The Self-Inflicted Victimization of Blacks

The following is an excerpt rom my eBook titled, “Blacks Are Victims: Because They’re Told They Are;” published and released in 2015.

Webster’s Dictionary offers two definitions for the word victim: one that is subjected to oppression, hardship or mistreatment and one that is tricked or duped. Insert the word “easily” in the latter and you have the definition of another word found elsewhere in Webster’s, which is equally fitting in meaning. That word is “sucker.”

The disquieting fact is that both definitions are applicable to blacks today. One is more often than not a form of self-inflicted victimization; the other is inflicted victimization.

The self-inflicted involves – but is certainly not limited to – black-on-black crime, which the black illuminati is now trying to convince us doesn’t exist. Statistics to the contrary are not sufficient to dissuade them of their error. Self-inflicted victimology includes but is not limited to black women having children before they are married and before they can afford to raise them. It also includes black females giving themselves up like change at a toll booth to men who have no intention of being fathers.

Not all areas that are predominantly black are housing projects – some are simply lower- income neighborhoods. Yet, perhaps not so shockingly, the high percentage of crime in these districts is black on black. One could safely say that constitutes hardship and mistreatment. But it isn’t at the hands of whites or the police. It is at the hands of malevolent anti-social predators. Can you say who’s the victim?

It is only common sense that neighborhoods such as these have low property values, necessitate higher insurance rates for all and have fewer opportunities for employment and/or neighborhood activities that many of us take for granted.

Not surprisingly, there is also a deep resentment toward the police. Why? Because law and disorder are the oil and vinegar of our society. The law must clamp down on disorder, i.e., crime and the disorderly, i.e., criminals resent any restrictions being placed on their behavior. One would think any police presence would be appreciated (and it should be noted that not all resent police presence), but much too often police are resented simply for doing their jobs.

Common logic would dictate that since Chicago is the front yard of both Obama and Jesse Jackson, and since they are the self-professed champions of the oppressed – those suffering from hardship and those being mistreated – both would be in the most violent Chicago neighborhoods assisting police by leading neighborhood cleanups, drug patrols and advocating working closely with police to curb the plague of violence.

You would think that even though Spike Lee lives in one of the most affluent areas of New York City he could find time to go into the blighted high-crime areas and pitch in lending his time, money, and support to help the police and revitalize these New York neighborhoods. When Al Sharpton isn’t working as a snitch for the FBI, it would be nice to see him combatting drugs, guns, gangs, violence, and abortion in the disaffected predominantly black neighborhoods of New York. But people like Sharpton, Lee, Obama, et al would rather play the race-victim cards than actually admit that America has been pretty damn good to them. And accordingly, America will afford the same to all those who are willing to apply themselves.

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., once foolishly said: “Minorities are humiliated and angered by the indignity of being treated all too often as presumptive criminals.” He was partially right. The so-called “minorities” who are supposedly being humiliated and
angered by the indignity of being treated too often as presumptive criminals. It is because the majority of the time it happens, the presumptions of criminality are correct.
If blacks do not want the indignity of being viewed as criminals, then my suggestion would be to stop acting like criminals. You cannot be the disproportionate perpetrators of crime and then be upset when the police and law-abiding citizens question your legitimacy.

The public has quickly forgotten that the Street Crimes Unit officers’ aggressive approach to tackling the drug problem, rapists and felony assaults were responsible for reducing crime over a 5-year period in New York.

I will never forget that on March 10, 2003, when Detectives Rodney Andrews and James Nemorin were murdered execution style in cold blood, while trying to rid the neighborhoods of machine-gun dealing teen-agers, none save their fellow detectives, families and fellow brothers/sisters in police work grieved or attended their funerals. There were no protests. Obama wasn’t there, Sharpton and Jackson didn’t lead marches. There were no New Black Panther Party members there. It was just two murdered detectives who happened to be black.

So, in the end, the work of many brave individuals is thrown back in their faces. This is the pall that hangs over the inner-city neighborhoods. Black-on-black crime goes unchallenged by the so-called black leaders and the liberal elites, as the predators victimize those who are unable to retreat to safer environs.

I submit this lingering infestation of malignancy threatens generation after generation and prohibits any hope of prosperity. White guilt and taxpayer dollars are not the cure for those who accuse the white man but fail to take personal responsibility.

There are varying forms of inflicted victimization, but ultimately they all emanate from three primary arenas. They are skin color based affirmative-action, the Democrat Party, i.e., elite neo- Leninist liberal racists and the so-called black leadership.

The inflicted victimization of affirmative action is that it engenders an attitude of expectation as opposed to an attitude of incentive. Race-based affirmative action carries with it the unspoken understanding that “I’m not good enough so I deserve help.” The problem with that unspoken mindset is that it also leads to Pygmalion, i.e., self-fulfilling prophecy. When the person doesn’t perform up to the levels of the other students, the message then becomes that the tests and textbooks are culturally biased. When the students’ grades suffer or they drop out, it is because there aren’t enough black professors.

If the person cannot perform the job for which they were hired it becomes “The boss doesn’t like me because I’m black.” Victim, victim, victim.

When a neighborhood is placed at risk because the testing requirements are lowered in some instances to the equivalent of an “F” grade just to achieve the color balance the Obama Justice Department demands, who cares if people die from those unable to perform their jobs? The neighborhood is the true victim but that doesn’t matter as long as you have the right color balance. Victim, victim, victim. But those victims don’t get to blame their victimization on the truth.

A good example of meritocracy would be athletics. The bar is never lowered for the athlete – rather it is continuously being raised. And yet each season athletes are able to climb over it. If you want the best and most qualified raise the standards; if you want the unqualified dregs, lower the standards so you harm the individuals and those who rely upon their expertise.

You don’t make a professional roster just to achieve a diverse mix of players. The teams are not comprised on the basis of how many blacks, Hispanics, homosexuals and women there are proportionately. They are comprised on the basis of “assemble the very best regardless of ethnicity/color” in order to have the best chance of winning (the Chicago Cubs and Cleveland Browns notwithstanding). There are also alternative leagues in which to hone one’s skills. They may not offer the same money or prestige, but you are still able to play.

Everyone benefits from increased standards. But you will never get liberal race-mongers to admit that.

My business was owned and operated by a black person – me. Yet 99 percent of my client base was white. My clients did not seek me out because I was black – nor did they continue our association because I was black. They came and they stayed because they trusted my ability.

Another thing affirmative action does is paint all with the same brush stroke. If you are a student on an Ivy League campus, the thought is (verbalized or not) you are there because of affirmative action. I recently had a man of color attack me because he felt I was minimizing what he had accomplished by hard work and good decision making by comparing his effort to skin-color based affirmative-actionites. But he refused to understand the very thing he was arguing with me about is the very mindset that color-based affirmative action engenders.

Affirmative action allows for failure or lack of success to be viewed as “it’s because I am [whatever].” Failure or lack of success is rarely if ever put in the context of “maybe I wasn’t cut out to be an engineer or a lawyer” or “maybe I should attend a junior college.”

The elite neo-Leninist social-liberal racist is another primary source of inflicted victimization. Consider: On April 26, 2003, Jeff Kunerth staff writer for “The Orlando Sentinel,” wrote an article “Income Rises, Poverty Falls for Black Families In ’90s.” Kunerth’s article began: “Despite the economic downturns, black families nationwide are better off than they were in the mid-1990s, according to figures released Friday by the U.S. Census Bureau.”

Kunerth used Census Bureau data to point out strident gains for blacks in America. George Will and John Logan, then director of the Lewis Mumford Center at the University of Albany, N.Y, and myself, all made the same point.

But Sam Dillon of the liberal New York Times, in an April 30, 2003 article wrote: “Report Finds Number of Black Children in Deep Poverty Rising”, he quoted a study by the ultra-liberal Children’s Defense Fund, a child welfare advocacy group. The Times article not surprisingly was approximately 700 words of elite neo-Leninist social-liberal distortion designed to keep blacks bent over and bitter, juxtaposed to upright and optimistic. Genaro C. Armas of the Associated Press (April 30, 2003) wrote “Group: More Black Kids in Extreme Poverty” – yet another “po-po black folks story.”

As for the Democrat Party itself, the first chapter of their manual on how to keep black votes on the plantation is, “Tell them they’re victims of slavery, oppression, white Republican bigotry and make them think they cannot succeed without our blessings vis- a`-vis handouts,” with the introduction being: “This really works.”

Per inflicted victimization by the so-called black leaders, I defy anyone to tangibly prove to me how they have been improved by the actions of the Congressional Black Caucus, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, the (modern day) NAACP, Julian Bond, Carol Moseley- Braun or Maxine Waters, or by Pharaoh himself – Barack Obama. The virulent vitriol of “it’s because you are black,” poor, descendants of slaves, “it’s the white man’s fault,” and “you deserve reparations” do not count – nor do $2,000 suits, private jets, stretch limousines, opulent office suites or extravagant dinners in restaurants many people would not be able to wash dishes in.

Self-inflicted victimization is what blacks do to one another, e.g., black-on-black crime and extortion. Inflicted victimization, to paraphrase Booker T. Washington, is the insidious external messages from “that class of people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs and hardships of the Negro race before the public; and who do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, less they themselves lose their jobs” and their votes.