I think the willingness of Hispanics to replace blacks, and the unwillingness of blacks to be replaced will become an ever more common story in the days to come.
A Black-vs-Hispanic conflict has been predicted that way for decades. It's never quite happened in the way envisioned.
It might have happened, in a more-open political environment/ But both "Hispanic" migrants and Blacks writ-large are managed by the elite Democratic Party and the Regime to which the D-party is so closely aligned. They are part of the same coalition. Beyond a few unorganized incident and rants, the matter never quite galvanizes.
Anyone who spends time in an area where both Blacks and Hispanics are in the same spaces, will with some regularity see a Black rant against a Hispanic to "go back to your country" and the like, commentary that would get a White person ruined for life. But it's all just meaningless 'diss-culture' big talk, of the kind so typical of Blacks. It never goes anywhere, because the leadership element, and the Regime managers who oversee both groups, squash it.
Yet the replacement continues. I am retired but had several crews working on my place for the past couple of years. I have seen darn few blacks on those crews. Mostly Spanish speakers with maybe 15% Caucasians.
It definitely has real-world effects: the Latinos take Black territory in an organized manner and the Blacks just generally do random crime. They are both grifting off the White-generated wealth of America but in different ways. Almost certainly the Black grift will run-dry first and then you'll see more organized attacks and out-rightvrace war between Blacks and Latinos.
I don't think Whites are going to get involved anytime soon; the state will crack down too hard. But if Kamala steals the presidency it might finally be enough to trigger a response from Whites (which the state will gleefully use as an excuse to use unrestrained violence and repression). Hopefully cooler heads prevail because the best chance Whites have is to come in as mediators after a brutal Black/Latino showdown. It won't happen till the welfare gift ends though.
> Though the city says it does not track crimes by the victims’ race or ethnicity
As an up-and-coming reporter for The New York Times, I view this sort of stonewalling as simply one more barrier to surmount. Like all NYT journalists, I am committed to upholding the highest standards of integrity as outlined in our "Ethical Journalism Handbook" (1). I'll do whatever it takes in my quest to keep our readers reliably informed on the important stories of the day.
As you can tell from reading my article, I was able to pierce that official veil of bureaucratic indifference, and uncover the grim reality of 2024: Billy Daniel López García, Ramiro Romero López Temaj, Maria Morales, and the other people caught in this racial crossfire of 2024 America were Latinos. Not whites, but Latinos.
Race -- which as you can see is very consequential -- is probably an attribute of the people carrying the guns that committed this anti-Hispanic violence. Because of space limitations (my article was only 34 paragraphs long), I couldn't delve into that topic, which wouldn't have added anything significant to the story, anyway.
> Why mention whites? What do whites have to do with this story? What are you hiding?
Actually "AMac78" ≠ "Christina Morales". If you think Ms. Morales race-centric 34 paragraphs could have been improved by a mention or two of the racial identity of the assailants, you'd do better to take it up with her. Contact info at the provided link. If you like her reporting as-is -- then all is well.
“The article states that Montgomery does not categorize the race or ethnicity of those targeted by thieves. Do they categorize the thieves by race or ethnicity? I ask because if Latinos are being targeted, who is doing the targeting?”
Reply to top comment:
“great point. And, the answer is clear, because if it were one particular ethic group, this would be an article about ‘racist hate crimes.’
Because you do not see that language, you have your answer”
Censorship by omission for reporting crimes is now so well patterned and ubiquitous that I imagine all but the dumbest readers just fill in the blanks for themselves. Better still omit the entire publication.
- Asians: 7,717 [3%], of whom most are Korean and Chinese (4,000 between them)
- Other, incl. mixed-race: 5,795 [3%]
.
The true number of Hispanics could be many thousands higher, according to the Census data. Their 2022 population-survey team's data-collection assigned unusually wide error-bars to their overall Hispanic count. The error-bars for the White population are small, at +/- less than 1% of the mid-point estimate of 67,752 (so a very-high confidence that the true number of Whites is around 67,000-68,500); for Hispanics, margin-of-error is something near 50%!
This means the Hispanic population is extremely weakly rooted, extremely transient, and hard to track. There could be thousands of illegals in and around Montgomery, Alabama, early-2020s-entry 'migrants'. Criminals always prey on the transient, and on illegals.
The 2022 estimate also reveals that the best-guess is that there has been near ZERO net-growth in the Hispanic population since 2010. On the 2010 census, Hispanics "clocked in" at only 8,300; the mid-line estimate for 2022 was just a few-hundred more.
The ACS (American Community Survey) is not the same as the "census form" decennial census (such as 2020's). The ACS relies much more on statistical techniques and estimates derived from sampling, not attempting a full-population cover.
How many of the 9,000 or so "Hispanics" in Montgomery County, Alabama, in 2022 were present in the county, or anywhere nearby, as of 2010 or 2000? The answer may well be: Very few. A constant churn, at the bottom. Illegals get word of work opportunities, show up, then move on.
That's the "model" many have of the postmodern USA: Always transient, nothing is permanent, nothing is rooted, nothing matters, a money-pump exists and dumps cash on transients, one group after the next. For the top tiers, it's an endless source of cheap and complacent labor.
One of the more surprising components of the Black vs Latino is that black politicians are very pro migrant even though their constituents are being replaced. For example, I was initially surprised to hear Maxine Waters support illegal immigrants moving into public housing since the people losing housing are very likely to be black.
I then noticed that her congressional district that had been 80% black when she took office is now majority hispanic. On her watch, her community was destroyed! As anyone ever called her out on that?
> One of the more surprising components of the Black vs Latino is that black politicians are very pro migrant even though their constituents are being replaced... On [Maxine Waters'] watch, her community was destroyed!
Per Sailer, the Coalition Of The Fringes is held together by hatred of the common enemy ('Core Americans'). This raises two questions about the mindset of an Establishment African-American pol like Waters: (1) Is she or he driven more by love of "her/his peeps" or by disdain (envy, scorn, etc.) of the core? (2) How does she or he define "my people," anyway?
Like most Core Americans, I'd believed that these leaders aligned with the interests of descendants of American slaves (ADOS). A policy of importing more-talented Caribbeans and Africans to outcompete ADOSs for affirmative action slots -- For or Against? This would seem to be an easy call -- and it is... just not the one that I'd expected.
This speaks to both questions. For Waters and her supporters, "our community" is a flexible concept. Evidently, kneecapping ADOSs is acceptable if regrettable Friendly Fire. Or perhaps it's a Feature.
There is no way that U.S. Black leaders of one century ago would go along with this. At least many/most of them had a sense of interests and ethno-racial independence.
By the late-20th century, a stable system emerged in which Blacks became passive consumers of political-goodies distributed by the Regime, as represented by the Democratic Party.
By our time it's really from both parties doing it; Trump did it plenty -- and is generally forgiven for it by so many White supporters, themselves desperate for a political home and locked-in to giving symbolic support for "their side" regardless of the details.
With Blacks you do see it clearly: With no serious ethno-racial independence movement today, of the kind you saw all over the place in the early-20th century fading into the mid-20th century, they really are satisfied to be passive political consumers, a learned-helplessness. And I see some of the same in Whites vis-a-vis the now-multiculturalized MAGA movement.
Refreshingly, every single "Reader Pick" comment on the article is about the outrageous omission of perpetrator demographics. When the left has lost the NYT readership…
It's even possible that, in their all-out effort to get the utterly unlikeable Kamala Harris into the Oval Office, the media will find their trusty cudgel of "racism" has markedly less heft.
In any case, it's no exaggeration to give Sailer a great deal of credit for the increasing outrage that meets the manipulative elision of unpalatable truths—without someone fearlessly continuing to put out factual statistics on the obvious-but-unstated, our society might well have slipped into even deeper stupidity.
Now that even Times readers can easily fill in the missing blanks, perhaps it's finally time to rewrite the old maxim to remove "bliss": "Ignorance is blacks."
The question answers itself
I think the willingness of Hispanics to replace blacks, and the unwillingness of blacks to be replaced will become an ever more common story in the days to come.
A Black-vs-Hispanic conflict has been predicted that way for decades. It's never quite happened in the way envisioned.
It might have happened, in a more-open political environment/ But both "Hispanic" migrants and Blacks writ-large are managed by the elite Democratic Party and the Regime to which the D-party is so closely aligned. They are part of the same coalition. Beyond a few unorganized incident and rants, the matter never quite galvanizes.
Anyone who spends time in an area where both Blacks and Hispanics are in the same spaces, will with some regularity see a Black rant against a Hispanic to "go back to your country" and the like, commentary that would get a White person ruined for life. But it's all just meaningless 'diss-culture' big talk, of the kind so typical of Blacks. It never goes anywhere, because the leadership element, and the Regime managers who oversee both groups, squash it.
Yet the replacement continues. I am retired but had several crews working on my place for the past couple of years. I have seen darn few blacks on those crews. Mostly Spanish speakers with maybe 15% Caucasians.
It definitely has real-world effects: the Latinos take Black territory in an organized manner and the Blacks just generally do random crime. They are both grifting off the White-generated wealth of America but in different ways. Almost certainly the Black grift will run-dry first and then you'll see more organized attacks and out-rightvrace war between Blacks and Latinos.
I don't think Whites are going to get involved anytime soon; the state will crack down too hard. But if Kamala steals the presidency it might finally be enough to trigger a response from Whites (which the state will gleefully use as an excuse to use unrestrained violence and repression). Hopefully cooler heads prevail because the best chance Whites have is to come in as mediators after a brutal Black/Latino showdown. It won't happen till the welfare gift ends though.
"Killers could be here" he thought.
New York Posts all the way down.
> Though the city says it does not track crimes by the victims’ race or ethnicity
As an up-and-coming reporter for The New York Times, I view this sort of stonewalling as simply one more barrier to surmount. Like all NYT journalists, I am committed to upholding the highest standards of integrity as outlined in our "Ethical Journalism Handbook" (1). I'll do whatever it takes in my quest to keep our readers reliably informed on the important stories of the day.
As you can tell from reading my article, I was able to pierce that official veil of bureaucratic indifference, and uncover the grim reality of 2024: Billy Daniel López García, Ramiro Romero López Temaj, Maria Morales, and the other people caught in this racial crossfire of 2024 America were Latinos. Not whites, but Latinos.
Race -- which as you can see is very consequential -- is probably an attribute of the people carrying the guns that committed this anti-Hispanic violence. Because of space limitations (my article was only 34 paragraphs long), I couldn't delve into that topic, which wouldn't have added anything significant to the story, anyway.
.
(1) https://www.nytimes.com/by/christina-morales
Why mention whites? What do whites have to do with this story? What are you hiding?
> Why mention whites? What do whites have to do with this story? What are you hiding?
Actually "AMac78" ≠ "Christina Morales". If you think Ms. Morales race-centric 34 paragraphs could have been improved by a mention or two of the racial identity of the assailants, you'd do better to take it up with her. Contact info at the provided link. If you like her reporting as-is -- then all is well.
Sorry, AMac78, I read it too quickly. Somehow I thought you were Ms morales
The sond I saw this headline I knew it was total Sailerbait.
second
You should be able to edit your own comments here at the hallowed digital halls of SteveSailer.net; find the right button.
The NYT readers are wondering too: top comment:
“The article states that Montgomery does not categorize the race or ethnicity of those targeted by thieves. Do they categorize the thieves by race or ethnicity? I ask because if Latinos are being targeted, who is doing the targeting?”
Reply to top comment:
“great point. And, the answer is clear, because if it were one particular ethic group, this would be an article about ‘racist hate crimes.’
Because you do not see that language, you have your answer”
Notice that no one can write the actual word though.
Definitely not at NYT.
This Jarques one is an anomaly, Steve. The rest were evil white supremacist Trump supporters. Everyone knows that!
Censorship by omission for reporting crimes is now so well patterned and ubiquitous that I imagine all but the dumbest readers just fill in the blanks for themselves. Better still omit the entire publication.
I'm guessing the Black-to-Latino population ratio is a lot higher in Montgomery AL than in, say, Los Angeles.
“They” own the media. Ask Van The Man
Montgomery County, Alabama
2022 Am. Community Survey population estimate
U.S. Census Bureau
.
TOTAL POPULATION: 226,361
- Blacks: 135,919 [60%]
- White non-Hispanic: 67,752 [30%]
- Hispanics: 9,178 [4%]
- Asians: 7,717 [3%], of whom most are Korean and Chinese (4,000 between them)
- Other, incl. mixed-race: 5,795 [3%]
.
The true number of Hispanics could be many thousands higher, according to the Census data. Their 2022 population-survey team's data-collection assigned unusually wide error-bars to their overall Hispanic count. The error-bars for the White population are small, at +/- less than 1% of the mid-point estimate of 67,752 (so a very-high confidence that the true number of Whites is around 67,000-68,500); for Hispanics, margin-of-error is something near 50%!
This means the Hispanic population is extremely weakly rooted, extremely transient, and hard to track. There could be thousands of illegals in and around Montgomery, Alabama, early-2020s-entry 'migrants'. Criminals always prey on the transient, and on illegals.
The 2022 estimate also reveals that the best-guess is that there has been near ZERO net-growth in the Hispanic population since 2010. On the 2010 census, Hispanics "clocked in" at only 8,300; the mid-line estimate for 2022 was just a few-hundred more.
.
https://data.census.gov/table/ACSDP1Y2022.DP05?g=050XX00US01101
Just because you don't fill out your census form doesn't mean you are transient lol
The ACS (American Community Survey) is not the same as the "census form" decennial census (such as 2020's). The ACS relies much more on statistical techniques and estimates derived from sampling, not attempting a full-population cover.
How many of the 9,000 or so "Hispanics" in Montgomery County, Alabama, in 2022 were present in the county, or anywhere nearby, as of 2010 or 2000? The answer may well be: Very few. A constant churn, at the bottom. Illegals get word of work opportunities, show up, then move on.
That's the "model" many have of the postmodern USA: Always transient, nothing is permanent, nothing is rooted, nothing matters, a money-pump exists and dumps cash on transients, one group after the next. For the top tiers, it's an endless source of cheap and complacent labor.
Just because they came recently that doesn't mean they are necessarily going to leave.
I’m shocked I tell you! Shocked!
It's just another coincidence, stop noticing them
The Mafia used to keep the streets safe. I don't think the cartels care.
I wonder if the drug lords will ever make the European transition: war lords to constrained feudal lords to lords with some sense of noblesse oblige.
One of the more surprising components of the Black vs Latino is that black politicians are very pro migrant even though their constituents are being replaced. For example, I was initially surprised to hear Maxine Waters support illegal immigrants moving into public housing since the people losing housing are very likely to be black.
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/05/21/maxine-waters-ben-carson-hud-1461077
I then noticed that her congressional district that had been 80% black when she took office is now majority hispanic. On her watch, her community was destroyed! As anyone ever called her out on that?
I'd be interested to know how it happened.
> One of the more surprising components of the Black vs Latino is that black politicians are very pro migrant even though their constituents are being replaced... On [Maxine Waters'] watch, her community was destroyed!
Per Sailer, the Coalition Of The Fringes is held together by hatred of the common enemy ('Core Americans'). This raises two questions about the mindset of an Establishment African-American pol like Waters: (1) Is she or he driven more by love of "her/his peeps" or by disdain (envy, scorn, etc.) of the core? (2) How does she or he define "my people," anyway?
Like most Core Americans, I'd believed that these leaders aligned with the interests of descendants of American slaves (ADOS). A policy of importing more-talented Caribbeans and Africans to outcompete ADOSs for affirmative action slots -- For or Against? This would seem to be an easy call -- and it is... just not the one that I'd expected.
This speaks to both questions. For Waters and her supporters, "our community" is a flexible concept. Evidently, kneecapping ADOSs is acceptable if regrettable Friendly Fire. Or perhaps it's a Feature.
There is no way that U.S. Black leaders of one century ago would go along with this. At least many/most of them had a sense of interests and ethno-racial independence.
By the late-20th century, a stable system emerged in which Blacks became passive consumers of political-goodies distributed by the Regime, as represented by the Democratic Party.
By our time it's really from both parties doing it; Trump did it plenty -- and is generally forgiven for it by so many White supporters, themselves desperate for a political home and locked-in to giving symbolic support for "their side" regardless of the details.
With Blacks you do see it clearly: With no serious ethno-racial independence movement today, of the kind you saw all over the place in the early-20th century fading into the mid-20th century, they really are satisfied to be passive political consumers, a learned-helplessness. And I see some of the same in Whites vis-a-vis the now-multiculturalized MAGA movement.
Refreshingly, every single "Reader Pick" comment on the article is about the outrageous omission of perpetrator demographics. When the left has lost the NYT readership…
It's even possible that, in their all-out effort to get the utterly unlikeable Kamala Harris into the Oval Office, the media will find their trusty cudgel of "racism" has markedly less heft.
In any case, it's no exaggeration to give Sailer a great deal of credit for the increasing outrage that meets the manipulative elision of unpalatable truths—without someone fearlessly continuing to put out factual statistics on the obvious-but-unstated, our society might well have slipped into even deeper stupidity.
Now that even Times readers can easily fill in the missing blanks, perhaps it's finally time to rewrite the old maxim to remove "bliss": "Ignorance is blacks."
He’s easily been the most consequential journalist in America this past decade.