Race and Crime in America

Ron Unz, July 20, 2013

The noted science fiction writer Philip K. Dick once declared that “Reality is what continues to exist whether you believe in it or not.”  Such an observation should be kept in mind when we consider some of the touchier aspects of American society.

Recall the notorious case of Daniel Patrick Moynihan, whose 1965 report on the terrible deterioration in the condition of the black American family aroused such a firestorm of denunciation and outrage in liberal circles that the topic was rendered totally radioactive for the better part of a generation.  Eventually the continuing deterioration reached such massive proportions that the subject was taken up again by prominent liberals in the 1980s, who then declared Moynihan a prophetic voice, unjustly condemned.

This contentious history of racially-charged social analysis was certainly in the back of my mind when I began my quantitative research into Hispanic crime rates in late 2009.  One traditional difficulty in producing such estimates had been the problematical nature of the data.  Although the FBI Uniform Crime Reports readily show the annual totals of black and Asian criminal perpetrators, Hispanics are generally grouped together with whites and no separate figures are provided, thereby allowing all sorts of extreme speculation by those so inclined.

In order to distinguish reality from vivid imagination, a major section of my analysis focused on the data from America’s larger cities, exploring the correlations between their FBI-reported crime rates and their Census-reported ethnic proportions.  If urban crime rates had little relation to the relative size of the local Hispanic population, this would indicate that Hispanics did not have unusually high rates of criminality.  Furthermore, densely populated urban centers have almost always had far more crime than rural areas or suburbs, so restricting the analysis to cities would reduce the impact of that extraneous variable, which might otherwise artificially inflate the national crime statistics for a heavily urbanized population group such as Hispanics.

My expectations proved entirely correct, and the correlations between Hispanic percentages and local crime rates were usually quite close to the same figures for whites, strongly supporting my hypothesis that the two groups had fairly similar rates of urban criminality despite their huge differences in socio-economic status.  But that same simple calculation yielded a remarkably strong correlation between black numbers and crime, fully confirming the implications of the FBI racial data on perpetrators.

This presented me with an obvious quandary. The topic of my article was “Hispanic crime” and my research findings were original and potentially an important addition to the public policy debate.  Yet the black crime figures in my charts and graphs were so striking that I realized they might easily overshadow my other results, becoming the focus of an explosive debate that would inevitably deflect attention away from my central conclusion.  Therefore, I chose to excise the black results, perhaps improperly elevating political prudence over intellectual candor.

I further justified this decision by noting that black crime in America had been an important topic of public discussion for at least the last half-century.  I reasoned that my findings must surely have been quietly known for decades to most social scientists in the relevant fields, and hence would add little to existing knowledge.  However, since that time a few private discussions have led me to seriously question that assumption, as has the emotion-laden but vacuous media firestorm surrounding the George Zimmerman trial.  I have therefore now decided to publish an expanded and unexpurgated version of my analysis, which I believe may have important explanatory value as well as some interesting policy implications.

The Pattern of Urban Crime in America

My central methodology is simple.  I obtained the crime rates and ethnic percentages of America’s larger cities from official government data sources and calculated the population-weighted cross-correlations.  In order to minimize the impact of statistical outliers, I applied this same approach to hundreds of different datasets: each of the years 1985 through 2011; homicide rates, robbery rates, and violent crime overall; all large cities of 250,000 and above and also restricted only to major cities of at least 500,000.  I obtained these urban crime correlations with respect to the percentages of local whites, blacks, and Hispanics, but excluded Asians since their numbers were quite insignificant until recently (here and throughout this article, “white” shall refer to non-Hispanic whites).

I also attempted to estimate these same results for the overall immigrant population.  The overwhelming majority of immigrants since 1965 have been Hispanic or Asian while conversely the overwhelming majority of those two population groups have a relatively recent immigrant family background.  So the combined population of Hispanics and Asians constitutes a good proxy for the immigrant community, and allows us to determine the immigrant relationship to crime rates.

Presented graphically, these various urban crime correlations are as follows:

HomicideRatesCities250k

RobberyRatesCities250k

ViolentCrimesCities250k

HomicideRatesCities500k

RobberyRatesCities500k

ViolentCrimesCities500k

These charts demonstrate that over the last twenty-five years the weighted correlations for each of the crime categories against the percentages of whites, Hispanics, and “immigrants” (i.e. Hispanics-plus-Asians) have fluctuated in the general range of -0.20 to -0.60.  Interestingly enough, for most of the last decade the presence of Hispanics and immigrants has become noticeably less associated with crime than the presence of whites, although that latter category obviously exhibits large regional heterogeneity.  Meanwhile, in the case of blacks, the weighted crime correlations have steadily risen from 0.60 to around 0.80 or above, almost always now falling within between 0.75 and 0.85.

These particular calculations do rely upon several minor methodological choices.  For example, I have used the 2000 Census population thresholds for selecting the sixty-odd large cities in my dataset, while I could have chosen some other year instead.  The substantial annual fluctuations in the urban ethnic percentages provided by the Census-ACS estimates led me to instead use the interpolated Census figures for all years.  The annual urban population totals used by the FBI sometimes differ slightly from the Census numbers, and I used the former for population-weighting purposes.  However, all my results were quite robust with respect to these particular decisions, and modifying them would produce results largely indistinguishable from those presented above.

On a more difficult matter, there is always the possibility of local bias in FBI crime statistics, with the data for some cities possibly being more reliable or comprehensive than for others.  But the reporting rate for homicides is widely accepted as close to 100 percent, and the close correspondence between the results for this “gold standard” crime category and those for the robbery and violent crime rates tends to confirm the validity of the latter.  In any event, we would expect the highest-crime areas to be those most likely to suffer from under-reporting problems, so we would expect our figures to somewhat underestimate the true size of the correlations.

It is important to recognize that within the world of academic sociology discovering an important correlation in the range of 0.80 or above is quite remarkable, almost extraordinary.  And even these correlations between black population prevalence and urban crime rates may actually tend to significantly understate the reality.  All these correlations were performed on a city-wide aggregate basis.  The New York City numbers include both the Upper East Side and Brownsville, Los Angeles both Bel Air and Watts, Chicago the Gold Coast and Englewood, with each city’s totals averaging those of both the wealthiest and the most dangerous districts.  This crude methodology tends to obscure the local pattern of crime, which usually varies tremendously between different areas, often roughly corresponding to the lines of racial segregation.  It is hardly a secret that impoverished black areas do have far higher crime rates than affluent white ones.

If instead we relied upon smaller geographical units such as neighborhoods, our results would be much more precise, but ethnicity data is provided by zip code while crime data is reported by precinct, so a major research undertaking would be required to match these dissimilar aggregational units for calculation purposes.  However, the apparent geographical pattern of crime in these cities and most others might lead us to suspect that our national racial correlations would become substantially greater under such a more accurate approach, perhaps often reaching or even exceeding the 0.90 level.  The inescapable conclusion is that local urban crime rates in America seem to be almost entirely explained by the local racial distribution.

But could such a strikingly simple sociological truth possibly be correct?  After all, academic scholars have long advanced a wide variety of different socio-economic explanations for crime, and these have often been heavily promoted by pundits and the media.  Commonly cited factors have been urban density, especially in the case of high-rise housing projects, and local poverty.  There is also the relative number of police officers to consider.  We should certainly compare the possible influence of these factors with the ethnic ones examined above.

Since the geographical borders of a city are generally fixed, average population densities are easy to calculate and in recent years their apparent impact upon crime rates has been negligible, whether for homicide, robbery, or violent crime in general.  For the last dozen years, the density/crime correlations have always ranged between 0.20 and -0.20 and were usually close to zero.  Perhaps many of us have an intuitive mental image of densely populated East Coast cities being natural hotbeds of crime.  But this appears incorrect: crime rates and urban density seem to have little connection.

What about the sizes of the various urban police departments?  Although precise comparisons are sometimes difficult, the Bureau of Justice Statistics periodically publishes official reports on the subject, and the latest 2007 study lists the numerical totals of America’s fifty largest urban police forces, allowing us to calculate the weighted correlations between these per capita policing levels and the corresponding crime rates of the years 2007-2011.  We discover that there actually exists a moderately strong positive correlation, generally falling in the range 0.30-0.60: the more police, the more crime.  Although this might seem counterintuitive, the explanation becomes obvious once we reverse the direction of causation.  Higher crime rates usually persuade local authorities to hire additional police officers.

Finally, although urban crime rates do track local economic conditions, the relationship is far from tight.  For the years 2006-2011, the Census-ACS provides estimates of the Mean Income, Median Income, and Poverty Rates for each urban center, and we can easily perform the same calculations we did in the racial case.  The correlations between the Mean Income and Median Income levels and the various crime categories generally fall in the range of -0.40 to -0.60, being moderately rather than strongly negative.  Even the correlation between Poverty Rate and crime—supported by the obvious truism that most street criminals are poor—is hardly enormous, falling between 0.50 and 0.70, and usually well below our racial figures.

The relative strength of these different correlations may be seen by a chart superimposing the economic and ethnic results for the last dozen years of robbery rate correlations for our major cities.  Although the hard economic times since 2008 have considerably increased the influence of the poverty correlate, that factor is still considerably less significant than the racial one.

RobberyRatesCities500kx

Indeed, the race/crime correlation so substantially exceeds the poverty/crime relationship that much of the latter may simply be a statistical artifact due to most urban blacks being poor.  Consider that both blacks and Hispanics currently have similar national poverty rates in the one-third range, more than double the white figure, and each constitutes well over 20% of our urban population.  However, major cities with substantial poverty but few blacks usually tend to have far lower levels of crime.  For example, El Paso and Atlanta are comparable in size and have similar poverty rates, but the latter has eight times the robbery rate and over ten times the homicide rate.  Within California, Oakland approximately matches Santa Ana in size and poverty, but has several times the rate of crime.  Thus, it seems plausible that removing the black population from our calculation might actually reduce the residual poverty/crime correlation for non-blacks to a moderate or even a low figure.

To some extent, this surprising possibility is merely a statistical syllogism.  Whenever the correlation to a single factor approaches unity, no other non-equivalent item may have a large, independent impact.  And failing to recognize the existence of such a single, overwhelming factor might lead us to misidentify numerous other spurious influences, whose apparent causal importance actually derives from their own correlations with the primary item.  For many years, the black connection to local crime has been so strong as to almost eliminate the possible role of any other variable.

We must obviously be cautious in interpreting the meaning of these statistical findings since correlation does not necessarily imply causation.  Over the last few years the crime correlation for Hispanic or Hispanic-plus-Asian numbers has been substantially more negative than the same figure for whites, but this does not necessarily prove that whites are much more likely to commit urban crime, though it would tend to rule out the contrary possibility that Hispanics or immigrants have far higher rates of criminality.

However, if we examine the official FBI arrest statistics, we find that these seem to support the most straightforward interpretation of our racial crime correlations.  For example, blacks in America were over six times as likely to be arrested for homicide in 2011 as non-blacks and over eight times as likely to be arrested for robbery; the factors for previous years were usually in a similar range.  The accuracy of this racial pattern of arrests is generally confirmed by the corresponding racial pattern of victim-identification statements, also aggregated by the FBI.  Indeed, several years ago the liberal Sentencing Project organization estimated that some one-third of all American black men are already convicted criminals by their 20s, and the fraction would surely be far higher for those living in urban areas.

A sense of the real world impact of these grim statistics may be found in the stratified 2011 Census-ACS data for major American cities.  The three urban centers with the largest black populations are New York City, Chicago, and Philadelphia, and together they contain over one-third more adult black women than black men.  The corresponding national shortfall of black males runs well into the millions, partly accounting for the notorious “marriage gap” problems faced by women of their background.  Those millions of missing black men are generally dead or in prison.

Over the last few years, the official publications of the Bureau of Justice Statistics have made it increasingly difficult to determine the racial totals of inmates in state prisons and local jails but the figures from the mid-2000s probably still provide a reasonable estimate, and I had used these in my 2010 article.  Since crime is overwhelmingly committed by young males, for comparative purposes we should normalize all these incarceration totals against the base population of adult males in their prime-crime years, and the results are summarized in my previously published chart, reprinted here.

HispanicCrime-chart1

Since the mid-1990s, the issue of street crime has mostly dropped off the front pages of our national newspapers and disappeared from the public debate.  Meanwhile, black Americans have gained much greater visibility in the upper reaches of our national elites, while Barack Obama has been elected and reelected as our first black president.  This might seem to indicate that traditional racial cleavages in our society have become less substantial.  Furthermore, with such enormous numbers of young black men now in prison, we might naturally expect that the racial character of American urban crime rates has sharply declined over the last couple of decades.  However, the quantitative evidence demonstrates the exact opposite situation, as may be seen by examining the combined twenty-five year trajectories of our various racial crime correlations, which have steadily grown more extreme.  The images shown on our film screens or television sets may portray one America, but the actual data reveals a very different country.

BlackCrimeCities250k

Once we accept the reality of these stark racial facts, we must naturally wonder about the causes, and also why the historical trends seem to have been moving in exactly the wrong direction over most of the last quarter-century. Certainly many theoretical explanations have been advanced, both from the Left and the Right, and whole library shelves have been filled with books on the subject since the urban violence of the 1960s. A short article is no place for me to summarize such a vast literature on a contentious topic, especially when I can provide no original insights of my own. But good theoretical analysis requires a solid factual grounding, and my main purpose here is to establish those facts, which others may then choose to interpret howsoever they wish.  Absent such information, any national dialogue becomes an exercise in empty ideological posturing.

The Racial Subtext of American Electoral Politics

Racial issues have traditionally been among the most highly charged in American public life, and the nexus of crime and race has been exceptionally contentious for many decades.  Under these circumstances respectable scholars tend to be cautious in discussing or merely investigating this topic, and the mainstream media is usually even more gun-shy.  The striking racial findings presented above require only trivial statistical calculations and may be glimpsed in any casual inspection of the crime rankings of our major cities.  But I remain uncertain to what extent they are already recognized by our experts in social policy.

For example, when I presented my correlation results to one very prominent conservative social scientist, he found them shocking and remarkable, and said he had never imagined that the statistical relationship between race and crime was so extremely strong.  But when I showed the same data to an equally prominent liberal academic, he took the information in stride and said he assumed that almost all experts were already quietly aware of the general facts.  The reactions of other knowledgeable individuals fell all along this spectrum ranging from surprise to familiarity.  Knowledge so explosive that it is usually unspoken and unreported may easily remain unknown even to many of our foremost intellectuals.

But whether or not most of our ruling elites explicitly recognize the stark racial character of American crime, the reality still exists, and we should consider exploring whether these unpublicized facts may have had broader influences in our society, possibly in seemingly unrelated areas.  After all, urban crime has frequently been a leading issue in American public life, during some periods ranking as one of the most important.  Certain matters may not be easily discussed in polite company these days, but if even just a portion of the citizenry is intuitively aware of the situation, their attitudes might have broader ripple effects throughout the entire population.  Is there any substantial evidence for this?

Consider the electoral behavior of American whites, and especially their inclination to support either Democratic or Republican candidates.  Because of gerrymandering, most individual congressional districts are overwhelmingly aligned with one party or another, and general elections are a mere formality; this is often also true of statewide races for senator or governor.  However, in presidential elections both parties almost always field viable national candidates with a reasonable chance of winning, so these provide the best means of gauging white political alignment.  And for these campaigns, the racial lines are clearly established, with the modern Republicans being the “white party,” drawing over 90% of their support from that demographic group, while over 90% of blacks regularly vote the Democratic ticket, which also usually attracts the overwhelming majority of other non-white voters.

As I pointed out in a 2011 article, there has been a striking statewide pattern to white voting behavior over the last couple of decades.  Many conservative activists and media pundits have spent years attacking immigrants, illegal or otherwise, and have regularly denounced the cultural threat posed by the growing population of non-English-speakers or non-white foreigners.  Nevertheless, the empirical fact is that presence or absence of large numbers of Hispanics or Asians in a given state seems to have virtually no impact upon white voting patterns.  Meanwhile, there exists a strong relationship between the size of a state’s black population and the likelihood that local whites will favor the Republicans.  The weighted-average correlations between the racial compositions of the fifty states and the degree to which their white voters favor Republican presidential candidates is summarized in the following chart.

WhiteRepublicanSupport

GOP leaders are always fearful of being denounced as “racist” by the major media, and often seek to camouflage the underlying source of their electoral support by adopting the most extreme forms of tokenism, promoting black party leaders and spokesmen while heavily recruiting black candidates and focusing almost entirely upon non-racial issues.  Conservative activists often rhetorically identify themselves as heirs to the “party of Lincoln” and may even accuse their Democratic opponents of seeking to keep blacks in Welfare State bondage.  But the actual data tells a very different story about the likely sources of Republican support.

The strength of this pattern may be seen at its extremes.  Mississippi is the state with the highest black percentage and across all six elections its white population was the most likely to vote Republican, with the figures recently running at nearly the 90% level.  Louisiana, Georgia, and South Carolina are generally clustered together as the next blackest in population, and in most elections their white populations were the next most likely to support the Republican ticket, although being sometimes exceeded by the whites of Alabama, the fifth or sixth blackest state during those decades.

By contrast, consider the three states with the largest non-white percentages: Hawaii, California, and New Mexico.  The whites of the first two have actually been far less likely to vote Republican than whites nationwide, while those in New Mexico fall close to the national average.  This tends to confirm the national statistical results that the widespread presence of non-whites, even in overwhelming numbers, seems to have little impact upon white voting behavior.

While I would not argue that black crime is the sole determining factor behind the racial polarization in white voting behavior, I do suspect it is one of the largest contributors.  Empirically, the presence of blacks causes whites to vote the “law-and-order” Republican ticket, while the presence of Hispanics or Asians seems to have negligible political impact.

Nevertheless, we should remain cautious in interpreting these results.  For example, although these national correlations are certainly substantial, they are almost entirely due to the weighting of the Southern states, in which blacks are almost 20% of the total population and racial tensions have traditionally been the strongest.  In non-Southern states, the correlations are nil, perhaps partly because blacks are found in far smaller numbers, being less than 9% of the total.

The Hidden Motive for Heavy Immigration?

Consider also the highly contentious issue of immigration.  Obviously, much of the underlying conflict is purely economic in character, with workers aware that restricting the supply of available labor will protect their bargaining power over wages, while businesses seek to maximize their profits by expanding the pool of potential employees, whether low-skilled or high-tech.

But all involved participants quickly discover that despite endless protestations to the contrary there is also a clear racial subtext, usually accounting for the emotionality of the debate.  For the last half-century, the overwhelming majority of immigrants, especially illegal ones, have been non-white, and the resulting racial fears have been a central motivating force driving many of the most zealous restrictionists, who fear being swamped by a tidal wave of “the Other.”  However, I believe that racial considerations, whether fully conscious or not, might also be found on the other side of the issue, helping to explain why our national leadership today so uniformly endorses very heavy foreign immigration.

America’s ruling financial, media, and political elites are largely concentrated in three major urban centers—New York City, Los Angeles, and Washington, D.C.—and all three have contained large black populations, including a violent underclass.  During the early 1990s, many observers feared New York City was headed for urban collapse due to its enormously high crime rates, Los Angeles experienced the massive and deadly Rodney King Riots, and Washington often vied for the title of American homicide capital.  In each city, the violence and crime were overwhelmingly committed by black males, and although white elites were rarely the victims, their fears were quite palpable.

One obvious reaction to these concerns was strong political support for a massive national crackdown on crime, and the prison incarceration of black men increased by almost 500% during the two decades after 1980.  But even after such enormous rates of imprisonment, official FBI statistics indicate that blacks today are still over 1,000% more likely to commit homicide than non-blacks and their robbery rate is nearly 1,500% larger; these disparities seem just as high with respect to Hispanic or Asian immigrants as they are for whites.  Thus, replacing a city’s blacks with immigrants would tend to lower local crime rates by as much as 90%, and during the 1990s American elites may have become increasingly aware of this important fact, together with the obvious implications for their quality of urban life and housing values.

According to Census data, between 1990 and 2010 the number of Hispanics and Asians increased by one-third in Los Angeles, by nearly 50% in New York City, and by over 70% in Washington, D.C.  The inevitable result was to squeeze out much of the local black population, which declined, often substantially, in each location.  And all three cities experienced enormous drops in local crime, with homicide rates falling by 73%, 79%, and 72% respectively, perhaps partly as a result of these underlying demographic changes.  Meanwhile, the white population increasingly shifted toward the affluent, who were best able to afford the sharp rise in housing prices.  It is an undeniable fact that American elites, conservative and liberal alike, are today almost universally in favor of very high levels of immigration, and their possible recognition of the direct demographic impact upon their own urban circumstances may be an important but unspoken factor in shaping their views.

As an anecdotal example, consider the case of Matthew Yglesias, a prominent young liberal blogger living in Washington, DC.  A couple of years ago he recounted on his blogsite how he was suddenly attacked from behind and seriously beaten by two young men while walking home one evening from a dinner party.  At first he was quite cagey about identifying his attackers, but he eventually admitted they were blacks, possibly engaged in the growing racial practice of urban “polar bear hunting” so widely publicized by the Drudge Report and other rightwing websites.

Few matters are more likely to trouble the minds of our Harvard-educated intellectual elite than fear of suffering random violent assaults while they walk the streets of their own city.  Yet no respectable progressive would possibly focus on the racial character of such an attack, let alone advocate the removal of local blacks as a precautionary measure.  Instead Yglesias suggested that housing-density issues might have been responsible and that better urban planning would reduce crime.

But consider that support for very high levels of foreign immigration is an impeccably liberal cause, and such policies inevitably displace and remove huge numbers of urban blacks; it is easy to imagine that Yglesias quietly redoubled his pro-immigration zeal in the wake of the incident.  Multiply this personal example a thousand-fold, and perhaps an important strand of the tremendous pro-immigration ideological framework of American elites becomes apparent.  The more conspiratorially-minded racialists, bitterly hostile to immigration, sometimes speculate that there is a diabolical plot by our ruling power structure to “race-replace” America’s traditional white population.  Perhaps a hidden motive along these lines does indeed help explain some support for heavy immigration, but I suspect that the race being targeted for replacement is not the white one.

Such factors may also play a role outside the major urban centers discussed above and even where least suspected.  Among all American businessmen, Silicon Valley executives are probably strongest in their pro-immigration advocacy, as indicated by the major political advertising campaign recently launched by top technology CEOs, organized together as “FWD.us.”  Obviously, their own cosmopolitan background and desire for an unlimited supply of inexpensive, high-quality engineers is their primary motive.  However, widespread sentiments in favor of lesser-educated immigrant groups such as undocumented Latin Americans also seem quite strong, and we find Steve Jobs’ wealthy widow Laurene Powell Jobs focusing her efforts almost exclusively on that particular aspect of the legislation, with her sentiments hardly being discordant with those of her wealthy peer group.  Could hidden racial factors be part of the explanation?  That might seem quite unlikely since Silicon Valley’s black population has been very low for decades, running in the 3 or 4 percent range.

However, a closer examination reveals a very different situation.  The small city of Palo Alto is one of the most desirable local residential areas, home to the late Steve Jobs, as well as the current CEOs of Apple, Google, Facebook, Yahoo, and a host of other companies; by some estimates, it may contain the world’s highest per capita concentration of billionaires. On three sides, Palo Alto abuts communities of a similar character: Mountain View, containing Google; the Stanford University campus; and Menlo Park, the center of America’s venture capital industry.  But on the fourth side, mostly separated by Highway 101, lies East Palo Alto, which for decades was a dangerous ghetto, overwhelmingly black.

I moved back to Palo Alto from New York City in 1992, and that year East Palo Alto recorded America’s highest per capita murder rate; although relatively few of the homicides, robberies, and rapes spilled across the border, enough did to leave many people uneasy.  Gated communities and even street fences are quite uncommon in the region, and for years anyone who wished could go to the home of Steve Jobs and walk around his yard or even peer into his windows.  Meanwhile, the sort of harsh racial profiling widely practiced in some large cities was completely abhorrent to the socially liberal citizenry.  One may easily imagine a scenario in which escalating street crime from the ghetto next door might have produced a collapse in high housing prices and sparked a massive flight of the wealthy.

One reason this did not occur was the vast influx of impoverished immigrants from south of the border that swept into the less affluent communities of the region during those same years and rapidly transformed the local demographics.  Between 1980 and 2010 the combined Hispanic population of Santa Clara and San Mateo counties nearly tripled.  A city offering cheap housing such as East Palo Alto saw far greater relative increases, reversing its demographics during that period from 60% black and 14% Hispanic to 16% black and 65% Hispanic.  Over the last twenty years, the homicide rate in that small city dropped by 85%, with similar huge declines in other crime categories as well, thereby transforming a miserable ghetto into a pleasant working-class community, now featuring new office complexes, luxury hotels, and large regional shopping centers.  Multi-billionaire Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and his wife recently purchased a large $9 million home just a few hundred feet from the East Palo Alto border, a decision that would have been unthinkable during the early 1990s.  Technology executives are highly quantitative individuals, skilled in pattern recognition, and I find it difficult to believe that they have all remained completely oblivious to these local racial factors.

However the powerful role of immigration in transforming the crime rates of important urban centers probably had a much smaller impact on the national totals.  The combined black populations of New York City, Washington, and Los Angeles may have dropped by half a million over the last two decades, but the individuals pushed out did not disappear from the world; they merely moved to Atlanta or Baltimore or Riverside.  But from the personal perspective of America’s ruling elite, they did indeed disappear.

For over thirty years, local black activists in Washington, D.C. have accused the ruling white power structure of promoting “The Plan,” a deliberate strategy of removing most of the black population from our national capital and replacing them with whites; and this “conspiracy theory” has been endlessly ridiculed as absurdly paranoid nonsense by our elite Washington media.  Meanwhile, during this same thirty year period, Washington’s black population dropped from over 70% to less than half and will probably fall below the white total within the next few years.

Indeed, the strong support of our political elites for Section 8 housing vouchers may be less connected with any alleged social benefits these provide than with their important role in moving large numbers of impoverished urban residents away from the near vicinity of wealthy neighborhoods out into the remote suburbs of the middle class.  Several years ago the Atlantic published a major article by Hanna Rosin on the rapid changes in the geographical pattern of crime induced by these demographic shifts, and the piece provoked much discussion even though the author avoided unduly emphasizing the troubling racial aspects.  Elite selfishness is hardly surprising and a policy of exporting those populations with a strong link to crime into other localities seems a natural strategy, especially if this can be accomplished under the altruistic guise of socially-uplifting anti-poverty programs.

Finally, it is important to emphasize that this clear political interplay between heavy levels of immigration and black urban displacement is a relatively recent development and certainly was not anticipated by the original promoters of the 1965 Immigration Act.  Indeed, although restrictionists routinely denounce that legislation for having flooded America with Hispanic immigrants, the facts are precisely the opposite.  While the 1924 Immigration Act had drastically curtailed immigration from Europe (and Asia), the entire Western Hemisphere was totally exempted, and the U.S. retained its previous “open borders” policy for Mexico and the rest of Latin America until strict quotas were finally introduced as part of the 1965 law.  Although these 1965 changes were expected to enable renewed European immigration, no one anticipated the vast inflow of Hispanic and Asian immigrants in the decades that followed, nor the resulting impact upon the racial composition of our major cities.  But today these continuing urban demographic changes may have now become a significant motive in the minds of the elites advocating increased immigration under the legislation being considered by Congress.

During the 1960s black author James Baldwin coined the widely-quoted phrase “Urban renewal means Negro removal.” I suspect that a somewhat similar semi-intentional national policy is today transforming America’s leading urban centers, although it remains almost entirely unreported by our mainstream media.

On rare occasions, the mask slips and the underlying mental workings of our national elites are momentarily revealed. Consider New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, one of our most vocal pro-immigration voices on the national stage and a man whose vast wealth and influence often allow him to be far more candid on controversial topics than most other public figures. In May 2011 Bloomberg was interviewed on Meet the Press, and explained that if he had full authority, he could easily fix the seemingly insoluble problems of a city like Detroit at no cost to the taxpayer. He proposed opening wide the floodgates to unlimited foreign immigration on the condition that all the additional immigrants moved to Detroit and lived there for a decade or so, thereby transforming the city. I suspect this provides an important insight into how he and his friends discuss certain racial issues in private.

The Remarkable New York City Exception

Powerful quantitative evidence for social determinism may be dispiriting, and when the main determinant seems to be race, many Americans will choose to throw up their hands and ignore the statistical facts, simply hoping that these might somehow be proven incorrect.  That is certainly their privilege, but for those individuals who prefer to grit their teeth and mine the data for contrary indications, there do exist a few interesting nuggets.

Weighted average correlations are a very useful summary statistic, but they neither tell the whole story nor do they preclude the existence of outlying cases, which might provide some insights on ameliorating the grim situation we have described.  And it so happens that among our many dozens of major urban centers one of the most extreme race/crime outliers is neither small nor obscure: New York City.  Our largest metropolis often has crime rates that deviate sharply from the usual urban pattern observed almost everywhere else.

Recall our earlier mention of the surprising absence of any correlation between urban population density and crime rates.  Those summary statistics were correct, but they also hid some important variations and the null overall result was almost entirely due to the extremely high density and low crime rates in America’s largest city, combined with its huge population-weighting.  If we excluded New York City from our calculations, the remainder of America’s major urban centers would demonstrate some moderately strong and fairly stable correlations between density and crime over the last dozen years; for example, density has generally had a positive correlation of around 0.35 with robbery rates.

Similar anomalies appear in the racial crime calculations that have been the central focus of our analysis.  Based on its racial composition, we would expect New York City’s homicide rate to be some 70% higher than it actually is, with robbery and violent crime also being far more widespread.  Cities like San Jose and San Diego may have homicide and violent crime rates only half that of New York City, but given the stark differences in their underlying demographics, it is New York City’s Finest who deserves praise for their remarkable effectiveness in crime prevention.  Evaluating the apparent success or failure of urban law enforcement policies without candidly considering a city’s demographic challenges may lead to incorrect policy judgments.

Little of New York City’s success in crime prevention seems due to the relative size of its police force, which is roughly similar to those of Chicago, Philadelphia, Baltimore, and Boston on a per capita basis, and far below that of Washington, D.C., all cities whose crime rates reflect their demographics.  So it appears that New York City’s crime-fighting methods rather than merely the number of its officers has been the crucial factor.

Ideas have consequences, as do attempts to avoid them.  For most of the last twenty years, the policing methods implemented under mayors Rudolph Giuliani and Michael Bloomberg won enormous national praise as they so dramatically cut New York crime rates: murders dropped by over three-quarters.  But during the last few years, some of these same policies have begun receiving widespread criticism among those pundits who may have forgotten just how bad things were two decades ago.

Our simple statistical analysis obviously does not allow us to disentangle the relative importance of the different factors behind New York City’s success.  Since the early 1990s, the city implemented a “community policing” model as well as pioneering the rapid use of local crime data to pinpoint dangerous hotspots and allocate resources more accurately.  But other elements of the package have included strict, even harsh policing methods, such as the widespread use of “stop-and-frisk” to reduce gun violence.   Denouncing these techniques as unconstitutional or racially discriminatory may be perfectly justified, but those who do so must consider the trade-offs involved, including the very real possibility of a 70% rise in homicides if local policing effectiveness declined to levels found in the rest of the country.

Let us compare the demographic and crime trends of New York City and Washington, twin abodes of our East Coast urban elite.  Between 1985 and 2011, Washington’s homicide rate dropped by 26%, robbery fell 27%, and violent crime in general was cut by 30%; but the city’s black population also dropped by 27% during this same period.  Meanwhile, New York City’s corresponding declines in crime were far greater, 67%, 78%, and 67% respectively, but were accompanied by only a small 7% decline in black numbers.  For all these serious crime rates to decline at nearly ten times the rate of their primary racial determinant is absolutely remarkable, a combination that left the city an exceptional outlier among America’s major urban centers.

Put another way, if America’s other cities with large black populations had somehow managed to achieve the same surprisingly low crime rates as New York City then most of the  high racial crime correlations that have been the central findings of this article would disappear.  Conversely, if New York City were excluded from our current national statistics, many of the existing racial crime correlations would exceed 0.90.  These are objective facts and well-intentioned analysts who sharply criticize New York City policing methods should recognize that they may face some unpalatable choices.

Perhaps further research would establish that the widely-lauded elements of local police practice are the ones primarily responsible for such results, and the more controversial methods may safely be eliminated without negative consequences.  But for whatever combination of reasons, the overall results achieved by New York City have been quite remarkable and caution should be exercised before drastic changes are made in such a successful model.

Obviously New York City is not the sole positive outlier on these crime statistics, though it is by far the most significant, both because of its size and the magnitude of its deviation from the predicted results. If we examine the 2011 homicide rates for our set of sixty-six large cities, seventeen of these were at least 30% below the projected trendline, with four cities—Charlotte, Raleigh, St. Paul, and Virginia Beach—achieving even better results than New York City. But many of these successful cities have numerically small black populations, and the total for all seventeen combined is not much larger that of New York City alone. One intriguing fact is that although fewer than one-third of the all our large cities lie in the South, these Southern cities account for over two-thirds of those particularly successful examples, and a roughly similar pattern applies both for other crime rates and for other recent years. The exact mix of cultural, socio-economic, or demographic factors responsible for such notable Southern success in achieving relatively low urban crime rates is unclear, but might warrant further investigation. Scatterplot-Robbery2011

Over the last decade or two, liberal intellectuals have regularly denounced their conservative opponents for allowing ideological considerations to trump objective facts, sometimes styling themselves the “Reality-Based Community” as an ironic riposte to the foolish criticism of a top Bush Administration official.  Many of these liberal accusations have considerable merit.  But individuals who claim to accept reality undercut their credibility if they pick and choose which portions of reality they acknowledge and which portions they carefully ignore.  Our academic and media elites should not avoid factual evidence that they dislike.

Consider that over one-quarter of all the urban black males in America have vanished from our society, a loss-ratio approaching that experienced by Europeans during the Black Death of the Middle Ages.  Yet these astonishing statistics have largely remained unreported by our major media and hence unrecognized by the general American public.  Should the medieval scribes of the Fourteenth Century have ignored the annihilating impact of the bubonic plague all around them and merely confined their writings to more pleasant news?

It is said that very young children sometimes believe they can hide themselves by covering their eyes, and that seems to be the general approach taken by our major media to the unpleasantly grim racial crime statistics analyzed in this article.  But the reality continues to exist whether or not we ignore it.

Topics: , ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • http://twitter.com/AgentAxis D.B. Cooper

    That’s a pretty clear cut analysis, Mr. Unz, but do you care to shop it around to the Republican Party? You’re preaching to the choir over here.

    Remember the Time magazine article…from 1958?

    • din_do_nuffins

      Glen Beck was all Treyvon Up En Heeah today and sounding like an Amrener. He actually gave what sounded like anti n’ro Color of Crime stats. Anyone listening would quickly adopt the “mindset” of extreme Race Reality.

    • Aditya Vivek Barot

      I’m not a productive or particularly intelligent member of society since I am an attorney. I really have no clue about performing quantitative analysis. But, I wasn’t always a lawyer, and I’ve spent a good deal of time in Hispanic and Black neighborhoods, and even some time in working class white neighborhoods.

      Indisputably, black neighborhoods are hell-holes. White neighborhoods, even the poor ones, no! Especially the poor ones, are awesome because there is a sense of community.

      As far as safety is concerned, again, white is right.

      I am convinced that there is something wrong with this analysis. There’s no way in hell whites commit as many, if not more, crimes than Hispanics in the greater Los Angeles area. I wish I could prove it.

      Care to be an expert witness, sir? If I can get rebuttal evidence, we can send a nice letter to Mr Unz who, in my opinion, should be a registered foreign agent of Mexico, and perhaps force him to print it in his rubbish rag of a magazine.

  • din_do_nuffins

    Just isolated incidents- race had nothing to do with it, unless it can be used by MSNBC Toure to “point to a larger problem.”

    • Sick of it

      This map is proof that everything I was told growing up is a lie. Go figure. In most parts of America, you’ve got a 15% or less shot if you start at the lower end of things.

      • YngveKlezmer

        This map mainly validates what we racial realists already know. The Negroid species of human, as a general rule, has no resourcefulness, save for in the case of sniffing out the location with the best handouts, and the best free ride. Why leave the handouts of Michigan, Ohio, and New York for a sunbelt state where one will be expected to work? In the old Northern cities, one can sit on their food stamps and welfare, and just blame the closed factories and lack of opportunity instead of moving to greener pastures, and actively seeking to better one’s self. The safety net in the old industrial states was conceived in the days when these states were almost entirely populated by Europeans, and there was a large European immigrant population. In this context, the safety net was a good thing, as it was used specifically as a safety net, and nothing else. To do otherwise went against the grain of hardworking European peasants, as well as good Southern Mountain folk who came North to better themselves. With the influx of Negroes into the Northern states, our safety net has become a gravy train.

        • me

          Can someone email this article over to that racist communist in the White House? Maybe he’ll run out of excuses for his ‘people’. I bet his grandparents are spinning in their graves at 78rpm.

    • sbuffalonative

      Notice the ‘blue line’ running down the center. The left and right coasts are being overwhelmed by dieversity and pushing whites into the center on both sides.

      There is one exception in Texas.

      In spite of the lies that ‘dieveristy is a strength’ and we ‘need immigrants’, the ‘blue line’ show otherwise. In fact, it shows the opposite.

      • Sick of it

        Looking at real employment figures and real wages makes it fairly obvious that we need to expel immigrants, not absorb more.

    • YngveKlezmer

      Looks like another pro-Negro scolding of working Whites to me. The areas where there is supposedly a greater chance of upward mobility are mostly White areas. It is a wonder that these libtards haven’t grown really long noses, like Pinocchio, with all of their egregious lies. The blue areas are not wealthy areas, and are areas with horrible weather. The reason for the chances of the upward mobility is the resourcefulness of the European American populace. The red areas are major Black areas. How can someone make up such a lie? Escaping the poverty of the West Virginia hills, or a hardscrabble, weather battered North Dakota farm is much harder than availing one’s self of nearby opportunity in a major metro area!! Any dolt knows this. This libtards are over the top with their hooey! An honest assessment of this map would simply point out that Blacks, despite all of their constant complaining, are highly complacent. It would also have been expedient to have pointed out that, as industries left cities like Detroit and Buffalo, it was the White residents who left in search of better opportunities, and the Blacks who were too complacent to leave. This is how cities like Detroit became almost entirely Black. Blacks liked the generous welfare handouts of the Northern states, and were not going to return to a state where they actually had to get a job at some point. Nobody made them stay. White folks have been leaving certain places for greener pastures for generations, often with nothing more than the clothes on our backs and the will to work. Most of our ancestors came to this country in such fashion, and bettered themselves through hard work and determination. When failure hits, we also tend to look in the mirror first, whereas Blacks tend to look at who they can blame.

      • MikeofAges

        Village socialism. When village socialism is your way of life, you just stay no matter what happens. You work, that is true, when secure work is offered, but if it isn’t you live on the handouts.

  • IstvanIN

    So, in summation, if the black population were to suddenly vanish our crime rate would drop by 2/3rds?

    • din_do_nuffins

      No! Our crime rate would explode by 2/3, because our White privilege would run amok by that much, which is criminal.

      • Jack Perry

        LOL…. got to enjoy the trolls….eh, din_do_nuffins?

      • e2657383

        Don’t blame me, I did do nuffins.

      • IstvanIN

        Madam, I assure you, I keep my white privilege in check.

      • Jack Burton

        I’m still waiting for my White privilege check in the mail. All I get are bills.

        • Irishgirl

          We have disagreed on another article, but I have to give credit where credit is due – that is funny!

    • YngveKlezmer

      I suspect that it would drop even more than that. Most of the predominantly Black older Northern cities have far more crime than the stats reflect, especially in the all Black sections of town. Blacks are always complaining that the police are targeting them, as if police go around targeting Blacks minding their own business, and capriciously arrest them just for sport. Nothing could be further from the truth. The level of dysfunction amongst the Blacks is absolutely astounding, and a shock to the system of any White person that has any exposure to it. By our European cultural standards, there are few to no Black communities that are not sociopathic hotbeds of chaos, violence, and dysfunction. The fault for this lies entirely with the inhabitants of such communities, especially in this day and age when Blacks are treated preferentially every time they go for a job interview.

    • Jack Burton

      It would really be amazing. Besides the huge reduction in violent crime, robbery and rape, I wouldn’t have to pick up litter in my yard every god damn week. My mailbox wouldn’t be vandalized. I wouldn’t have to hear their obnoxious music from their gaudy vehicles.

      Blacks are not just a criminal toll, they are a psychological toll on the community.

      • me

        It’s the modern scourge, known as the “BLACK PLAGUE”.

    • me

      “Precisely! Sherman, the Bantu populations are historically and factually known for their lack of intelligence and their dependence on their betters for survival.”
      “But Mr. Peabody, our President recently said that the reason the Negro population in this country is so dysfunctional is because of historical oppression…”
      “Sherman, you need a lesson in historical accuracy, rather than believing any random nonsense that a clown in the White House may tell you. Let’s heavily arm ourselves and take a trip through time and observe Negro history up to the present day. To the Wayback Machine!”

  • bigone4u

    Blacks excel in criminality and incarceration. Good for them. It gives them something to proud of since they have nothing else to celebrate.

    • YngveKlezmer

      They are like predatorial animals. Violence is what they do best.

  • kjh64

    Well, even if immigrants flooded American cities and crime rates dropped(has happened), the Blacks would still be here causing crime.

    • YngveKlezmer

      At this point, immigrants from Europe flooding our cities is the very thing that we need to renew the spirit of European Americans, and give us reason to feel some optimism about this decaying country that is a shadow of its’ former self. Bosnian immigrants in St. Louis have really re-invigorated a section of town. With the levels of poverty in Eastern Europe these days, there is no excuse for the United States becoming this stagnating, decaying backwater of the Western world that will soon be dominated by non-Whites. We need to welcome the poor, tired, huddled masses from the poor corners of Europe once again, and breathe life and European culture back into the cities surrounding the Great Lakes, especially, re-invigorating the once vital European cultures of these cities. Stagnating, depressing cities that are slowly becoming like Detroit, with more than a few young White men who are Negro worshiping wigger boys, hooked on meth and gangster rap, is surely not what our forebears had in mind. Instead of welcoming more Mestizoes and inviting feral, HIV positive Africans from horrific place like Somalia, church groups need to focus on refugees from places like Bosnia and Moldavia. Maybe some of the lost souls who are hooked on meth and rap will re-discover the miracle that is life, and learn to act like real Europeans, learning to dance the polka like their Grandparents, and to love and embrace life.

      • Bossman

        Canada is welcoming a lot of Eastern Europeans and from what I’ve heard, these Eastern Europeans are very dull and unfriendly.

        • Creepy as a cracker!

          I’ll take Eastern Europeans over blacks any day!

  • Northerner

    General trends in U.S. crime: Blacks commit 4x more violent crime than expected based on population size. Whites commit 50% less crime than expected. Asians commit 4x less crime than expected.

    • Creepy as a cracker!

      And if we defend myself from one of these violent black criminals, we can expect to have the full weight of the Justice Dept. crash down on upon us. We will be accused of racial profiling and civil rights violations while Leroy and Tyrone can victimize Whites with impunity.

      • me

        Creepy,
        This will only happen if we don’t collectively join forces and rid ourselves of Holder, POTUS, and all of the other crypto-communist, anti-White, radical, Unconstitutional reprobates that have lied and bought their way into governmental positions of power.

    • YngveKlezmer

      And that is only based on what our arrest records reflect, which do not capture the full magnitude of chaos that occurs amongst the Negroids in their neighborhoods. Cities like Detroit and Gary are far more dangerous than even the stats indicate. Negroids cannot be civilized and Westernized. If it were possible, this would have happened generations ago. Trying to Westernize these Negroids is like trying to teach a tiger not to be a predator. It just doesn’t work.

  • ncpride

    Wow, just heard O’Reilly go on a 10 minute rant about black dysfunction in America following Obama’s little appearance last Friday. I’m actually impressed…. The man was angry and got several good points in.

    • Charles Lufkin

      When will he shill for amnesty for illegal aliens–again.O’Reilly is a big amnesty supporter,Rubio-Schumer supporter.

      • ncpride

        Oh, I know what he is. I was just very surprised he spoke so bluntly about black crime in America.

    • Jefferson

      You know Black crime is out of control in America when even Bill O’Reilly notices it.

      • ncpride

        Still infuriates me he doesn’t have the guts to point out black on White crime. Tonight was the perfect opportunity.

        • Jack Burton

          The man takes Al Sharpton out to dinner and pays for it. Don’t hold your breath.

      • YngveKlezmer

        Black crime is always out of control, by European cultural standards, if one is in a mostly Black neighborhood or settlement. When left to themselves, Western Civilization disappears very quickly. It has always been this way. In the old days, down South, most of them just knew better than to mess with White folks, or discipline would be swift and sure. Within their own communities, though, violence and moral depravity reigned supreme, just as much as it does now, if not more so. Venereal disease was endemic, as was incest, rape, and general violence. Thanks to segregation, though, the Negroes knew that Whites were off limits as far as their conquests of depravity.

        • me

          The South shall rise again! All over the world, this time….I think we’ve learned a hard lesson about accepting ‘diversity’ and ‘multiculturalism’. Didn’t we, boys and girls? Our grandparents weren’t as stupid as we thought, were they? Baby Boomers SUCK.

          • YngveKlezmer

            You are right. For the most part, the Boomers have bought into the media lies about race. Far too many of them are now telling their Grandchildren to be colorblind. I am thankful to have grown up with Grandparents who reinforced the importance of segregation.

        • Irishgirl

          Can anyone recommend a book/article/whatever that I could read to learn about Southern culture past and present?

          I grew up in California, never spent more than a couple days in the South, and was raised on a diet of ultra-left-wing fairy tales about the “evil Confederacy.” I’m curious about what black culture was REALLY like back then, and how it has changed (or not changed).

          • Bossman

            You could try reading some of the old classics like “Gone With the Wind” or “Uncle Tom’s Cabin.”

          • YngveKlezmer

            I recommend “The South Was Right”, by James Ronald Kennedy and Walter Donald Kennedy.

          • Irishgirl

            Thanks for the suggestions.

    • YngveKlezmer

      Cool!!! It is about time that these mainstream media Conservatives take a truly conservative stance. If they have been awakened from their apathy into racial realism, George Zimmermann has not suffered in vain.

    • Jack Burton

      Eh, not really. Yes, he tells the facts, but then leads Whites astray with BS reasons. He’s just another media Judas goat.

      O’Reilly logic: “Out-of-wedlock births, single-parent homes and violence in TV and movies turn black males into murderous psychopaths.” Wrong.

      It’s the same liberal nonsense. Poverty and bad parenting causes black failure. No, the symptoms don’t cause the disease. Inherent black failure causes it, how they evolved in Africa, their evolutionary psychology and low IQ causes all of the symptoms.

      • ncpride

        True, but my favorite parts were when he tells blacks to stop blaming their problems and failures on Whites and slavery, and leave the victim mentality behind. He actually unloaded on Sharpton and Jackson as well, so I’ll bet ‘ole Al won’t be accepting a dinner invitation from Bill any time soon.

        • Jack Burton

          If they didn’t use all of those excuses and transfer blame then they would have to face their own failures, lack of ability and accept racial facts. They will never do that.

        • Irishgirl

          Are you actually suggesting that Al Sharpton would turn down a free meal?

          • ncpride

            Ha! Good one..

  • E_Pluribus_Pluribus

    UNZ: “…the strong support of our political elites for Section 8 housing vouchers may be less connected with any alleged social benefits these provide than with their important role in moving large numbers of impoverished urban residents away from the near vicinity of wealthy neighborhoods out into the remote suburbs of the middle class . . .”

    Indeed.

    “especially if this can be accomplished under the altruistic guise of
    socially-uplifting anti-poverty programs.”

  • Spartacus

    “The combined black populations of New York City, Washington, and Los
    Angeles may have dropped by half a million over the last two decades,
    but the individuals pushed out did not disappear from the world; they
    merely moved to Atlanta or Baltimore or Riverside. But from the
    personal perspective of America’s ruling elite, they did indeed
    disappear.”

    ———————————————————————————————————————

    And here lies the main problem of our race as a whole – our “elites” would rather let the poorer whites deal with the blacks animals, instead of even publicly telling the truth, let alone actually doing something about it. Traitors, all of them.

    • YngveKlezmer

      This was why the Southern leaders and politicians, in the old days, were such good men. They had a sense of loyalty to our race. They cared about poor whites, and made sure to shape their beliefs in ways that would preserve White culture. Segregation encouraged White pride and dignity, strong morals, and holding Negro depravity in appropriate disdain. We racially aware Whites need a new White homeland that is specifically and purposefully all White, with an emphasis on European culture and strong morals. Whites who want to remain in the diversity slime pit and worship Negroes can be free to do so, but those of us who want to rebuild our European culture have the right to do so.

      • Spartacus

        We need a new elite, a true elite that worries itself first and foremost with the well-being of the race and it’s nations. But that won’t happen until we get rid of these vermin first…

        “If I had but one bullet and were faced by both an enemy and a traitor, I would let the traitor have it.” – Corneliu Zelea Codreanu

      • Aditya Vivek Barot

        With due respect to the Gentlemen of the South, I dissent: Most of the Southern Elite didn’t give a tinker’s cuss about poor whites. If they did, why would they use slaves instead of white labor? The elite, anywhere and everywhere, despise the poor. More so when the poor are robust, as whites undoubtedly were. I contend that the segregation was a sop to poor whites to enable them to feel “empowered” even though the elite were ensuring that they remained poor in perpetuity by closing off the labor market and otherwise inhibiting upward social mobility.

  • JDInSanDiego

    Unz tries to imply that Hispanic and white crime rates are the same but did he count illegal immigration as a crime? Or working without paying taxes? Or collecting welfare intended for Americans? Or stealing ID’s? Etc…

    • YngveKlezmer

      He is full of Sh*t with this!! Hispanic barrios are much safer than Black neighborhoods, no doubt, but are decidedly more violent places than mostly White neighborhoods. He seems to want to perpetuate the myth that the barrio is as safe as a White neighborhood, and has obviously fudged the stats in these graphs to perpetuate these lies. What I can’t see is why White libtards do this. What exactly do they think they are going to gain by this garbage?? A simple ride through a typical Hispanic barrio in Florida would instantly cure him of his illusion.

      • me

        It would be too risky for a pencil-necked geek to actually do some field work. Therefore, they pass data along to each other like a tribe of mentally-incestuous degenerates. God help us if academia were to actually voice the ugly truth….

        • YngveKlezmer

          If he did that, Unz might have to actually show some Cahonis, and learn to defend himself as George Zimmerman did. Unz knows what the truth is, I am sure, but he wants to win brownie points with some aging Baby Boomer boss who fried their brain on LSD back at Woodstock, and was placed in their position through sheer nepotism. Journalists used to tell the unabashed truth about non-White behavioral issues, back before the Woodstock Generation inherited their parents’ positions. Their parents, many of whom fought in WWII, were racial realists. They didn’t try to inculcate egregious lies into young minds, things such as the lie that South America is just as quiet and crime free as Spain and Portugal. They understood that a Mestizo is the result of miscegenation between a European and a South American Indian, and could see that Mestizoes, as a group, have not maintained a European style civilization in Central and South America.

      • Irishgirl

        This is just anecdotal, but my experience has been that Hispanic guys will make inappropriate (sexual) comments, possibly try to cop a feel – which is certainly disturbing and embarrassing – but black guys stare at me with a look of cold hatred in their predatory eyes that terrifies me. So if I have to choose between the lesser of two evils I’ll take the Hispanics. Of course, we shouldn’t have to make such a choice in the first place, but I know I’m preaching to the choir here.

  • din_do_nuffins

    Bill O’Reilly really went of the medz tonight and sounded like a righteous Amrener.

    He exploded on the race hustlers for not addressing the real problems and hit Obama hard for making black excuses.

    But he perpetuated a shameful fallacy.

    He said the destruction of the “African American family” is the cause of so much poverty, violence, and dysfunction. Why do White elites, even rich conservatives, still believe that blacks would get better if they acted White by creating and sustaining “families”?

    Family is a non African invention. Blacks are not suited for family. The are suited for exactly what you get when you remove them from control by Whites. They revert to type faster than any other species on earth.

    Black “problems” are just black nature made manifest. Why complain?

    O’Reilly even talked about somebody in the black community needing to tell black girls to stop getting pregnant. What a racist! Might as well tell black boys then to stop rapping and gang banging. Black girls don’t have morals as we understand the word. Jungle sex is their way.

    Sadly for us, ever since the Civil Rights movement, the White community has learned to act black. We’re doomed because we are too far gone.

    But it was fun listening to an angry White man give the rest of us reason to double down our hardened “mindset.”

    • Whitetrashgang

      Blacks do the crime Hispanics will not, also you are correct in there is no such thing as a black family more like a pack of wolves. No maybe more like a pack of chickens with their heads cut off running around with a knife.

      • din_do_nuffins

        The White community still hasn’t understood the need to ask
        the “beloved community of color” why so many black “teens”
        and “youth” continue to stigmatize themselves by living into the
        typical stereotype by renouncing Martin Luther King’s call for non violence.

        Blacks are dangerous now, but what happens when Whites are
        too much of a minority to elect our own representatives, sheriffs, and judges?

        Won’t angry blacks decide that justice is more important
        than law and order?

        We are in trouble, and the evidence will only become more
        incontrovertible.

        • YngveKlezmer

          What happens is what has happened in South Africa, and what has happened to Gary, Detroit, Newark, and Camden. Whites become prey in a predominantly Negroid environment. We must take steps to secure a White homeland for ourselves, and the time to start is now.

      • Jack Burton

        The wolf is a noble creature in comparison. More like a pack of hyenas.

    • YngveKlezmer

      You are right on the money. Recreational sex and violence are their way, and the time for us to give up on them is long overdue. They will never change. The problem, these days, is that the average conservative, from a psychological standpoint, believes that all human behavior is learned. This is just a lie, and science proves otherwise. Most psychological research proves that most human behavior is an almost 50/50 mix of genetics and learned behavior, thus the Libs failing to teach Blacks not to act Black. Taking the Negro out of the Negro makes no more sense than expecting to teach a cat not to hunt.

    • ncpride

      Yeah, he really surprised me too. I know he didn’t say what we here would want him to acknowledge, but we’re a long way from getting them to admit genetics play a huge role in black dysfunction. I thought his rant was pretty funny though!

  • SoCal88

    They have a law in South Africa that permits women who are driving alone to roll through traffic lights rather than come to a full stop, hoping to avoid being pulled from their cars and raped, murdered, or worse. We may need to consider similar laws.

    • me

      You mean, IMPLEMENT similar laws….I’m completely in favor of bringing back the Jim Crow laws.

      • Aditya Vivek Barot

        As you can see, I’m not white. But I favor Jim Crow laws. As did this man:
        “we believe as much in the purity of race as we think they do, only we believe that they would best serve the interest, which is as dear to us as it is to them, by advocating the purity of all the races and not one alone. We believe also that the white race of South Africa should be the predominating race.”

        But, subject to this caveat:
        “The last week has been very busy. We have not had a moment’s leisure. We saw Mr. Theodore Morison of Aligarh and the well-known Mr. Stead of the Review of Reviews. Mr. Stead has boldly come out to give us all the help he can. He was therefore requested to write to the same Boer leaders that they should not consider Indians as being on the same level as Kaffirs”

        Guess who said that? :)

        • me

          Who?

          • KevinPhillipsBong

            Mahatma Gandhi

          • Aditya Vivek Barot

            Finest con-man who ever lived: MK Gandhi.

          • Jack Burton

            Funny how the liberal media leave out racist quotes about blacks from Gandhi.

          • Aditya Vivek Barot

            They also leave out his blatant Jew hatred and near-lunatic anti-Zionism (Gandhi was a major Muslim appeaser – that’s why a Hindu fascist, Nathhuram Godse capped his ass.).

      • Jack Burton

        Segregation is only a temporary solution. We need repatriation and secession into an ethnostate. We need to finish what we started with the Liberia project.

    • YngveKlezmer

      Whites have been doing this for years when driving through the “vibrant” Black neighborhoods in our cities, the very neighborhoods that our Grandparents’ Generation had to move out of due to the explosion of violence the Blacks brought. The only difference between here and South Africa is that the Negroids, here, are few in number most places. Wherever they are large in number, things closely resemble South Africa.

  • Bossman

    This looks like a well-researched article with lots of meaningful graphs. I’ve not yet read it carefully but what the author seems to be saying is that Hispanic immigrants are a good antidote for black crime. Hispanics are less afraid of Blacks and they don’t mind screwing them to turn them into Hispanics. Hispanics may be a cure for the black problem in the USA.

    • bopberrigan

      Hispanics replace blacks in the cities because they establish an extended family and then react to black threats via an army of close relatives; cousins, second cousins, etc. This would be similar to the Italian Mafia. Black aggression is thus ineffective and they look for greener pastures.

      • Bossman

        Well then they do have more social cohesiveness than US Blacks.

  • ravitchn

    Racial segregation or apartheid is the only hope for America.

    • Jack Burton

      No, no, no. Haven’t you learned anything from history? Look what happened when we did have that, it doesn’t last.

      Geographic racial separation, which is how races evolved in the first place, with Whites-only citizenship is the only long-term solution.

  • JohnEngelman

    the correlations between Hispanic percentages and local crime rates were usually quite close to the same figures for whites, strongly supporting my hypothesis that the two groups had fairly similar rates of urban criminality despite their huge differences in socio-economic status.

    - Ron Unz, July 20, 2013

    I am interested in learning what Jared Taylor has to say about his. In his essay “The Color of Crime,” he wrote: “Hispanics commit violent crimes at roughly three times the white rate.”

    Ron Unz’s analysis matches my experiences. Since moving into a predominantly black city that has one of the highest crime rates in the United States I have been mugged several times by blacks and nearly murdered by blacks. I have had good experiences with Hispanics.

    • YngveKlezmer

      That all sounds positive in theory, John, but how large is the Hispanic population where you live? My general observation is that some Hispanics integrate into our mainstream White society quite well, and that the typical Hispanic barrio is far safer than a Black neighborhood, but still a pretty violent place when compared to our White neighborhoods. From what I can tell, many Hispanics are not vociferously anti-White like the Blacks are. After all, much of their culture is clearly rooted in Southern Europe, so extreme anti-White sentiment amongst them would just not make sense. Read about how the La Raza higher ups are rejecting Zimmermann, though, and one wonders. If common sense prevailed, La Raza would be offering Zimmermann protection, not denouncing him. They would be reminding Hispanic ladies how their boyfriends and husbands look like George, and how, if they had a son, he would look like George, and that he should defend himself if attacked by a Bantu.

      • Ella

        I live in a predominant Hispanic city and I see violent crime done by both Hispanics and Blacks. What isolates the Hispanic community is 1) Spanish language and 2) gangs. Whites shy away from “macho” males and Spanish speakers. Some integrate if they have been here 60 plus years, BUT with more Hispanics near Mexico expect slower integration (maybe never being next door). Many Whites just do NOT like the Mexican/Latinos cultures.

    • Jack Burton

      It does make a huge difference.

      For instance the area I grew up in and still live in is majority black. You might say why do you live there, well it’s not by choice. My family has property here, and the area used to be mostly undeveloped and all White. Since integration things have vastly changed. Schools that were once all White are predominantly black.

      However the city itself is about the same population of blacks and Whites. Like a tug of war, when the population goes 60+% black it starts slipping further and further into the Third World. It can no longer sustain itself.

  • guest

    The person who loves their own race may or may not love other
    races also, but if they do it need not be expected that their
    love or positive emotions for other races should be equal to what
    they feel for their own. It is normal to have a wide range of
    different emotions and feelings for different things, including
    different races, to value some more than others, to have preferences,
    likes and dislikes, and to discriminate on the basis of those
    preferences. It is abnormal to have the same or equal feelings
    or emotions for all things, including all races. Yet this is the
    egalitarianism of emotions, feelings and esthetic sensibilities,
    or emotional reductionism — the reduction of a complex and diverse
    variety of different types, intensities and degrees of emotion
    to a single, uniform emotion in accordance with the egalitarian
    principles of agapic love — that racial egalitarianism requires.
    It opposes the valuing or loving of one race — normally one’s
    own — more than other races, and condemns as immoral any person
    who values or loves one race — normally their own — more than
    other races, or who values or loves different races unequally,
    or in different or unequal degrees.

  • Puggg

    Sorry, Mr. Unz, but I don’t think that “they’re better than the black undertow” is a good enough much less good reason to import millions of non-whites.

  • JohnEngelman

    If Ron Unz’ analysis is correct non white immigration remains an economic concern for white employees, but not a crime concern.

    When I moved to the San Francisco Bay area I was nearly as attracted to the Hispanic presence as I was to the Oriental presence.

    • YngveKlezmer

      That is a big “if”. While I, too, have had some very good meals at Mexican restaurants in my area, with stellar service and hospitality, and I do enjoy the Mexican music, I would far prefer an influx of Eastern European immigrants. Even so, I agree with you in the sense that I would far rather have an influx of Hispanics into this country than Negroes, especially, or Arabic Muslims. We could do worse than the Hispanics, and plenty of them are good workers and decent people, far preferable to the Negroes. I’ll take a Mestizo over a Negro any day of the week. Still, I think it is tragic that America cannot receive the poor, tired, huddled masses of Eastern Europe as we did at the turn of the 20′th century. The Bosnians in St. Louis have formed a neighborhood that is actually as safe as most White suburban areas, far preferable, IMO, to a Hispanic barrio.

      • Bossman

        The USA is not accepting the huddled masses of Eastern Europe. It is also not accepting the huddled masses from anywhere else. If there are seemingly more non-white immigrants to the USA these days, it is because they are more desperate and enter through desperate means such as being refugees, partners in pre-arranged marriages and as undocumented immigrants. Also, there are more non-whites in the world than whites.

        • http://www.amren.com/ Michael Christopher Scott

          We’re flooded with greasers. Just what are you smoking?

  • Spartacus

    Indeed. Centuries from now, people will look at our age as the Age of the Traitor, as all our problems can be linked directly to those who betrayed us, who sold their souls and their nations just because they wanted money, or because they were afraid of a word, or just because they were cowards.

  • John Smith

    The trend affects non-whites too. I had a Hispanic friend whose wife packed up and went back to Mexico because she didn’t want her child growing up in the local street gang. The boy is doing well now. Getting good grades and setting goals for what he wants to be someday. It was as easy as getting out of America. The father joined them a couple of months ago. Amazing no?

    • Jack Burton

      America is a large country that varies in its racial makeup. If you live in the Black Belt or some ghetto, you’re living in a Third World environment, except with White Western laws and welfare.

      • willbest

        Having spent some time in Asia, there are actually a lot of Third World environments I would rather live in

  • Bossman

    And what country is that? A lot of you in this forum are not even American.

  • KevinPhillipsBong

    He’s from an ethnicity that has a long history in Germany but is not German.

  • Bossman

    So why don’t you do your own research and get it published? Mr. Unz article appears to be well researched.

    • JDInSanDiego

      My point was that it’s not well researched or accurately presented if he didn’t include the multitude of crimes illegals commit every day just by being here.

      Regarding violent crime, in San Diego the most crime ridden neighborhood is called…Barrio Logan. Shocking right? The most crime ridden city in San Diego County is National City and it’s not because of the 19% Philipino population. It’s 53% Mexican and 5% other Hispanic.

  • anarchyst

    . . . he’s a member of the “tribe” . . .

  • JohnEngelman

    Negroes have more genetic diversity than all of the other races combined. This means that they can evolve faster.

    • http://www.amren.com/ Michael Christopher Scott

      Certainly that might mean they can evolve faster, but in which direction?

      • JohnEngelman

        That depends on which direction there is population pressure. If intelligent blacks have children and stupid blacks do not, and if black criminals are prevented from reproducing by the frequent use of capital punishment and plenty of long prison sentences the results will be good.

        • Bossman

          Blacks all need to be hybridized with other races.

  • Kris Roys

    Unz’s analysis is a more detailed, accurate breakdown of the data. It’s a simple as that. The math is simple, easily verifiable and sound.

  • Bossman

    Were you in jail yourself? You seem so sure about that.

  • Bossman

    According to people who know that site very well, WND stands for World Nut Daily.