When the gun debate got really big under Obama, the racial component of gun crime (and all crime) became glaringly obvious, even in normie right wing spaces. Blacks commit most violent crime, despite being a small percentage of the population. The one (laughable) counter argument the left and anti-racists tried to use against these statistics, is that most of the victims of black crime are other blacks.
Why is that? It's because, despite all the ridiculous multicultural propaganda in the West, people still predominantly prefer to live with their own kind. Even in "diverse" areas, people form ethnic enclaves. I've seen it myself, in numerous locations.
So, when crime happens, the most likely victims will be of the perpetrators own kind.
However, there's obviously bleed over and blending of the populations, leading to interracial crime stats, which skew overwhelmingly towards certain races.
Non-whites, with the exclusion of certain Asians, are more violent than White people, and White people are the predominant victim of interracial crime stats. Just because a violent non-white hurts one of their own in a "spree" doesn't discount the inherent anti-White biases in interracial crime.
Why is that? It's because, despite all the ridiculous multicultural propaganda in the West, people still predominantly prefer to live with their own kind.
Nope. People predominantly prefer to live in white spaces. That’s why homes cost the most in white neighborhoods. That’s why majority white schools are so popular. Black peoples, given the option, prefer to live in the safety and prosperity of white areas, not least because whites are overly altruistic and will give away resources if you call them racist.
Look at immigration as a whole. It’s mostly black and brown people moving to white countries. That doesn’t sound like “everyone prefers their own kind”.
This multiculturalism doesn’t work for white people. For those whose lives are improved by escaping dysfunctional black communities, multiculturalism is a net gain. It’s basically redistribution of prosperity via movement of peoples. It’s a form of communism.
The one exception is Muslims, who legitimately do prefer to live amongst their own. Their strategy is to take over white areas and change the fundamental character of the place to suit Islam.
people still predominantly prefer to live with their own kind
All the proof you need is looking at a high school cafeteria. Look at who sits together. Sometimes it isn't along racial lines, but people ALWAYS sit with those like them, they never sit with people who are different than them.
Non-whites, with the exclusion of certain Asians, are more violent than White people, and White people are the predominant victim of interracial crime stats. Just because a violent non-white hurts one of their own in a "spree" doesn't discount the inherent anti-White biases in interracial crime.
Ok, but what about the counter of the fact that there's simply more White targets than non-White targets? It would make sense to see higher numbers of White victims on account of there simply being more White people overall.
Does it?
He spent 20 years on government welfare planning his revenge against <checks notes> free cash
Not necessarily.
When the gun debate got really big under Obama, the racial component of gun crime (and all crime) became glaringly obvious, even in normie right wing spaces. Blacks commit most violent crime, despite being a small percentage of the population. The one (laughable) counter argument the left and anti-racists tried to use against these statistics, is that most of the victims of black crime are other blacks.
Why is that? It's because, despite all the ridiculous multicultural propaganda in the West, people still predominantly prefer to live with their own kind. Even in "diverse" areas, people form ethnic enclaves. I've seen it myself, in numerous locations. So, when crime happens, the most likely victims will be of the perpetrators own kind.
However, there's obviously bleed over and blending of the populations, leading to interracial crime stats, which skew overwhelmingly towards certain races.
Non-whites, with the exclusion of certain Asians, are more violent than White people, and White people are the predominant victim of interracial crime stats. Just because a violent non-white hurts one of their own in a "spree" doesn't discount the inherent anti-White biases in interracial crime.
Nope. People predominantly prefer to live in white spaces. That’s why homes cost the most in white neighborhoods. That’s why majority white schools are so popular. Black peoples, given the option, prefer to live in the safety and prosperity of white areas, not least because whites are overly altruistic and will give away resources if you call them racist.
Look at immigration as a whole. It’s mostly black and brown people moving to white countries. That doesn’t sound like “everyone prefers their own kind”.
This multiculturalism doesn’t work for white people. For those whose lives are improved by escaping dysfunctional black communities, multiculturalism is a net gain. It’s basically redistribution of prosperity via movement of peoples. It’s a form of communism.
The one exception is Muslims, who legitimately do prefer to live amongst their own. Their strategy is to take over white areas and change the fundamental character of the place to suit Islam.
All the proof you need is looking at a high school cafeteria. Look at who sits together. Sometimes it isn't along racial lines, but people ALWAYS sit with those like them, they never sit with people who are different than them.
Ok, but what about the counter of the fact that there's simply more White targets than non-White targets? It would make sense to see higher numbers of White victims on account of there simply being more White people overall.