Well I suppose it’s about to be Hide ya kids, hide ya wife time in Missouri. Though I don’t completely dismiss the possibility of an indictment. The pressure to hand one down must be immense. Going forward, such antique notions as technical legality will recede to more vibrant legal concerns. It won’t be words on paper but races on the panel that decide your fate. Imperiled liberals will become as eagle-eyed about “good jury pools” as they are presently of “good schools.”
Though that debased scenario is one for the future–late January at the earliest. For today I was more intrigued by the deluge of comments concerning the imminent Ferguson decision. At the Washington Post they were washing in at a stream of consciousness rate. And from the almost dadaesque verbal kaleidoscope, enough pattern emerged to cultivate a few insights.
The liberals marched in columns bearing their most vaunted talisman at the fore: racist! Obviously my inclination was toward ridicule, but after hundreds of comments I became more interested in an anthropological perspective. Why is this concept above all others so sacred to them? And given that it plainly is, why do they not hold non-whites to even a sliver of the standard? Lastly, what could be going through their minds to offer this hoary denunciation for the billionth time? Obviously they find force in the j’accuse even when repetition has rendered it an ambient drone.
And of course their tribalist black allies, hardly liberals by any consistent definition, were present to make the usual claims of white misconduct that I suppose Jesus himself must suffer to hear daily in the afterlife. But through the din one will notice two distinct sets of roles and expectations that answer, to my mind, some of the questions above.
Blacks, and as a general rule other non-whites, seek to enforce standards of behavior on out-groups. Their logic apparently being that if brother attacks brother it’s a family issue. But if outsider attacks brother, it’s war. This explains the sheer nonchalance toward black/black violence. It’s their issue, and others needn’t worry about it. This in stark contrast to when a white fells a black, where we see violent repercussions and literal para-military posturing. Blacks have standards and expectations for the behavior of others more so than themselves. And are furious when these are breached.
Whites have evolved an entirely different norming scheme: they patrol in-group behavior, and establish standards for it exclusively. For white liberals this means NO RACISM. This being a non-negotiable expectation for conservative peers (their in-group whether or not they care to admit it). In contrast they do not similarly discipline out groups, viewing them as wholly outside their purview. If brother attacks brother it’s critical business for everyone; but if outsider attacks brother it’s a random act of youth robbery gone wrong. This distinct compartmentalization is what induces cries of hypocrisy from quarters such as these, though is shrugged-off by liberals as wholly outside-of-scope. They enforce in-group behavior only and become goggle-eyed at infractions.
Similarly, white conservatives still largely reserve their heaviest rhetorical ordnance for the liberals who they view as having breached their own evolving in-group standards. Increasingly this standard includes survival as a people and, by necessity, the enforcement of expectations on out-groups. This driving a further wedge with their SJW peers 👯.
Taken in total, I find these distinct schemes to be quite infelicitous. To occupy the overlapping space of scrutiny rather than gambol in the open represents a cramp in any man’s style. Though one that will ultimately be sorted out. In the meantime though, enjoy the show tonight.