XPost: msnbc.breakingnews, alt.news-media
One pattern that has emerged over the past four presidential elections — ever since Barack Obama — is that the national conversation, as directed by the media, shifts back to race right around the time that the primaries are wrapping up.
Of course, the primaries are technically still happening on the GOP side if
you count Nikki Haley as a real presidential candidate. When you realize that she is, at this point, simply running to be the next overpaid CNN
contributor, you understand the primaries ended weeks ago, which means it is now time for the race cycle to begin anew.
Right on cue, MSNBC released a new special this month called “Black Men In America: The Road to 2024.” Now, based on the title, based on the timing,
based on the fact that it’s MSNBC, you might assume that the show
automatically is going to consist of a bunch of mindless race-baiting. You might make that presumption without seeing a single second of it. You might write it off, without giving it a chance, under the assumption that it’s
going to be nothing but idiotic, dim-witted racial grievance mongering. You might assume all of that. And you would of course be entirely correct.
Yet, as you’ll see in the clip I’m about to show you, it still manages to
limbo its way under the incredibly low bar that you have set for it in your mind. Watch:
https://youtu.be/Rpft5IEThD4
As you could see, that’s Ben Crump pretending to shoot pool with Al Sharpton. In other words, it’s neo-Al Sharpton with old Al Sharpton. It’s broadband Al Sharpton with Dial-Up Al Sharpton. Ben Crump is what happens if you clone Al Sharpton but you remove his hair and his three brain cells. Because that’s
the thing you notice about Crump. He is, objectively speaking — and I say
this in a medical sense, and not as an insult — a moron. In fact, his very existence single-handedly, and ironically, disproves systemic racism. There
is simply no way that a black guy this aggressively mediocre, this
consistently unimpressive, this simple-minded and ridiculous, could ever achieve the success he has achieved in a country that was systemically racist against black guys.
Sure, even in a country with systemic racism you could still end up with brilliant and innovative people who manage to succeed in spite of it. The existence of successful black people doesn’t in and of itself disprove
systemic racism. A million other things disprove it, but not that. But Ben Crump, specifically? This guy? You want to tell me this guy rose to the top despite having the entire system arrayed against him?
No, the truth is obviously quite the opposite. The system favors guys like Crump, which is the only reason anyone knows his name. By all rights the pinnacle of this dude’s career should be a position no higher than shift manager at Wendy’s — with no disrespect intended to shift managers at
Wendy’s. The point is that his wealth and success is entirely a product of a system designed to move mediocre half-wits like himself to the front.
As if to prove my point, what does he say? What’s the great insight he offers the world? Well, he says that we can get rid of all the crime in America overnight by changing the definition of crime. He’s right, of course. “Crime” is a legal designation. If you stop applying that legal designation to
things, then it will not be applied to thing, and therefore you have gotten
rid of the designation. Stop calling murder, robbery, and rape “crimes,” and
— just like that, presto chango — the crimes of murder, robbery, and rape
have disappeared. This is evidently what Crump, a guy who somehow earned a
law degree, wants to see happen.
Of course, the problem is that by getting rid of the crimes of murder,
robbery, and rape, you have not gotten rid of the actions of murder, robbery and rape. People are still being murdered, robbed, and raped — at what seems
to be an even higher rate now — but it doesn’t count in the books. The assailants aren’t being brought to justice. The victims have nowhere to turn for redress. All the bad things are still happening, but the law is covering its eyes and plugging its ears and pretending that it’s not. That’s what happens when you “get rid of crime,” as Crump suggests.
In fact every major city in America has adopted a strategy like this, to one degree or another. Every major city, thanks in large part to Soros-funded Marxist DAs, has decided to reduce crime by not fighting it. They’ve decided
to create fewer criminals by not calling the criminals “criminals.” As a result, most of these places are unlivable hellscapes. Which is not a problem for Crump, whose firm rakes in tens of millions of dollars a year. He’s not living in these crime-infested sewers that ambulance-chasing con artists like himself have helped to create.
Crump then goes on to claim that laws have the effect of “criminalizing black culture.” He gives the example of Eric Garner, who died while police
attempted to take him into custody for selling loose cigarettes. Now, the law against loose cigarettes isn’t as important or essential as laws against
murder and robbery, but the policy does make perfect sense. You aren’t
allowed to buy a pack of cigarettes from the convenience store and then stand outside the convenience store selling each individual cigarette to people walking by on the street. Why? Well, that’s not very fair to the convenience store, for one thing. For another, there are all kinds of additional laws governing the sale of tobacco products — laws that cannot be enforced if
people are allowed to walk around hawking individual cigarettes on the street corner.
It’s not the most important law, but it is a law, and it’s one that makes plenty of sense. The question in this case is why Eric Garner couldn’t just follow the law. Is it “black culture” to simply disregard whatever law you personally find inconvenient? That seems to be the claim Crump is making. But all of that is irrelevant anyway. Garner didn’t die because he sold loose cigarettes. Cops didn’t show up and stage a public execution as a penalty for selling loosies, as they’re called. No, they tried to arrest him, he
resisted, and in the struggle he lost his life. Why resist? What is that
going to achieve? What possible good can come from it? Even if you disagree with the law you broke. Even if you didn’t break a law at all. Even if you’re being falsely accused. Even if you’re innocent. No matter the situation, how does resisting arrest help your case at all? What good will it do you? What
is the plan? Walk me through the steps: Step 1) Resist arrest. Step 2)
Unknown. Step 3) You get to go home and have a pleasant day.
What happens in that second step? What did Eric Garner, or any of these BLM martyrs, think that second step would be? Did he think that if he declined to be arrested, the cops would just say, “Oh, you don’t want to be arrested?
You’d prefer not to be arrested this particular afternoon? Well, never mind then, good sir. Please be on your way. Our apologies.” Was that the idea?
Well, we know the answer. There was no thought process behind it. He didn’t have any ideas at all. He was acting in a totally thoughtless, self- destructive manner, and responding to a situation in a way that was
guaranteed to make the situation worse, no matter what. Is that black
culture, according to Crump?
Crump also mentions George Floyd. He says Floyd was another man arrested for participating in black culture. What was the culture in that case? Floyd was trying to pass off a forged $20 bill. Is that black culture? He was
overdosing on fentanyl. Is that black culture? I’m not asking these questions rhetorically. I would really like to hear Crump answer. I would like to know what he considers “black culture” to be. I would not personally call any of that black culture, but I will say that if it was black culture, then the culture needs to change. If your culture — as Crump seems to think — involves disregarding the law, being self-destructive, making decisions that are guaranteed to introduce more chaos and violence into your life and your community, then your culture is deeply flawed, terminally sick, and needs to change.
The law doesn’t need to accommodate your culture. Your culture needs to accommodate the fact that it exists in a civilized society with laws.
Naturally, Crump only talks about the laws against loose cigarettes and milk cartons and baggy pants — as if anyone is actually being arrested for having baggy pants. He completely ignores the obvious fact that black men are
arrested every day, in every city in America, for committing actual violent crimes. Young black men aren’t landing in prison because of their milk
cartons and ill-fitting pants. But Crump, of course, doesn’t want to acknowledge that. Because he is a liar, and he’s evil, and he doesn’t care
how many people die, or how many black men get themselves killed by making
the worst possible decisions, as long as he can personally profit off of it.
I began this by saying that Crump is stupid. And he certainly is. You can’t listen to him for more than five seconds without arriving at that conclusion. But like any other race baiter, he also knows exactly what he’s doing. He pretends to speak up for “black culture” — whatever he thinks that is — while at the same time doing everything he can to make black communities more dangerous, poorer, bleaker, more miserable.
It’s not the white man keeping black communities down. It’s men like Ben
Crump. And he deserves to be held accountable for it.
--
Let's go Brandon!
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)