Housing and Disparate Impact

Today, the Supreme Court continued hearing a case brought to it by the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs. The outcome of this case will have a great effect on Whites, Asians and aspiring Latinos all across the Nation though Black Race hustlers, George Soros and the Far Leftists at Holder’s Justice Department will probably be paying the closest attention.

Texas is attempting to roll back Fair Housing Act enforcement. The Act was intended to provide Government (taxpayer) money- known as Federal tax credit subsidies- to States to provide housing for low-income people. The conflict that is about to be played out before the SCUS is not just about the interpretation of the Act but also about Federal versus States’ powers, Race and totalitarianism. On one side is the conservative State of Texas resisting the attempt by the Federal Government to extend the reach of the Act. On the other side are the Federal Government’s Quangos, States dominated by Leftists, Leftist Front Organizations and Black self-styled ‘civil rights’ groups.

Those website visitors who read our preceding article will know that in contemporary Revolutionary America many words no longer enjoy their original meanings but are employed to mislead or conceal truths about which our Ruling Class and its allies feel uncomfortable. In this case ‘low income families’, a phrase that is always on the lips of Obama and his Democrat comrades, means Blacks. In theory it could also mean low income White, Asian and Latino families but the proponents of such welfare schemes as ‘Fair Housing’ have Blacks in mind as the victims who should be beneficiaries. The word ‘families’ in this context really refers to Black women and their fatherless children. The housing that gets built and allocated under this Act is part of the greater welfare network that Americans provide to a large underclass of Blacks in order to compensate for slavery, post-Bellum unfair treatment and to assuage contemporary White Guilt.

It may be assumed that the originators of this legislation simply intended that basic dwellings should be constructed so that mainly poor Blacks would have a proper roof over their heads and not be made homeless in areas where land values were high and housing prices beyond the reach of poor people. It is possible that the originators did not adequately recognize the growing phenomenon of ‘flight’ and the natural propensity of people to group themselves together either by race or by the more subtle differences of income levels, social manners, standards of behavior, school quality and personal taste.

The most notable example of people voting with their feet and choosing to live among their social peers is the much-maligned ‘White Flight’. This, as everyone knows, is what happens when Blacks start to move into an adjoining neighborhood of Whites in noticeable numbers. Whites, if they can afford it, move on to somewhere else. In more recent times as immigration from Asia and Mexico has burgeoned, the old division of Black and White has become more complicated by the choices of the new arrivals. In places like the greater Silicon Valley area, Orientals and Indians have chosen to live among Whites. Only the poorest Oriental, Asian and Latinos live in or near Black populations and this is rarely from choice. It is becoming commonplace for Latinos to group together and there are many reports (not mentioned in the MSM) of Latinos indulging in ethnic cleansing of neighborhoods.

It may be that most Blacks prefer to live in Black areas but aspiring Blacks almost always choose to live in White and Asian areas. White/Asian areas are not uniform but range from humble to exclusive according to income and the subtle educational and behavioral mores that accompany wealth.

In a free society and a market-based economy people earn their choices in almost everything. Housing is no exception. The poorest, the least educated, the feckless, the ignorant and the luckless have the fewest choices and today are forced to live together. In the past however this was not necessarily so. In pre-1960’s homogenous Britain there were areas where poor, poorly educated and luckless people lived separately from the feckless, ignorant and criminal. The latter lived in what were called ‘slums’ and the former were described as ‘respectable’. Their self-imposed apartheid was supported by police and politicians of the Left.

Mass immigration from the Third World, and the Media Class takeover of Left-leaning working-class political parties, has resulted in the demise of areas of the respectable poor. In the USA and the UK the takeovers of worker’s political parties (and Trade Unions) has resulted in a Far Left extremism that promotes Third World immigration, multi-culturalism and multi-racialism as desirable and attainable. Since the Revolutionary Left believes that there is scientifically no such thing as human nature and that re-education, propaganda, Government –driven social manipulation and penalties can eliminate anything that stands in the way of an ‘inclusive’ Utopia, the reactionary views and behaviors of ‘the people’ need not be considered and must be overcome by edict.

Two requirements of the Revolutionary Left’s agenda are the promotion of the concept of ‘non-judgementalism’ and an attack on ‘Whiteness.’ Here is not the place to explore these concepts except to say that both are essential to its achievement.

A free society and market forces result in human nature exerting itself so that in the area of housing ‘like lives with like’. Some on the Right will argue that people naturally choose to live segregated by race and skin color. It is the view of this website that people more likely choose to live segregated by behavior and that people are naturally ‘judgemental’. Law-abiding people and aspiring people choose to live with those who share such traits and ambitions. One consequence of this is voluntarily segregated cities.

In the USA, for whatever reasons, Blacks have developed a life-style and standards that are radically different from the rest of society. Obviously there are Blacks who prefer the mainstream way of life. Those who can afford to leave Black areas do so and move to neighborhoods that are predominantly White. No doubt some have to stay and suffer in silence, but the video of the ‘gentle giant’ and his friend violently robbing the little Asian shop worker in  the Black ‘community’ of Ferguson vividly illustrates why voluntary segregation characterizes American housing. If the video seems too anecdotal and not sufficient evidence to support our theory that Blacks have developed a radically different set of standards the subsequent violent reaction of Ferguson’s citizens and the rationalizations that they spoke to the MSM and posted on the Internet, provide overwhelming evidence of their endorsement of what others would call criminal behavior. And if that was not enough evidence, there are the Nation-wide violent Black protests that have shown that the Black residents of Ferguson are not exceptional.

In attempting to cope with the voluntary segregation in housing that is the people’s choice, many States have sited ‘affordable housing’ among the people who will directly benefit from it. This has translated into building it in predominantly Black areas. The argument these States use to defend this practice is that this is where land is cheapest. It is an argument that has some merit but mostly the compelling motive is that putting affordable housing in non-Black areas results in a popular outcry from citizens in those areas. They claim that it has a detrimental effect on their house values, a claim that has some merit but which hides the truth that cannot speak its name. Affordable housing brings crime, violence, vandalism, general anti-social behavior and ‘flight’.

In our new Revolutionary society, voluntary segregation- indeed human nature- cannot be permitted and so the Revolutionaries have devised the concept of ‘disparate impact’. Since discrimination (increasingly defined as an individual’s choice) is already criminalized the Revolutionaries are seeking to persuade the Supreme Court that a policy is discriminatory if its results disproportionately affect one group of people- even if the discrimination wasn’t intentional.

‘Disparate impact’, like the legalization of same-sex marriage, is a Revolutionary weapon that will set aside free choice and the results of individual effort. It will legalize the imposition of quotas, directives as to who can live where, who has to be given a job and, in the case of SSM, whose ‘wedding’ a photographer must celebrate. Holder’s Justice Department is already flat out measuring every workforce to discover disparate impact. Tests of ability will be set aside for they result in disparate impact. Brain surgeons, airline pilots and civil engineers will have to admit quotas of every minority group, irrespective of ability. This is not far-fetched speculation. Already the fighting forces and fire-fighters have lowered standards in order to admit people who cannot function effectively enough. The consequences are circumvented by over-employment, padded jobs and by an imposed veto on public debate.

The agenda of the Revolutionary Media Class and its allies on the Far Left is disconnected from reality but as we saw in the Soviet Union, if the MSM is solely a propaganda weapon and the Ruling Class owns the judiciary and the armory, reality can be denied for decades. The Rulers will not be subjected to examination for disparate impact. Obama will not fly in a plane piloted by a racial quota pilot, Nancy Pelosi will not have the residents of Oakland as neighbors, and there will be no affordable housing built in Beverly Hills, Marin County, Miami’s Coral Gables or the Hamptons. It is aspiring working people who are to be dragged down and punished. If the Supreme Court finds against Texas it will be several more steps on the road to serfdom.

Global Warming Watch

What is there to say other than the bitter cold weather of a normal winter continues to grip most of the USA. The UK is also experiencing a normal unpleasant winter.

Music Choice

Miles Davis became a Media darling largely because he was openly moody, hostile and contemptuous of White people at a time when racial masochism was beginning to infect them. He was fortunate in that several far better trumpet players died, leaving the field rather sparsely occupied. Fats Navarro and Clifford Brown were two far superior players who died young and the third was Lee Morgan, who was shot on the bandstand by a jealous woman. Morgan like Fats Waller had the rare ability to play humorously as well as seriously. He composed and played ‘Sidewinder’ in 1963. This sinuous, ‘snakey’ recording had Joe Henderson on tenor sax, Barry Harris on piano, Bob Cranshaw on bass and the outstanding drummer Billy Higgins. Morgan unlike Davis was a happy player and on this track he is clearly enjoying himself. Enjoy it with him!

What's Your Opinion?