I could do the whole bit about how American blacks are the wealthiest and most privileged blacks on earth, specifically because they were brought over as slaves.

I could do the thing about how the welfare they’ve sucked out of the white taxpayer is so much more than the wealth they produced working as slaves.

I could note that every single one of the endless black-on-white violent crimes that happens in this country every day is payback for slavery.

I could point out that even if you gave every black in America a million dollars in cash tomorrow, it would all be blown on drugs and parties and gold chains and rims in a matter of weeks, and blacks would be left in the exact same position they were in before receiving the money.

But it’s so dumb. I just don’t even want to engage this sort of thing.

It’s so ridiculous that responding to it makes me feel like I am ridiculous.

Fox News:

The question of slavery reparations for black Americans was the subject of a fiery and emotional House Judiciary Committee hearing Wednesday as Democrats called for measures to address America’s “original sin” — while Republicans described such payments as an “injustice” and “almost certainly unconstitutional.”

The Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties subcommittee held the hearing on H.R. 40 — a bill by Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee, D-Texas, to set up a commission to study and develop a response to the question of reparations for slavery.

Democrats such as former President Barack Obama and 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton opposed such a costly plan in the past. But amid a steady shift in the party to the left, the issue has been given new life with endorsements from 2020 hopefuls and others — though details remain vague as to what form such reparations should take, with estimates for a controversial direct payment to slave descendants running into the trillions.

“The role of the federal government in supporting the institution of slavery and subsequent discrimination directed against blacks is an injustice that must be formally acknowledged and addressed,” Jackson-Lee said.

“I just simply ask: Why not and why not now?” she said.

Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., who is running for president and has introduced a version of Jackson-Lee’s bill in the Senate, said it is wrong to present the issue as one American writing a check for another, and called on lawmakers to deal with what he said is continued racism in America.

Citing racial disparities on issues such as health and education, he said America has a criminal justice system “that is indeed a form of new Jim Crow.”

“And so we as a nation have not yet truly acknowledged and grappled with racism and white supremacy that has tainted this country’s founding and continues to persist in those deep racial disparities and inequalities today,” he said.

Republicans, meanwhile, recognized the horrors of slavery but said that reparations were not the way forward. Congressman Mike Johnson, R-La., was booed and heckled during his remarks.

“Putting aside the injustice of monetary reparations from current taxpayers for the sins of a small subset of Americans from many generations ago, the fair distribution of reparations would be nearly impossible when one considers the complexity of the American struggle to abolish slavery,” he said.

…

Activist and actor Danny Glover testified at the hearing, as did author Ta-Nehisi Coates, who wrote an influential 2014 essay on the subject and criticized McConnell by name in Wednesday’s hearing. He said that America was paying out pensions to heirs of Civil War veterans into this century, and still honors hundred-year-old treaties.

“Many of us would love to be taxed for the things we are solely and individually responsible for, but we are American citizens and thus bound to a collective enterprise that extends beyond our individual and personal reach,” he said.

Hey, “Ta-Nehisi.”

Where would you be if your ancestors weren’t slaves?

That’s right.

You would be living in a mud hut in Africa with a plate in your lip.

Because you are a nigger.

And mud huts are what niggers live in when they don’t have white people to babysit them and teach them how to pretend to be real people.

All of you niggers asking for handouts are full of shit and you all know it. If you actually hated this country as much as you claim to, you’d get on a plane and go the fuck back home to your mud huts and lip plates.

No one is keeping you here.

But a lot of people are getting real fucking fed up with your whining.

Most black people are totally worthless niggers and accomplish absolutely nothing their entire lives.

Distinguished colored gentleman Kanye West however is a genius, the best selling and most award-winning musician ever, and the eternal savior of the black race, AKA the black version of Jesus.

So it is zero percent surprising that worthless, stupid niggers are jealous of Kanye.

RT:

Kanye West is abandoning his black roots by embracing President Donald Trump and “white freedom,” says author and activist Ta-Nehisi Coates, the latest celebrity piling onto the rapper over his political views.

In a 5,000-word essay in The Atlantic magazine, the author of ‘We Were Eight Years in Power’ argues that many African-Americans, including himself, had considered West a “god” akin to Michael Jackson.

“The rule of Donald Trump is predicated on the infliction of maximum misery on West’s most ardent parishioners, the portions of America, the muck, that made the god Kanye possible,” Coates wrote. “But for black artists who rise to the heights of Jackson and West, the weight is more, because they come from communities in desperate need of champions.”

And who is the champion, “Ta-Nehisi”?

You?

Because you look like a fucking faggot.

You look like you couldn’t manage to be the champion of a gay pride parade.

Two weeks ago, West set Twitter on fire by posting a photo of an autographed Make America Great Again hat and calling Trump a “brother” who shared his “dragon energy.” He refused to walk back his comments in the face of a backlash from many black celebrities, saying instead that he was a free thinker who refused to live in the “prison” prescribed by others.

“[Kanye] is, indeed, championing a kind of freedom — a white freedom, freedom without consequence, freedom without criticism, freedom to be proud and ignorant… the freedom of rape buttons, pussy grabbers… the freedom of suburbs drawn with red lines, the white freedom of Calabasas,” Coates wrote, referring to the California hometown of West’s wife, Kim Kardashian.

This guy is so absolutely full of shit.

The only legitimate “intellectual” anti-white position is this: move back to fucking Africa. 

But Ta-Nahesi won’t do it. Meaning he is a fraud.

Because where does he live?

Doesn’t look very African, bro.

People are calling your bluff, nigger.

Kanye West has sold hundreds of millions of albums and recorded all of the best rap albums of the decade (that weren’t by Gucci) and at least 3 of the best ten albums of the last decade total.

NOTE: If you don't know which three I'm talking about, you're fucking stupid. Also, if you give me shit about giving a colored gentleman props for making good music, it actually shows you aren't a serious racist but a cartoonish one. It's like saying because women are stupid, you don't like fondling their boobs. The supremacy of the white race is evident across the entire planet presently and throughout all of history. Claiming that Kanye West doesn't make good music or that he isn't the black Jesus actually discredits you when you state the obvious fact of white supremacy.

He also literally was crucified (similarly to another prominent savior, he was crucified by the Jews) and rose again for the sins of the black race.

Coates, what exactly did you do?

Write a 5,000 word thesaurus-based word soup gibberish piece for the Atlantic that not even signally white people will bother to read?

The NON-BLACKS praising it didn’t read it – they just already know these “arguments” in your incomprehensible soup, which are not your arguments, but the arguments of your kike masters.

It’s been a long time since I’ve read such a singular devastation of truth. This piece is filled with empathy and understanding and pain. Please read this piece by Ta-Nehisi Coates. Read every last drop. https://t.co/YsBSieQEZq

— Amber Tamblyn (@ambertamblyn) May 7, 2018

I'm just going to keep on tweeting this Ta-Nehisi Coates piece on Kanye West, and on his own brush with fame, until everyone reads it. Not just because the arguments in it are worth reading, but because the writing itself is so magical https://t.co/pTUtqiuweg

— Mathew Ingram (@mathewi) May 7, 2018

Move to Africa, Coates.

It’s the only way anything you say can ever make any sense.

So I think it’s time for us to have a toast
Let’s have a toast for the douchebags
Let’s have a toast for the assholes
Let’s have a toast for the scumbags
Every one of them that I know
Let’s have a toast for the jerk-offs
That’ll never take work off
Baby, I got a plan
Run away fast as you can

Get.

The.

Fuck.

Out.

Btw – Justin supports Kanye.

And I have a feeling you’re gonna be hearing a lot more from Justin in the near future.

Oh Great.

That Black terrorist guy is going to write your Marvel comics for you now.

New York Times:

Ta-Nehisi Coates can be identified in many ways: as a national correspondent for The Atlantic, as an author and, as of this month, as a nominee for the National Book Award’s nonfiction prize. But Mr. Coates also has a not-so-secret identity, as evidenced by some of his Atlantic blog posts and his Twitter feed: Marvel Comics superfan.

So it seems only natural that Marvel has asked Mr. Coates to take on a new Black Panther series set to begin next spring. Writing for that comics publisher is a childhood dream that, despite the seeming incongruity, came about thanks to his day job. “The Atlantic is a pretty diverse place in terms of interest, but there are no comics nerds,” besides himself, Mr. Coates said in an interview.

I told you comic-fags if you didn’t have a gamergate, there was no point at which these people would stop.

You didn’t listen.

All you had to do was listen.

Julian Castro, the former $20-per-day fake mayor of San Antonio promoted to Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, announced the Obama Administration’s new plan to move inner city poor people to your neighborhood on Wednesday in Chicago, a place I may have mentioned once or twice in discussing housing.

The Washington Post coordinated with the White House ahead of time to come up with an immense piece about how redlining in the distant past is the reason for the travails of blacks today:

Martin Luther King Jr. chose Chicago when, in 1966, he launched a campaign for “open housing” in northern cities where blacks had been restricted to slums. On Chicago’s South Side, their neighborhoods had been “redlined” by banks that refused to lend to black homebuyers. Restrictive covenants outside the ghetto barred blacks from moving in.

How can anything that happened in the last half century when liberals were running the race question in America have any influence on 2015? Haven’t you read today’s greatest public intellectual Ta-Nehisi Coates about the 1930s? Liberalism hasn’t failed, it just hasn’t yet been tried.

The Post put together a map proving that that white racism was still keeping the black down:

Okay, so there are almost no neighborhoods left in Chicago that aren’t at least 1% black. (By the way, that tiny new black-free neighborhood on the northwest side that emerged between 2000 and 2010 is very near where former Obama chief of staff and now mayor of Chicago Rahm Emanuel lives.)

The Austin neighborhood where my wife grew up is the left edge slightly north of the midline that changed rapidly from 1960 to 1980 (it’s now only 4% white). Whereas Oak Park, IL, where my father grew up is just to the left of Austin off the map and did not change rapidly due to city fathers imposing the black-a-block quota on real estate agents. The very liberal, very gay, quite white Oak Park is still 64% white.

Perhaps just to troll me, the New York Times explains:

Some local governments, like the Chicago suburb of Oak Park, have already created the kinds of fair housing plans the federal government will now require. Rob Breymaier, the executive director of the Oak Park Regional Housing Center, a nonprofit group that advocates “meaningful and lasting racial diversity,” said he hoped other communities would follow that example.

“This rule makes it clear that the fair housing obligation isn’t just being able to say, ‘I didn’t discriminate,’ ” Mr. Breymaier said. “It’s also saying, ‘I’m doing something proactively to promote an integrated or inclusive community.’ ”

Yeah, right …

In contrast to everybody knowing all about redlining in FDR’s day, the history of liberal control of housing from 1968 onward has disappeared down the memory hole. Fortunately, a liberal journalist named Alyssa Katz published a solid 2009 book, Our Lot, that documented the disastrous impact of liberal power on the Austin neighborhood in Chicago. I reviewed it in VDARE six years ago:

Our Lot: How Real Estate Came to Own Us by Alyssa Katz, a liberal journalist and NYU journalism professor who writes for Mother Jones, is the best book yet on how the sacred cause of “diversity” merged with pedal-to-the-metal capitalism to bring us the Great Mortgage Meltdown.

The book hasn’t garnered the attention it deserves—probably because it makes clear the bipartisan responsibility of both her opponents on the Right and her friends on the Left.

Our Lot focuses equally on the misdeeds of both capitalists and leftists. But I won’t give the boiler room boys as much attention in this review because they’re a more familiar tale, while Katz`s reporting on the role of her side is compelling “testimony against interest.”

Katz is remarkably frank about how government programs and political pressure to boost minority homeownership helped blow up the economy. She’s particularly good at explicating how leftist housing activists, such as ACORN and Gale Cincotta, the godmother of the Community Reinvestment Act, worked with Democratic politicians such as Bill Clinton, HUD Secretary Henry Cisneros, and Jim Johnson, CEO of Fannie Mae, to lay the groundwork for the Bubble and Bust.

Katz doesn’t devote quite as much depth to the Bush Administration`s culpability (which, to my mind, is even greater). Perhaps she lacked Republican contacts to give her the kind of inside story she got on her own party’s mistakes.

Still, Our Lot makes clear that on housing policy, the Clinton-Bush years form a single continuum with one overarching plan: boost the minority homeownership rate by lowering credit standards. I call it the Era of Multi-Culti Capitalism.

And there’s little reason to think that its lessons have been learned yet.

Katz begins her book in 1972, in the collapsing Austin neighborhood on Chicago’s Far West side, where Gale Cincotta was a Greek-American housewife.

Fortuitously for me, Our Lot fills in the political backstory of my own in-laws’ lives. My wife grew up in Austin, which had been a peaceful, densely populated working class [actually, middle class] neighborhood where small children could play safely on the crowded sidewalks. Suddenly, in the late 1960s, middle class blacks began buying into the neighborhood.

Friends warned my late father-in-law, a classical musician and union leader, to flee, that underclass blacks would follow. But he and my late mother-in-law, a schoolteacher, resolved to show that integration could work.

After my future wife was mugged twice and her younger brother once, however, my in-laws finally sold in 1970—losing half their life savings. They moved 63 miles out of Chicago, to a dilapidated farm where they lacked running water for their first two years. (And my father-in-law started voting Republican.)

How did this disaster hit Austin? Katz demonstrates that it was the direct result of a 1968 change in the Federal Housing Administration, which set off a bubble and bust in America`s inner cities, like a smaller precursor of this decade. As in 2005,

“In 1972, in Chicago and in every other city in the nation, almost anyone could get a home mortgage, including borrowers who didn’t earn enough to pay them off, on just about any house, for any reason. … And just like the recent adventure in lending beyond any rational limits, the mortgage disaster of the early 1970s was born from a lofty ideological conviction that enabled the basest of crimes and most foolish of gambles under its cover, insulated from almost any scrutiny until the damage was already done.”

Franklin D. Roosevelt had started the Federal Housing Administration to insure home loans, and Fannie Mae to buy loans from lenders. Together, these agencies created the familiar template of 30-year-year fixed rate mortgages with a moderate down payment that underpinned the growth of home-owning suburbanites after WWII.

FDR’s FHA, however, was reluctant to back loans in black neighborhoods—a practice that Cincotta later dubbed “redlining.” Eventually, in 1968, liberal Illinois Republican Senator Charles Percy and the Johnson Administration revamped the FHA in a more politically correct direction. Katz explains:

“The FHA was now, in effect, a front in the War on Poverty. … Under the new regime, homebuyers living in Chicago and other inner cities weren’t just eligible for loans. Lenders who signed up to sell FHA-insured mortgages were asked to do everything they could to make sure the buyers got them.”

Of course, the results of the Federal government`s encouraging mortgages with down payments of never more than $500 were absolutely predictable:

“Across the country, neighborhood destruction became a booming business, financed by the federal government. In Chicago they called it ‘panic peddling.’ In New York, it was ‘blockbusting.’ … The FHA-insured loans threw gasoline on that smoldering fire. … Indeed, the insurance made it profitable to seek out the most impoverished and unreliable borrowers, since the sooner a borrower defaulted on a loan, the more quickly the lender would get paid back in full by FHA.”

In Chicago, Gale Cincotta started a national coalition of “community activists,” who helped pass the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act of 1975 and the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977. Cincotta remains a heroine to the author, although she can’t quite make clear Cincotta’s logic. If the feds encouraging lending to minorities had destroyed Austin, how was more hair of the dog that bit you supposed to fix Austin?

Sadly, Austin remains unfixed. On a visit to Chicago earlier this month, my wife drove by her old house. Her former home had no doorknob, just an empty hole in the front door. But at least it was still standing, unlike two large apartment buildings on her old block, which are now just crabgrass-covered vacant lots.

Cincotta died in 2001—across the municipal border from Austin in Oak Park. In telling contrast to Austin, that prosperous suburb that had succeeded in saving its famous district of Frank Lloyd Wright homes (where my father was born in 1917) by limiting the number of blacks allowed to move in through its notoriously illegal but effective “black-a-block“ quota.

Katz notes that Cincotta`s organization of the left, combined with the invention of mortgage securitizing by investment banker Lewis Ranieri in 1983, made possible the disasters of this decade.

Cincotta began siccing her “pushy capitalist radicals” on Fannie Mae, which remained reluctant to buy the dubious mortgages of likely deadbeats. Still, Katz writes, “The reality was that to meet its growth objectives, Fannie Mae needed these poor people as much as the poor people needed them.”

Looking back from 2009, Katz asks:

“How did Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac … turn into the world`s biggest funders of Wall Street-backed subprime mortgages? … It all started with the best of intentions, with … the activists who demanded bank loans for the poor and urban.”

But how can any of this more recent history be of any importance compared to events from Glenn Miller’s heyday?