Here’s Looking Forward To Killing You

In Uncategorized on June 7, 2009 at 10:18 pm


The Freudian leitmotif to a Crash of Races, briefly touched upon in Crash, not Clash is incomplete without the mention of the primary handicap that it brings into the day-to-day relationships between peoples of varied races, and the potential catastrophe implied by the presence of a Freudian mechanism of suppression of issues vital to human survival.

A peculiarity of race relations, is that no matter how well intentioned interaction amongst the races, a special degree of attention and/or fainted lack of attention, becomes part of the person-to-person routine. No-where was this more apparent, than in the attitudes attributable to Obama’s self-professed post-racialist fans in the 2008 Presidential election. Being entirely white, these so called “trans-racialists” are called White Narcissits in the Crash of Races hypothesis. Obama’s non-white supporters  had narry a trouble expressing ethnocentric motivations behind their own votes,  while whites were giventwo choices: embrace Obama’s blackness as payback for past-wrongs or plead “post-racialism.” Singling out Obama as a  metis, or protesting the electorates’ obsession with Obama’s darker tone, was disallowed. This was the case for Obama supporters world-wide; all the white countrys’ where he enjoyed popular  support followed this, and only this, pattern.

In the daily lives of individuals of diverse communities- Robert Putnam’s trailblazing study has exposed what some would rightfully consider the biggest pit-fall of the  “diversity” doctrine and ideals of  “multi-ethnic” society. The straight-jacket of Obama’s election, bespoke of the fragility with which Whites are permitted to comment and reflect upon non-whites. Putnam’s research, focusing on inter-communal trust, translates what we witnessed in the election, to the micro-level of inter-racial dynamics.

The question of trust, deserves a separate study – and Putnam seems to have literally put-aside all further such endeavors. The bad-publicity garnered as a result of his statistics – unequivocal proof of inherent tension in all multi-racial communities, resulted in an unprecedented attempt to avoid mention of the inevitable conclusions of Putnam’s research.

Putnam’s work flushes out what many people feel, but fail to vocalise – namely the constant vigilance required when dealing with others of races different from our own. It’s like walking on egg-shells, laid over a mine-field. A lack of trust, is accompanied by increased fear. Ordinary exchanges take on new dimensions as innocent words and expressions require monitoring for content which may be found offensive to fault-finding racially sensitised peers.


The origin of this trust/fear mechanism remains to be clarified; since the mechanism has never even been acknowledged, but merely suggested by Putnam’s research, the clarification will be long in the coming. Anthropological inquiries insist on the importance of acculturation in developing the repertoire of an individuals gestuers, expressions, proxemics, and kinesics – all of which admit culture, age, and gender sensitivities. While no one has suggested sensitivities to race and ethnicity, such a factor must be considered when accounting for the difficulty of trusting those whose most intimate non-verbal communication we read least well.

Human beings are programmed for survival. Basic ethology shed a light on this survival program, when discussing the role of trust in in-group and outer-group behaviour. Trust is the glue of social cooperation, and without it, no communal undertakings are possible. Putnam’s study lays particular emphasis on the role absence of trust plays in deteriorating civic participation of American citizenry. The ethological explanation is that inter-racial relations stress trust-based activity, and produce suboptimal results for communal undertakings. Studies of human communication would add that such trust is absent specifically because gestures common to one group, do not reach across to other groups. Crucially, the comfort which non-verbal communication conveys about the “threat/no threat” aspect of a a communication pair, is absent in inter-racial interaction.


This is the case in every setting where peoples of varying races are forced to share space. At work, it is manifest by the inability to express religious, ethnic (especially white, majority ethnic – while minority are encouraged), and political opinions. In the media, by the hysteria with which any and all transgressions of racial social convention are met. In the community – by the alienation and withdrawal of certain neighbours, and the destruction of communal policing and control over public space – increasing abuse of public goods by those with the initiateive to do so, and the corresponding reliance on non-community policing – i.e. city police.

As the cases of Baghdad, Gujarat, and Yugoslavia unquestionably prove, in a very real sense,differences lay the potential for the most explosive conflict imaginable at the human scale. Segregation offers more comfort and less mental stress.

The mental stress which accompanies Racial relations, is minimised or downplayed by the imbalance of public discourse – favoring militant ethnocentrism of minorities, over reactionary hegemonism of the majority. The psychological impact of condoning and encouraging minority ethnocentrism on both majority and minority races, is never considered.

In the case of the majority people, the sacrifice required of one’s identity, means accepting race-related stress (i.e. stress result from forced compensation of diminished trust) without so much as a right to question it. In the case of minority psychology, condoning ethnic nationalism cultivates resentment, hypersensitivity, escapism, and scapegoating – undermining virtually any and all of the basic traits expected of an independent individual well integrated in the industrial process. A militant mindset sets the stage for terrible, and vicious conflict. By placing the the minority at odds with an entire system which is presented as unresponsiveive to his legitimated but unrealistic expectations, it imparts the anxiety characteristic of an insurgent outsider. An outsider waging a silent war, eyeing his future pray.

This “eying” is precisely what majority populations feel, in most of the White world. The litany of guilt-based racial discourse, creates a situation in which it is only a matter of time, before the militant outsider, takes the race riot to the level, beyond which the forces of law and order will no longer be responsive to the deligitimised majority, and hence permit costly, and brutal race based conflict.


The Freudian undercurrent to all present discussions of white and non-white relations in the white world, assures that any measures taken to prevent violent recalcitrance on the part of minorities against middle class whites, appear draconian and excessive.

If this current continues to dominate in the racial discourse, eventually  the measures required of effectively suppressing recurring racial insurgency, will not enjoy legitimacy among forces of law and order whose members actions will be constrained by lack of legitimacy. Necessary measures will not be implemented and the predator will finally break the barrier between “eying his prey” to enjoying the open-ended thrill of the unrestricted chase.

Trust is about more than just believing or listening to what someone has to say – it is ultimately about being able to decide whether a relationship presents such a threat as to require fight or flight. While it is morally impossible to decry progress of the Civil Rights era, white flight can be seen as a justified reaction to such progress by a portion of the population who cannot deal with the psychological difficulty of sharing space with non-whites. A lack of trust virtually guarantees levels of stress which made conflict-free interaction impossible.

The stress continues – and in many ways, it is heating up. White flight has reached its territorial limits. Civil Rights legislation did not lead to racial transformations of key institutions of law and order, and elite decision making groups. As more recent migrants couple economic success with ethnic assertion, a rejection of the white world’s Judeo-Christian-Secular culture, removes the final barrier between flight and fight. Whites have been checkmated.

What happens next, will largely depend on the alliances formed in key institutions of the white world – and the programs to which they dedicate their activities. The alliances involve Jews  and Asians. What they do, determines the Crash of Races scenario. The fundamental step required for coming up with a viable program that prevents genocide and debilitating racial conflict, is the one which has yet to be taken – the admission that a real Crash of Races is slowly becoming inevitable, if it continues to enjoy the protection of the shadows to which all discussions of Race have been relegated in society, as a result of the diminished power of traditional white elites.


  1. Isn’t this incindeary!? I mean this is fuckign crazy!! Now you’ve shown your true colors “skincolour” – whitey honky scared shitless in a rich black world! !

    Whatch you doing with them pimp pics!?

    You ever consider the genocide you whiteys made us go through? You bet its time for payback – but not in violence – just success, and money. And you aing gonna beat us down!

  2. Actually, I’m speechless. Rich and complicated, slightly unstructured – but you bring up all the problems we face as a nation – its true, we hide from our real fears – and we do have a lot of tension to deal with, because we don’t trust one another. So how do we restore trust. I know you mentioned elite alliances, but what about us everyday folks? What are we going to do in terms of confidence-building? You ask good questions, and they are explosive, but I don’t always see clear and reasonable answers.

  3. Wow – I don’t know what to say. A bit complex, and not easy to follow – I think you need to develop the Putnam question – but overall – the idea of being watched!

    I wonder what your “negro” readers have to say on this.

  4. I take it this is some kind of artistic essay attempting to communicate the paranoia that arises when people don’t trust one another.

    But as a black man, I can tell you more about being starred at, than you could ever imagine. While you may feel starred at – that’s your guilt speaking – we get starred at, because of hatred, and racism.

    The two aren’t the same.

    Like I said – I am married to a white woman, and I can identify with a lot of what is said here. There is a tension in personal relationships, that almost never gets discussed in the media. What you describe is a tension that takes place in communities, but there is a tension that takes place between people – friends, relatives, and partners. And that tension is sometimes hard to deal with, because you’ve got people who can’t exactly grasp the source of their problems.

    I don’t know what to add.

  5. So racism is really just the desire to not be “stressed-out” by those that are different from me? Have you ever lived in another country? Somewhere where you stand out? Well if you have and you were stressed out the whole time, that sucks for you….but in most cases, after a few weeks, you just get used to it..that’s what humans do. It’s called culture shock, and it goes away, just like altitude sickness. And you’re attributing race wars in Yugoslavia and Gujarat to cultural misunderstandings and “elevated stress levels”? You really need to go see the world man! Let me guess, you were raised monolingual. Most of the world is multi-lingual, culturally homogeneous socities are the exception, not the rule on this planet of ours. Hindus and muslims in India, or Hutus and Tutsis in Rwanda are historical enemies…when you see them interact though, its as natural as two white mid-westerners at a sports bar… So this “office space” tension you’re talking about is simply because you have two groups of people who don’t live together, and only see each other at the office, so of course it’s awkward. If you were to watch black and white individual interactions in many southern states you would see your argument fall completely apart…blacks and whites interact in very low-stress natural banter, understanding each others subtle cues very well, but there is an independent overarching animosity between the groups as a whole. It’s called racism,tribalism, what will you, but it’s a system of internalized beliefs passed down from generation to generation…and is not a product of our real world experiences. Rather, the way we interpret our real-world experiences is a product of that belief system that has been consciously and unconsciously passed down to us. Don’t just write this off…really think about it.

  6. You (even the “niggars”) cant argue with facts.Crime etc are fact.

    • What kind of moderation do you want?snoopy dog says its ok to say “niggar” are you saying its not?

  7. […] “Here’s Looking Forward to Killing You” the research of Robert Putnam was mentioned so as to introduce the aggressive psychological […]

  8. […] flotsam accumulating as racial self-hatred in the psyches of Whites. In an atmosphere of asymmetric racial tension (where one participant group perceives any and all acts of communication from another as genocide […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: