Standard Poolparties in the Age of Social Media

The Conservative Treehouse has put out an article on the McKinney pool incident, challenging the entrenched social media narrative about police brutality and white-on-black racial violence.

As it turns out, the community pool was more or less swamped by a flash mob and the police were called in to protect property and restore order, which is exactly what they did. As reported:

In addition to friends of Tatiana Rhodes, more than 100 additional people, mostly teens, showed up as a result of the advertising promoted by Tatiana on social media.   They were dropped off by the car-load as the afternoon party began.

Apparently Tatiana and her mother Lashana were unable to control the growing crowd – who came to their event at the park looking for and expecting a “pool party”.

That’s when things got out of control as the 100+ teens (and young adults) turned into a mob of partygoers and began jumping the fence to the gated pool area.  Residents within the neighborhood  found themselves confronting a mob of teens growing ever increasingly hostile and agitated.

The narrative doesn’t care about laws or facts. Trespassing doesn’t matter. Physical and verbal fighting doesn’t matter. Crowd control doesn’t matter. The police using force to restrain persons who refuse to comply is evil and doubleplus evil if the cop is white and the suspect is black. The media has a story to sell about white people being bad and black people being innocent.

This will surely be yet another issue which splits whites (into POC-cheerleading leftists and the racially self-conscious) and unites blacks against their perceived common enemy. Permanent victim status and race-baiting are enshrined ideologically for the black population and their leftist handlers. The civil rights industrial complex is already getting protests up and running.

Events like Ferguson, Baltimore, and now McKinney highlight that racial egalitarianism will never work. Imposing white societal standards on black populations—such as rule of law, policing and the justice system—will be met with cries of racism and demands of further rent-seeking. When white and black communities clash, it’s always going to be a standard poolparty.

Maybe we’d all be happier with separate countries. We can’t oppress them if they don’t live here.

This entry was posted in America, Culture and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Standard Poolparties in the Age of Social Media

  1. Imnot George says:

    Uh, dude, blacks have been pretty much permanent victims in the good old U.S.A. for every bit of 400 years. Calls to send them back to Africa (ever heard of Liberia) have been coming out for 150 years. I wonder how you would do if you were enslaved all your life, not allowed to learn to read and write and then just turned free into a hostile South with just the shirt on you back and nothing more. Most blacks had to sharecrop on the same plantation they had been slaves upon just to keep from starving. It isn’t really fair to even say “impose white societal standards” on a community (when we don’t and only impose those that suit us) when it is only the punitive laws and not the social or economic standards being extended. How about the crack vs. cocaine laws? Those were one standard for the same drug, different deliver system, that blacks overwhelmingly used (because of poverty), and 100X less punishment for powder cocaine. How is that for “equal standards”? There are a hundred things like that you are probably completely unaware of. There has never been a let up of institutional or implicit racism even though it has certainly gotten better since 1865. Every time one sort of oppression was ended (without any reparations for the wrongs I might add – it was just, hey, your free now, go about your business, sorry) a new way to oppress by other means was put in place. Do we expect blacks to just say, “hey, cool, I’m equal now, don’t worry about the last 400 years” when we say, “hey, we got rid of all the unequal treatment in the 80’s and 90s so sorry about 380 years of exploitation, let’s just call it even and start out square”? Really? As a community, they haven’t ever had a chance, much less a leg up for all the exploitation (and it continues in the form of paycheck and title lending in their communities, no banking or groceries in many of them, heavy policing, incarceration often starting in grade school, etc… etc… etc…).

    You may have heard of 40 acres and a mule. It was radical and unprecedented, but it was only 400,000 acres so only 10,000 freed slaves of the 4 Million received any land or a mule (from the Army). Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s successor and a sympathizer with the South, overturned the Order in the fall of 1865, and, as Barton Myers sadly concludes, “returned the land along the South Carolina, Georgia and Florida coasts to the planters who had originally owned it” — to the very people who had declared war on the United States of America. So no, there was never even any “40 acres and a mule”.

    After they were freed from slavery with just the shirts on their backs (there were only and with any culture or tradition brought from Africa destroyed (they were not allowed to marry, read, write or have families much less culture or tradition as slaves) they suffered through 100 years of Jim Crow where anything they owned or made could pretty much be stolen from them and they were terrorized and lynched by the KKK and LEOs.

    They were denied most of the support from the New Deal and after they fought for their country in WWII, most of the G.I. Bill did not apply to them. Despite this and the redlining of the banks and real-estate communities they flocked to the north for jobs and a chance at a life away from the Jim Crow south. We passed a couple of laws in the 1960s (after 350 years of terrible treatment and pillage) that ended overt segregation, discrimination in housing, voting and civil rights, but many communities continued to work to find ways around these laws for decades to come.

    Then, just when it looked like things might finally be turning around for many black inner-city communities, de-industrialization started and many lost their jobs and could not afford to move to where there might be jobs. Then came “Get Tough on Crime” and the “War on Drugs” and we incarcerated 2.3 Million people, almost 800,000 of them black in absurd proportion to their representation in the greater population.

    Were there/are there blacks who overcame that? Yes, there will always be exceptions to the rule. There were even black slave owners in the South and educated women writers in 13th Century Europe, but that doesn’t prove women weren’t oppressed or blacks weren’t slaves. Basically, the black population was never given even half a chance to overcome the cruelties, crimes and setbacks imposed upon them by the white majority. It is actually remarkable how well black communities have done in the last 150 years considering the odds against them.


    • Wonderful. Most of your history is correct. I am aware of the plight of black communities as well and the history of the United States as an unequal and unfair country as far as racial egalitarianism is concerned. And that Reconstruction flopped. (Due to Southern resistance and Northern apathy I might add). And that Jim Crow legislation was oppressive towards blacks and that discrimination has occurred and continues to occur North and South. And so forth.

      I just think blacks and whites would be better off with their own nation states. That was the pricinple of European decolonization of Africa. They don’t like being ruled by whites and whites ruling them is morally difficult. The oppression of blacks in the United States is perhaps analogous if you buy into the leftist narrative. And from another angle, white populations and black populations are markedly different in culture, identity, behavior, achievement, political views, crime rates, you name it. We’ve been trying to bring them up to speed for decades and it doesn’t work. And in a lot of ways, it may well be unfair and impossible because of genetic, environmental and historical reasons. There are multiple nations in our little empire and they don’t get along. That much is obvious. They’ve migrated internally before and it might be better for everyone if they did so again. There was a time when almost all blacks lived in the South while now it is about half. And when whites move away from blacks it is criticized as white flight but when they move near them it is condemned as gentrification. The 400 year old chip on African America’s shoulder will never go away, and neither will racism so long as distinct groupings exist. If it is no longer possible to share this country without civil conflict we ought to split it somehow. That’s my point; yours seems to be a history lecture.


  2. Imnot George says:

    OK, where to begin since your thinking is so absurd in its foundations. Even if you take your premise to have a shred of validity, it isn’t that “They don’t like being ruled by whites”, it is that “they” don’t like being unfairly ruled by whites or anybody. Nobody does. Now whites, in particular, white men and more specifically, old white men, mostly don’t like being “ruled” (or even led or managed) by blacks or for that matter women, latinos, asians, anybody younger than they are and all sorts of other folks. You don’t have to even consider any “leftist” narratives, you just have to look at the facts. They weren’t allowed to have a culture for 200+ years (or even marry, have a family, accrue wealth, do anything they wanted or read) and when they were free to start to develop a culture, they were lynched, terrorized and any wealth or security they could develop or save was often just taken from them with no recourse. What does it say about “white culture” that on the surface reveres the “rule of law” but for 300 years refused to apply it to blacks, women or most other minorities of any sort?

    Your statement that “We’ve been trying to bring them up to speed for decades and it doesn’t work” is absurd on its face. After 350 years of keeping them down and developing all our institutions and views to reinforce that, you think that because we passed three or four laws 50 years ago (that have been fought against and ignored wherever possible) that the black community has had any sort of chance to achieve what 350+ years of white affirmative action have achieved for the white middle class? You have to be completely delusional to think that. It isn’t “impossible because of genetic, environmental and historical reasons” it is impossible because of societal, institutional and historical reasons (the worst being completely unwilling to acknowledge the history or examine the issue of reparations). There are no genetic or environmental reasons because you can’t take a black person’s genes, organs or brain and upon examination without external correlation determine whether that person is black, white, asian or native american (latinos being a mix of native Americans and Europeans). Race is a fiction, a social construct that has no basis in anything other than where on the earth a member of homo sapiens sapiens ancestors was born. In fact, humans of African descent are more pure homo sapiens sapiens than Europeans because Europeans mixed with Neaderthals and have 3% to 5% Neaderthal DNA while pure Africans with no European descent (a whitey or European in the woodpile if you will) have 0% Neanderthal DNA (Asians have about 2% to 3% and so are “purer” than Europeans as well if you like that sort of definition and language) are 0%.

    That brings up another chimera in your contention that “blacks and whites would be better off with their own nation states”. What defines “blacks and whites” now? One drop of black blood? Many people who are 100% “white” on the surface including several white supremacists have black ancestors verified by DNA (traced to outside info linked to people from certain regions who have black skin – otherwise there is no way to tell the melanin level of their skin). Almost all African Americans in the USA have European or white DNA. Is the level half and half? 51%? Do we do it by skin color or features or looks or parents or what? It is absurd to even think that way and even if we could define completely who is “white” and who is “black” where would anybody give up their country so “blacks” could have it? Would it be Alabama? Maybe Texas? Do we send them all back to Africa? The whole idea is so absurd it ranks up there with believing dragons, elves, Big Foot or the Loch Ness monster are alive and doing well in this world.

    The only point you make that has even a semblance of connection with reality is that “when whites move away from blacks it is criticized as white flight, but when they move near them it is condemned as gentrification”. Ironically, this is the trend that might truly lead to a fully integrated society (that and all the mixed “race” marriages that result in children) because now that blacks and some other minorities are being gentrified out of their neighborhoods, they are often moving to the suburbs, integrating those neighborhoods and schools, getting better educations and housing as well as getting good jobs and truly integrating into our society in a way that seems wholly unintended.

    For at least 300 of 350+ years of overt racism and segregation there really haven’t been “distinct groupings” and that is especially true today and it isn’t a “chip” on anyone’s shoulder if there are real and solid injustices and grievances. I mean, did you truly say that blacks had a “chip on their shoulders” while they were slaves (the first 200 years of the 400 you referenced)? Really? Oh, and then, was it a “chip on their shoulders” when they were freed with only the shirt on their backs and 200 years of their labor stolen with no recompense, not to mention that almost 4000 were lynched, terrorized and pillaged during Jim Crow? Really? If that had happened to your family and ancestors would it be a “chip on your shoulder”? I mean the Irish have plenty of grievances against the British, but it isn’t characterized as a chip on their shoulder now it it? History has made the society, culture, attitudes and institutions we have today and they are unambiguously racist in many many ways. A few decades of affirmative action for blacks, women and other minorities cannot easily (and hasn’t) erased the effects of 400 years of old white man affirmative action. I openly acknowledge and embrace my old white man privilege, but with the caveat that I would like to extend it to everyone.

    This country has always had civil conflict and probably always will. We can, have and will continue to share it with all sorts of people from all over the world and that indeed is our strength and vitality rather than an impediment. We just need to live up to our Founders words of “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal” even if the Founders did not wholly grasp their entire import. If and when we do this, it will make us a better and stronger people and nation. We are struggling to get there now and must not abandon that expanded and noble vision.


    • The founding fathers you speak of are in the process of being thrown out as we transition to a post-white America. You cannot have it both ways. It is quite obvious who your sympathies lie with, and I stand by my assertion that whites and blacks would each be better off with their own states, something both black and white nationalists agree upon.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s