Quote of the day

From Zero Hedge:

Interpol has just issued an international arrest warrant for Julian Assange. The offense listed: SEX CRIMES. . . . Unclear if Ben Bernanke will follow suit in the same Sex Crime category for repeated involuntary fornication with the world’s middle class.

How to make reactionaries

Make people live near poor blacks – see the comments to this post about some recent crimes in my neighborhood (for reference, Potomac Gardens is Section 8 housing). I swear that I did not write any of the comments.

Update: be sure to watch the video from Red’s comment http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJLDjSMqXLg&feature=player_embedded

Advertisement

Progress

From Dalrymple:

But what was really heartening was that, for the first time in the recent history of French rioting, la racaille (the scum), to use the president of the Republic’s judicious term, was racially very mixed, at least if the photographs published in the newspapers were anything to go by (which, of course, they might not be). Furthermore, again for the first time, members of the female gender participated fully and—according to reports—just as violently as the males.

There’s progress for you, and on two fronts—race and gender—simultaneously!

Suck it, plebes

"Foseti," I hear my commenters saying, "doesn’t a freeze on federal employees’ pay mean that you are wrong about how good it is to be a federal employee."

By now, dear reader, you should be aware that you can’t really freeze federal pay in any meaningful way. If you read the story carefully, you’ll see this:

The pay freeze would not affect bonuses or step increases for federal employees.

So basically, this only freezes pay increases for inflation. Since the official measures show inflation of 0%, this pay freeze isn’t exactly going to hurt. In total, the average federal employee in 2013 might be making about 3% less than he or she otherwise would be. Big deal. Many of us will get step increases or promotions or bonuses in the meantime.

German expansion

From Dr Dalrymple:

Angela Merkel has in effect become the new ruler of Ireland, a kind of 21st-century Henry II, using clout of the financial rather than the medieval kind. . . .

Assuming a zero rate of interest and no population growth, every man, woman, child and baby in Ireland would have to pay back $250 a year for 2,000 years to clear the debt (the precise figure, by my calculation, is 1,936 years, based on one estimate of Ireland’s total external debt, but what is 64 years among friends, or creditors?). . . .

I mean no disparagement of the Germans by the latter, however. It was not something that they sought. Rather it was something thrust upon them by their own diligence, industry and constant application of intelligence to the real rather than the virtual economy; and by their willingness to get-rich-slow, which was in such marked contrast to some other nations that I could name. Ireland is a morality tale, but not just for itself.

I am fascinated by the success of the German economy.

DC’s demographics

From Audacious Epigone:

The nation’s capital has undergone the most substantial demographic transition in the country over the last decade, as blacks have left en masse (DC lost a staggering one-fifth of its black population over the three year period), replaced by SWPLs who have heeded John Derbyshire’s prudent advice that people should do their best to get government jobs.

It really is good advice.

Juxtaposition of the day

This story

with

this story

The decline and fall of the American Empire

In video

Review of “Wasting Police Time” by PC David Copperfield

The UK population has risen steadily over the last century or so, from 38 million in 1901 to around 60 million today (but it hasn’t doubled).

In the same period, the total number of police officers employed has risen from around 40,000 to close to 130,000 now (ie it has more than trebled).

What about crime? Well, the number of indictable offences known to the police in 1900 was 2.4 for every 1,000 of the population. In 1997, the figure was 89.1. I’d put my house on the fact that it’s gone up since then.

How is this possible? The answer put forth by this book, and the typical British cop who wrote it, is best illustrated by the way the average British cop now spends his or her day. According to this book, a typical day goes something like this:

Cop goes on duty.
Cop receives call from a person in a housing project complaining that he or she has received an abusive text message from another tenant in the housing project.
Cop reports to housing project to take a statement from the complaining tenant.

Cop fills out a series of forms to demonstrating that the complainer is not being treated in a racist manner.
Cop interviews the tenant who sent abusive message.
Cop fills out a series of forms to demonstrating that the abuser is not being treated in a racist manner.

Abuser says that the original complainer also sent an abusive text message.
Cop repeats the above process for this "new crime."
Cop returns to station to complete the mound of paperwork required to ensure that no one has been treated in a racist manner.

Cop’s shift ends.

The cop has spent an entire shift dealing with two "crimes" that have both been "solved." The result is that a lot of paperwork has been completed. The important thing is that no one has been treated in a racist manner.

The reality that emerges from the pages of the book is that modern police are basically social workers for the underclass. If you want to know why crime is up, it’s because police aren’t on the streets anymore. Instead, they’re filling out paperwork or looking for a kid whose mother is too lazy to turn off the TV and be a parent (and why should she miss her stories, if she doesn’t know where her kid is, she can just call the police).

The police also spend an inordinate amount of time documenting the fact that they’re not racist. After all, increases in the level of crime won’t get any of them fired, but an accusation or two of racism that they can’t refute could result in someone losing their pension. This war on racism has other consequences. For example, officers now have almost no discretion in determining whether something is a crime, whether to arrest someone, whether to interview someone, etc. The resulting absurdities make for a great book, which is often funny if you ignore how sad it is.

If you spend some time thinking about how bad policing has become, your perspective on other issues will change. For example, is the failure of the war on drugs really due to the inevitability of drug use or is it merely representative of the failure of the modern policing strategy?

In short, this was good police work. Policing has unfortunately changed since Peel’s day – and the results have been disastrous.

Non-liberals and urbanism

It’s no secret that conservatives and libertarians don’t have very warm feelings towards urbanism.

I offer two explanations for this phenomenon:

1) urbanism is generally just a guise to enact liberal policies. When was the last time an "urbanist" suggested lowering tax rates in the city to make city-living less expensive (my taxes in DC, for example, are almost twice what they’d be if I lived in Virginia, I make up for some of this because I only need one car in DC, but I don’t make up for all of it. Plus, Virginia’s services are much better and the schools in Virginia are usable – I’m paying more for less)?

2) the only reason we need "urbanism" these days is because progressive policies in previous decades destroyed most American cities. Shouldn’t those of us who are not progressives fear a new form of urbanism after the recent results of previous forms of urbanism?