters were white”.

Even stranger is Miliband’s apparent notion that, far from militating against educational achievement as I suggested, “the gang culture of black London” must therefore be a seedbed for scholarship and sound learning. Odd, isn’t it, that Waterstone’s bookshop was the only business unlooted in the Ealing riots? And odder still that Lindsay Johns, the Oxford-educated mixed-race writer who mentors young people in Peckham, argues passionately against “this insulting and demeaning acceptance” of a fake Jamaican – or “Jafaican” – patois. “Language is power”, Johns writes, and to use “ghetto grammar” renders the young powerless.

“So why,” some of my friends have asked, “didn’t you stop there?” “Why did you have to talk about David Lammy MP sounding 'white’? Or white chavs becoming 'black’?” The answer is that I thought my appearance on Newsnight was supposed to be part of a wide-ranging discussion about the state of the nation. Central to any such discussion, it seems to me, are the successes and failures of integration in Britain in the past 50 years. And it was these that I was trying to address.

On the other hand, there is no doubt that my remarks on this subject produced especial outrage. I was accused of condemning all black culture; of using white and black culture interchangeably to denote “good and bad”, and of saying that blacks could only get on by rejecting black culture. Actually, I said none of those things and nothing that I did say could have been construed as such by any fair-minded person.

Instead, I was trying to point out the very different patterns of integration at the top and bottom of the social scale. At the top, successful blacks, like David Lammy and Diane Abbot, have merged effortlessly into what continues to be a largely white elite: they have studied at Oxbridge and gone on to Oxbridge-style careers, such as that of an MP.

But they have done so at the cost of losing much of their credibility with blacks on the street and in the ghettos. And here, at the bottom of the heap, the story of integration is the opposite: it is the white lumpen proletariat, cruelly known as the “chavs”, who have integrated into the pervasive black “gangsta” culture: they wear the same clothes; they talk and text in the same Jafaican patois; and, as their participation in recent events shows, they have become as disaffected and riotous.

Trying to explain why, led me to what all my friends agree was my greatest error: to mention Enoch Powell. Tactically, of course, they are right, as the “Rivers of Blood” speech remains, even 40-odd years after its delivery, an unhealed wound.

Unfortunately, the speech and still more the reaction to it, are also central to any proper understanding of our present discontents. For Powell’s views were popular at the time and the London dockers marched in his support. The reaction of the liberal elites in both the Labour and Tory parties, who had just driven Powell into the wilderness, was unanimous: the white working class could never be trusted on race again. The result was a systematic attack over several decades: on their perceived xenophobic patriotism, on symbols like the flag of St George, even – and increasingly – on the very idea of England itself.

The attack was astonishingly successful. But it left a void where a sense of common identity should be. And, for too many, the void has been filled with the values of “gangsta” culture.

Consider the converse. One of the most striking things about the England riots is where they did not happen: Yorkshire, the North East, Wales and Scotland. These areas contain some of the worst pockets of unemployment in the country. But they are also characterised by a powerful sense of regional or national identity and difference that cuts across all classes and binds them together. And it is this, I am sure, which has inoculated them against the disease of “gangsta” culture and its attendant, indiscriminate violence.

Scotland, Alex Salmond says smugly, is a “different culture”. It is indeed, since the Scots are allowed - and even encouraged - to be as racist as they please and hate the English with glad abandon.

I do not want a similar licensed xenophobia here. But an English nationalism we must have. And it must be one that includes all our people: white and black and mixed race alike.

Fortunately, there is a powerful narrative of freedom that runs like a golden thread through our history. “The air of England is too pure for a slave to breathe in,” counsel declared repeatedly in Somersett’s Case, about the legality of slavery in England, in 1772.

We must focus on the righting of the wrong rather than the original wrong itself. The former heals; the latter divides. And we have had enough of division. There is a final point. If all the people of this country, black and white alike, are to enter fully into our national story, as I desperately hope they will, they must do so on terms of reciprocity. In other words, I must be as free to comment on problems in the black community as blacks are to point the finger at whites, which they do frequently, often with justice, and with impunity.

For the other pernicious legacy of the reaction to Powell has been an enforced silence on the matter of race. The subject has become unmentionable, by whites at any rate. And any breach has been punished by ostracism and worse. As the hysterical reaction to my remarks shows, the witch-finders already have their sights on me, led by that pillar of probity and public rectitude, Piers Morgan, who called on Twitter for the ending of my television career within moments of the Newsnight broadcast.

But the times have changed. Powell had to prophesy his “Tiber foaming with blood”. We, on the other hand, have already experienced the fires of Tottenham and Croydon. Moreover, the public mood is different from the acquiescent and deferential electorate of the Sixties. We are undeceived. We are tired of being cheated and lied to by bankers and MPs and some sections of the press.

We will not continue, I think, to tolerate being lied to and cheated in the matter of race. Instead of “not in front of the children”, we want honesty.

But this is only the beginning. The riots are the symptom of a profound rupture in our body politic and sense of national identity. If the rupture is not healed and a sense of common purpose recovered, they will recur – bigger, nastier and more frequently. Can we stop bickering and address this task of recovery and reconstruction – all together?

Cultural Mobs

In the anonymity of the crowd, the moral values of individuals become reflections of the social / cultural identity the mob has assumed.

If the culture of the mob is violent, anti-police, criminal, gang linked and linked with theft, drugs, gun crime and robbery, such as in the same Urban Gang Culture we see growing in cities all over the world - then individuals within the mob will assume and manifest the morality of the culture.

Those individuals within the mob will then channel the Chthonic and daemonic forces present within the context of that culture out into the real world as riots / crime on the streets. The manifestation of the shadow of that cultural meme then further incites other members of a community into violence and riots as they watch the disorder unfold around them, gradually dragging them into the vortex of violence awhirl all around them -and thereby creating as a social reality the cultural darkness that meme contains.

The riots were not riots - they were Anomic Flash Mobs.

They are symptoms of a cultural malaise.

Good people get sucked into the mob and adopt the morality of those around them within the mob - so when one part of the mob begin to loot, then the rest of the mob follow suit.

Rare individuals will resist the adoption of the mob morality over their individual morality, but most will simply be swept up into Dionysian ecastacy of the mob itself.

In the flickering of the flames and the ecstacy of the unleashing of the bonds of civilisation, crawling forth from the hollow shells of modern men, primitive savages are thus incarnated on our city streets.





http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2011/08/16/pseudoscience-and-the-london-riots-folk-psychology-run-amok/





“There is something profoundly anti-scientific going on.”

And he would know. Since the climax of the London riots a week ago, Stephen Reicher–a leading crowd psychologist at the University of St Andrew’s–has faced a drove of inquiring journalists. And, in the meantime, Reicher has watched a previously humble discipline evolve into a wielded weapon; thrust, sparred and grossly misused by politicians, journalists and, worryingly, by scientists themselves.

He has, in other words, borne witness to the miscommunication of science on a massive scale.

“The basis of any good science is that any explanation has got to be rooted in a sound empirical account of the phenomena,” said Reicher. “The simple fact of that matter is that, at this stage, we don’t have that.”

“So the point is, how can you explain something when you don’t even know what that something is?”

Yet attempts to explain (and, in particular, to use the broad banner of ‘psychology’ to explain) have been overwhelming.

Take, for instance, this Guardian article on “the psychology of looters”, one of the most popular news pieces in the wake of the violence. In it, Kay Nooney–a forensic psychologist who specializes in prison operations, not crowd action–is quoted as claiming that the constituency of these riots is similar to jail riots, where “there is no higher purpose, you just have a high volume of people with a history of impulsive behaviour, having a giant adventure.” This echoes countless other ‘psychological’ accounts of the riot, which explain by means of pathologizing the riot participants.

This, according to Reicher, is a widely discredited notion. And, though it is still early, much of the initial evidence suggests the rioters to be more ordinary than expected.

“It’s always been an instant response to riots to say that they are the marginal in society, they are people who are already violent in society,” said Reicher. “Those studies that have been done – and the biggest study was the Kerner Commission after the American riots of the 60s – which showed that the average ghetto rioter was not marginal. The average ghetto rioter was on the whole more educated than the norm, at least in the communities that participated.”

Or take this BBC article. In it, psychologist James Thompson refers uncritically to the bystander effect, which has recently been questioned and complicated. Most troublingly, however, are the comments of psychologist Jason Nier, who explains riotous behaviour by using the ‘deindividuation’ theory of crowd behaviour. This theory holds that anonymity in the group leads to a lack of restraint, and has most popularly been used to explain the Stanford Prison Experiment​. But according to John Drury, Stephen Reicher and the entire discipline of crowd psychology, the theory has been discredited over decades of research. This, however, didn’t stop the theory from being featured prominently on many news outlets.


“Science, at some level, can move fast but permeate slowly,” said Reicher. “For instance, the notion of deindividuation.”

“It’s perfectly true that you will still see deindividuation in the textbooks. But there is evidence from the last 20 or 30 years that the idea does not stack up. In groups, when people become anonymous, what they do is they shift from individual to social identity and then act on the basis of collective norms, values, standards.”

“We have also had epidemiologists talking about crowds and taking literally the metaphor of contagion. So there is a real danger of people straying into areas they know nothing about and talking nonsense as a result.”

And the list of pseudoscientific explanations of the London riots goes on. There are epidemiologists taking literally the metaphor of contagion, or sociologists spreading the pseudoscientific notion that crowds are ‘irrational’. The only common denominator? None of the researchers interviewed are working on crowd psychology, yet all are quoted as using discredited psychological theories.

The miscommunication of science is not new. What seems novel, however, is that this miscommunication has involved many psychologists.

“Academics are sometimes lazy themselves,” said Reicher. “Especially in the current ‘impact’ climate, academics want that visibility … they want to be the expert so they can claim their funding. So we’re not entirely innocent victims, we’re part and parcel of this system.”

But it speaks larger volumes about how behavioural science is treated by the media. On the whole, scientists–who rarely get to engage the public with their work–cannot be faulted for seizing opportunities to conjecture about their discipline, particularly when their discipline is suddenly a focal point for current events.

“Once the media know you, they’ll phone you about anything,” said Reicher. “It’s actually quite hard, for all sorts of reasons, to say no.

“When you have a charming journalist who invites you to go beyond the boundaries, it does happen. And that’s quite flattering. Especially at an international level–if someone from another country phones you up there is that sense that, ‘oh, this makes me an international expert’.”

This may be the particular burden of the social sciences. For example, it would be rare for a stem cell biologist to feature prominently in a story about animal behaviour. Yet the journalistic bias towards the social sciences seems to be that, because they are by definition ‘social’, they are more open to interdisciplinary expertise and, as such, their practitioners should be able to comment on a host of unrelated subjects.

Hence, the coverage of the London riots. Proximal and distal explanations have been conflated, old textbooks used, and there seems to be confusion over what constitutes an explanation versus a mere description. The rigour that is normally a hallmark of good science journalism falls short.

“The Greeks were quite right–tragedy is often a matter of hubris,” said Reicher. “It’s when you overextend what you’re trying to explain that you come undone.”

The London riots, it seems, have been tragic in every sense of the word.

Pat Buchanan On The Riots

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=45460




"You've damaged your own race," said Mayor Michael Nutter to the black youths of Philadelphia whose flash mobs have been beating and robbing shoppers in the fashionable district of downtown.

"Take those God-darn hoodies down," the mayor went on in his blistering lecture. "Pull your pants up and buy a belt, 'cause no one wants to see your underwear or the crack of your butt."

And the mayor had some advice for teenagers looking for work.

"You walk into somebody's office with your hair uncombed and a pick in the back and your shoes untied and your pants half down, tattoos up and down your arms and on your neck, and you wonder why somebody won't hire you?"

"They don't hire you 'cause you look like you're crazy."

Nutter is African-American and the first leader to speak out about the racial character of the flash mobs attacking people in one American city after another. And where are our other leaders?

At the Iowa State Fair last August, black thugs beat a white man so savagely he was hospitalized. Police only began to look into the possibility of a racial attack and hate crime after fair-goers said the thugs were calling it "Beat Whitey Night."

After Memorial Day, Chicago cops had to close a beach when a flash mob formed, attacked people and knocked cyclists off bikes.

In Miami Beach, there were beatings and shootings that same weekend. In D.C., flash mobs of black youths have turned up a half-dozen times in stores to loot clothes and merchandise and flee.

The media almost never identify the race of the thugs. Their reticence would disappear were a white mob in some Southern city to be caught beating up on black shoppers at a mall.

But the flash mob scourge hitting U.S. cities has been eclipsed by the pillaging and burning of London and other British cities in the worst violence visited on that nation and its capital since Goering's Luftwaffe executed the "Blitz."

Thousands of hoodlums, thugs and criminals have firebombed buildings, looted stores and stripped, beaten and robbed people for no reason other than that they were white.

Overwhelmed cops virtually surrendered the city for three days. By the fourth night, the rampage had taken on a multiethnic caste as Asians and white trash appeared to join in the festival of criminality.

Asian and black store owners, too, are victims. In Birmingham, three Pakistani men defending their neighborhood were run over and killed by a truck reportedly driven by a black rioter.

In a country-and-gospel tune recalled often in the '60s, the one that gave James Baldwin the title of his polemic, this couplet appears:

God gave Noah the rainbow sign,
No more water, the fire next time.

A half-century after the long hot summers of the 1960s and two decades after the worst riot in U.S. history since the New York draft riots of 1863 -- the Los Angeles riot of 1992, in which blacks and Hispanics attacked Koreans and whites -- the "next time" may have arrived.

In Europe, the harbinger of the new century came a half-decade ago when North African youths in the Paris banlieues went on a days-long rampage of firebombing cars and attacking police and firemen, many of whom drove off and let the fires burn out.

This week, it was London's turn. And when the fires burn out, we shall hear anew the old liberal litany about poverty, despair, inequality and unemployment, the excuses that long ago ceased to persuade.

For poverty existed in far greater measure in the Depression. Yet our parents and grandparents did not form mobs to burn, beat and loot.

The West is in decline because the character of its people is in decline. In Europe, Christianity is dead. The moral code it gave men to live righteously is regarded with mockery. The London riots were the work of moral barbarians with no loyalty to the people in whose midst they live and no love for the society to which they give nothing, only take.

In America, millions of fatherless young seek out in gangs the familial ties they never knew. Those gangs are now almost always formed on the basis of ethnicity or race.

What were the British thinking when they threw open their doors to mass immigration from the Third World?

Over centuries, they had failed to assimilate a few million Irish, who were European Christians. So, having failed to assimilate the Irish, they decided to invite in millions of Hindus and Muslims from South Asia, Arabs from the Middle East, Africans from the sub-Sahara, black folks from the Caribbean.

But with no common faith or culture to hold the nation together, Britain is coming apart. Multiculturalism has "utterly failed," said Germany's Angela Merkel, only to be echoed by Nicolas Sarkozy and David Cameron.

Is multiculturalism a success here? Or does the sudden eruption of flash mobs suggest that the curtain has begun to be pulled back on diversity's dark side here in America?

Griffin and the Nationalist Idiot Squad.

One of the problems with Nationalists is their selective memory.

They forget what they dont want to remember.

For instance - every activist British Nationalist who has ever been on a nationalist demonstration, a march or a protest will know that when we do we are opposed by groups of Far left UAF, SWP, AFA thugs who are usually 99.9 % WHITE.

They are violent thugs with knives, hammers and weapons who have killed nationalists in the past and seriously wounded many other nationalists.

We have been petrol bombed and even had bombs planted by the Far Left eg Red Action and the Harrods Bombing. They were all WHITE.

The IRA WERE WHITE.

The same thing happens during the student riots that happen every few months - the rioters are always 99.9 % WHITE.

The rioter Charlie Gilmour who attacked the Cenotaph and prince charles car during the student riots wasnt black - he was WHITE.

More than that, he was the son of a rich poet and the step son of David Gilmour of Pink Floyd who has a fortuen of 400 millions pounds from his record sales over the years.

The riots in London and aross the country werent black riots, they were multi-racial and multi-cultural riots.

Look a this footage here ;


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EK-Ni1t9mwI


The scum that rifles through the back pockets of this mugging victim during the riots is a WHITE scumbag.

The riots all over Britain were the epitome of multi-racialism - they were formed from feral youth of all races who have become ammoral predators on our society.

Britain at the moment is also experiencing a crime wave from Eastern Europeans - and they are all WHITE.

The people filmed in all the rioting footage are not just black - they are white, asian and even orthodox Jews as shown on this video here ;


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9OMD_xeKV34



The BNP is peddling a load of bollocks about these being solely 'black' riots.

They arent.

By saying they are black riots griffin is ensuring that Nationalists, and the Nationalist discourse, are discredited even before the post mortem of the riots has begun.

He is doing the liberals work for them.

Not only is he talking crap, he is talking crap that a five year old could tear apart.

Thats not leadership, thats ineptitude of the highest order.

What we need is nationalists to tell the truth, not peddle racist bullshit that only the liberals will benefit from.

The liberals want the riots to be peddled by ignorant morons as race riots, as then they can tear the arguments apart , destroy and de-rail the debate and ensure they dominate the debate and retain their integrity so as even more pernicious liberalism will be imposed as a result.

It is time for nationalists to wake up and stop seeing what they want to see and face facts.

We need to tell the truth, so that when the debate starts we can win it and ensure the liberals are discredited and removed from power over our people, society and country - not be left looking like thick twats because we have been told and believed bullshit peddled by the moron Nick Griffin.

These riots are the products of white liberals imposing political correctness on our society.


THEY ARE THE INEVITABLE RESULT OF MASS IMMIGRATION, MULTI-CULTURAL GEHTTOISATION OF OUR COMMUNITIES AND POLITICALLY CORRECT POLICING.


The people who have created this problem are not black crack addicts in Tottenham or 14 year white kids in hoodies in Barking - they are rich white liberals who imposed multi-culturalism, political correctness and mass immigration on our country.

The rioters are the symptom.

The white liberals are the cause of the problem.

If we tell the truth, we can expose and finally destroy the integrity of our primary enemy - the white, multi-culturalism supporting, politically correct, mass immigration controlling white liberal elite.

If we lie, we look like fools and the liberals will win again.

Griffin is yet again doing the liberals job for them and discrediting nationalism.

Its time Nationalists stopped acting like reactionary retards and peddling lies that can be torn apart in moments.

Who is more stupid, the fool or the followers of the fool.

Nick Griffin is a lying crook.

You believe anything he says, or regard it as of any value to nationalism, then you are a bigger fool than he is.

Bring Out The Water Cannon

Why havent the police deployed water cannon and rubber bullets to drive the rioters from the streets ?

When there are riots in Northern Ireland the police routinely break out the rubber bullets and water cannon to deal with the rioters.

Yet when there are riots elsewhere in the United Kingdom, the police and government refuse to use the same tools to deal with rioters on our streets.
Why ? Is it because the rioters in Northern Ireland are white, whilst the rioters in London and Birmingham are mainly black ?

Is there a racist liberal double standard that says that riots by whites must be met with maximum force, whilst riots by mainly blacks must be met with politically correct policing ?

This double standard in policing must stop.

We in the British Freedom Party demand that riots on the mainland be met with the same
policing techniques and vigour as riots in Northern Ireland.

The liberal ideology has eroded the principle of meritocracy in our society and put us all into racial boxes and allocated some people extra rights solely on the basis of their racial origins.

We are all British citizens, and we demand that all criminals simply be treated as criminals regardedless of their race or religion.

Break out the rubber bullets and the water cannons and restore order on our streets. There are dozens of black and white families today and dozens of looted black and white businesses looted and ruined.

Black and white police officers are being injured as we do nothing but mouth the same failed liberal platitudes as a response to the riots.

To allow the liberals to continue their racism and their racist allocation or rights and duties in our society and communities is to ensure the social conditions that created the riots continue to grow and escalate out of control.