Give Us Your Violent Masses

smashed police carPolice were called to a rowdy party in North Melbourne at the end of April. Apparently up to fifty Sundanese youths were involved. The police got them to leave the premises but they created mayhem outside, including damaging police cars. The police took refuge in the townhouse rather than confront the youths. At least that is the way it was reported in The Age and in other news outlets. Also, according to a report in The Age, it was estimated that seven police officers originally attended the scene.

The precise facts of the case are not pertinent to my theme. What is pertinent is that the police were clearly well outnumbered. I heard some commentators imply criticism of the police, deflected onto those giving them riding instructions, for not confronting the thugs in the street. This is plain silly.

Police officers are human beings just like you and me. If possible they would like to end their shifts without incurring life-changing injuries. I once ran into the back of car in the centre of Adelaide. Three policemen where talking to a group of five or six disorderly Aboriginal men on a corner outside a pub. I called one of the policemen over to do the right thing and report the accident. He was young. He couldn’t have cared less about my prang and returned quickly to his colleagues. It was obvious. He was (very) visibly nervous at the prospect of tangling with five or six drunken Aboriginals when he was one of just three.

About week after the North Melbourne incident it was reported that some 150 youths of “African appearance” (presumably not disciples of Al Jolson) trashed a house in the Melbourne suburb of Footscray while the police stood by. Apparently, the police told the owner of the rented property that they could not enter unless she had proof that damage was being done. A strange business perhaps but would you like to face up to 150 youths, African or otherwise, behaving riotously unless backed by a SWAT team and tanks?

My point is that being seriously outnumbered, as was the case in North Melbourne and Footscray, is an impossible situation for the police unless there is confidence in an implied social contract between both sides. That social contract, which we have grown up with, is that the police will only act in accordance with their authority and, when they so act, that civilians – even when well outnumbering the police – will comply with lawful directions. Or at the very least will not turn on the police in a physically violent way.

I am prepared to guess that Sudanese youths running wild have not heard of this social contract. I am very sure the police suspect that they haven’t. What then exactly are the police to do? Perhaps they should venture forward with Tasers and truncheons at the ready. Good luck with that one. Of course, police have guns. But imagine what the media would make of them drawing them, never mind firing even warning shots? The police officers concerned would risk losing their careers and perhaps their freedom.

Our society, as its structured, cannot handle large gangs wreaking violence in public places. Gang members who injure and kill only each other is one thing. It is quite another if they run riot on the streets. We are not set up to handle it. Societies that are, Central American republics for example, look different to ours. You often see pictures on the TV of police weighing into rioters without a care for their welfare. We might tut-tut but exactly what do you do when large numbers of people are intent on violence?

There is no benign answer. In the case of the recent gang violence (and, let’s not forget, home invasions) in Melbourne, the answer would have been to have never let Sudanese refugees enter the country in the first place, or any refugees who pose the slightest risk to civilised values. Australian citizens come first, or they should. Unfortunately, successive governments have put their citizens at risk in order to satisfy do-gooder international conventions. That’s why Trump is so refreshing in simply trying to put Americans first. How novel is that nowadays! Australians injured by Sudanese violence should rightfully direct their ire at the political class who have conspired to put their safety in jeopardy.

As it is, there is little option but to go on increasing the militarisation of police forces. That’s what Islamic terrorism has already brought, together with intrusive searches, inconveniences and bollards. Sudanese gangs just up the ante. At question, I suppose for us ordinary Joes, is who next? Which people from which dysfunctional culture will be chosen next by politicians to supplement our population.

A passing thought. I doubt we would find white South African farmers trashing houses and running wild in the streets. Just a guess.

10 thoughts on “Give Us Your Violent Masses

  • PT says:

    Quite right. Sudanese and Somalis are trouble. Beyond being failed states, they are failed societies. Their rights and responsibilities should have been impressed upon them as soon as they arrived, but weren’t (only the “rights” were).

    The issue is still solvable if the State is determined and ignores political correctness.

    Firstly, they MUST create and fund an anti-gang taskforce. This has to have high levels of physical strength and presence built in to intimidate the gangs: no Newman style rubbish about lowering standards because not enough women can meet them rubbish!

    Secondly, specific laws targeting these offences must be enacted. We have mandatory arrest in cases of the police being called to domestic violence incidents now, and this may be nothing more than a touch! So why not specific laws for these thugs who terrorise women and children in their own homes?

    Thirdly, those who can be should be deported if they are repeat offenders, or if the offence is of a sufficiently serious nature!

    If these “kids” don’t know you can’t just rob houses, beat people into pulps for the fun of it etc in Australia then surely they’ll never be acceptable members of the community. If they know it’s wrong (as they actually do) they they have to be aware of the consequences.

    Of course our virtue signallers will whinge greatly – until they’re victimised of course.

  • Jody says:

    I vote that all inner urban lefties get these unsuitable immigrants as neighbours.

  • Jacob Jonker says:

    Upon a brief period of reflection, anout thirty seconds in my case, probably because I’m predisposed to a certain scepticism, one cannot but come to the conclusion that the government has a deliberate aim in planning and executing a covert law and order policy. The is covert in the sense that such policy is not divulged to people outside of the clique of corporate colluders. Let me explain: A burglar breaks into a property at night and is confronted by the only occupant, an old geezer in his eighties. The old geezer uses and old baseball bat to keep the aggressive burglar at bay. The burglar steps back a fraction and loses his(not her, it is safe to assume) balance, breaks his neck and the old geezer calls an ambulance and then the police. The police would not be backward arresting the old geezer and charging him with manslaughter. Yet, when the police are confronted by mobs of non-white vandals wrecking a house, according to the owner, the police will not have a look while this is going on, because…, they might get hurt. There is no law to protect police officers from assault by mobs running amok, apparently, but if it were a few people, or just one attacking a police officers, then the law would indeed apply. Likewise if there is a protest march which gets violent. If it is whites the riot squad would be called in. Somehow, the law is not being applied justly. This makes a mockery of the law, law and order and it makes the people in charge, whosoever they may be, look as if they are breaking the law, the Constitution and Common Law, and riding roughshod over the rights of peaceful and law-abiding citizens who pay rates and income tax, too. It is, however, non-PC to make such observation.
    Soon, critical comment directed at the authorities (as the people peopling the institutions directing and/or managing society’s affairs see themselves) and those working, or rather getting paid, at the “‘authorities’s” behalf, will be legislated against. It has been remarked by scholars who have studied fascism and communism that violent crime under these regimes was remarkable for its absence. However, one must not suppose that lawlessness in society is a sign that fascism and communism are absent. There is usually a method in the madness of dominators and exploiters.
    The lawlessness of gangs is tolerated by the authorities as and when it suits the covert agenda of they who control the “authorities”. The covert agenda will become obvious in due course. What might it be? We’ll just have to wait and see, or take a punt on it.

  • rh@rharrison.com says:

    “… would you like to face up to 150 youths, African or otherwise, behaving riotously unless backed by a SWAT team and tanks?”

    A fair point. But actually the Victoria Police riot squad (the Public Order Response Team) were in attendance at that Footscray incident. (No tanks, though.)

    Wikipedia informs us that the PORT has 105 officers in its ranks, and given that the incident unfolded over several hours, there is no reason the whole 105 uniforms couldn’t have been deployed, if Vic Pol genuinely wanted to stop the incident.

  • Jody says:

    In Austria this wouldn’t be tolerated for 1 hour without the tanks, water cannon and police coming out in their HUNDREDS. I’ve seen it myself!! “Oh, but that’s a right wing country”, I hear you say. “Yep; that’s what it takes to get public safety these days”, is my answer.

  • en passant says:

    This is the problem Oz has naively caused for itself. Long, but worth the time & effort to read.

    In July 2008, Irish journalist and writer Kevin Myers wrote an article arguing that providing aid to Africa only results in increasing its population, and its problems.

    This is the report by Kevin Myers which appeared in The Irish Independent:

    “Somalia is not a humanitarian disaster; it is an evolutionary disaster. The current drought is not the worst in 50 years, as the BBC, and all the aid organisations claim. It is nothing compared to the droughts in 1960/61 or73/74. And there are continuing droughts every 5 years or so. It’s just that there are now four times the population; having been kept alive by famine relief, supplied by aid organisations, over the past 50 years. So, of course, the effects of any drought now, is a famine. They cannot even feed themselves in a normal rainfall year.

    Worst yet, the effects of these droughts, and poor nutrition in the first 3 years of the a child’s life, have a lasting effect on the development of the infant brain, so that if they survive, they will never achieve a normal IQ. Consequently, they are selectively breeding a population, who cannot be educated , let alone one that is not being educated; a recipe for disaster.

    We are seeing this impact now, and it can only exacerbate, to the detriment of their neighbours, and their environment as well. This scenario can only end in an even worse disaster; with even worse suffering, for those benighted people, and their descendants.
    Eventually, some mechanism will intervene, be it war, disease or starvation.
    So what do we do? Let them starve?

    What a dilemma for our Judeo/ Christian/Islamic Ethos; as well as Hindu/Buddhist morality.
    And this is beginning to happen in Kenya, Ethiopia, and other countries in Asia, like Pakistan.
    Is this the beginning of the end of civilisation?

    AFRICA is giving nothing to anyone outside Africa — apart from AIDS and new disease.
    Even as we see African states refusing to take action to restore something resembling civilisation in Zimbabwe, the Begging bowl for Ethiopia is being passed around to us out of Africa, yet again.
    It is nearly 25 years since the famous Feed The World campaign began in Ethiopia, and in that time Ethiopia’s population has grown from 33.5 million to 78+ million today.

    So, why on earth should I do anything to encourage further catastrophic demographic growth in that country?
    Where is the logic? There is none.
    To be sure, there are two things saying that logic doesn’t count. One is my conscience, and the other is the picture, yet again, of another wide-eyed child, yet again, gazing, yet again, at the camera, which yet again, captures the tragedy of children starving.

    Sorry. My conscience has toured this territory on foot and financially.
    Unlike most of you, I have been to Ethiopia; like most of you, I have stumped up the loot to charities to stop starvation there.
    The wide-eyed boy-child we saved, 20 years or so ago, is now a low IQ, AK 47-bearing moron, siring children whenever the whim takes him, and blaming the world because he is uneducated, poor and left behind.

    There is no doubt a good argument why we should prolong this predatory and dysfunctional economic, social and sexual system; but I do not know what it is. There is, on the other hand, every reason not to write a column like this.
    It will win no friends, and will provoke the self-righteous wrath of, well, the self-righteous, hand-wringing, letter-writing wrathful individuals, a species which never fails to contaminate almost every debate in Irish life with its sneers and its moral superiority. It will also probably enrage some of the finest men in Irish life, like John O’Shea, of Goal; and the Finucane brothers, men whom I admire enormously. So be it.

    But, please, please, you self-righteously wrathful, spare me mention of our own Irish Famine, with this or that lazy analogy. There is no comparison. Within 20 years of the Famine, the Irish population was down by 30%. Over the equivalent period, thanks to western food, the Mercedes 10-wheel truck and the Lockheed Hercules planes, Ethiopia’s population has more than doubled.
    Alas, that wretched country is not alone in its madness. Somewhere, over the rainbow, lies Somalia, another fine land of violent, AK 47-toting, khat-chewing, girl-circumcising, permanently-tumescent layabouts, and housing pirates of the ocean.
    Indeed, we now have almost an entire continent of sexually-hyperactive, illiterate indigents, with tens of millions of people who only survive because of help from the outside world or allowances by the semi communist Governments they voted for, money supplied by lending it from the World Bank!!!

    This dependency has not stimulated political prudence or commonsense. Indeed, voodoo idiocy seems to be in the ascendant, with the president of South Africa being a firm believer in the efficacy of a little tap water on the post-coital penis as a sure preventative against AIDS infection.
    Needless to say, poverty, hunger and societal meltdown have not prevented idiotic wars involving Tigre, Uganda, Congo, Sudan, Somalia, Eritrea, et cetera.
    Broad brush-strokes, to be sure. But broad brush-strokes are often the way that history paints its gaudier, if more decisive, chapters. Japan, China, Russia, Korea, Poland, Germany, Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia in the 20th century have endured worse broad brush-strokes than almost any part of Africa.
    They are now — one way or another — virtually all giving aid to or investing in Africa, whereas Africa, with its vast savannahs and its lush pastures, is giving almost nothing to anyone, apart from AIDS.

    Meanwhile, Africa’s peoples are outstripping their resources, and causing catastrophic ecological degradation. By 2050, the population of Ethiopia will be 177 million; the equivalent of France, Germany and Benelux today, but located on the parched and increasingly Protein-free wastelands of the Great Rift Valley.
    So, how much sense does it make for us actively to increase the adult population of what is already a vastly over-populated, environmentally devastated and economically dependent country?
    How much morality is there in saving an Ethiopian child from starvation today, for it to survive to a life of brutal circumcision, poverty, hunger, violence and sexual abuse, resulting in another half-dozen such wide-eyed children, with comparably jolly little lives ahead of them? Of course, it might make you feel better, which is a prime reason for so much charity!
    But that is not good enough. For self-serving generosity has been one of the curses of Africa. It has sustained political systems which would otherwise have collapsed.

    It prolonged the Eritrean-Ethiopian war by nearly a decade. It is inspiring Bill Gates’ programme to rid the continent of malaria, when, in the almost complete absence of personal self-discipline, that disease is one of the most efficacious forms of population-control now operating. If his programme is successful, tens of millions of children who would otherwise have died in infancy will survive to adulthood, he boasts.”

    Oh good: then what? I know, let them all come here (to Ireland) or America. (not forgetting Australia!)

    Now that’s an idea.

    • Jacob Jonker says:

      Never heard of Kevin Myers, but evidently I was picking up his vibes back then. So, very good comment in passing. Yes, what to do? This is one unique problem touched upon here, and has been obvious for decades. The beauty of this problem is in its inexorability. All the other little problems we have in the West will be efficiently and conclusively dealt with by this issue. I have been onto this for decades from a slightly more Europe-centred perspective. It is not only Africa that is sure to give the West a severe headache. Look at South- and Middle America, look everywhere. Let us pray that our good friend Xi, Chairman for life in the People’s Republic, is able to keep things calm and peaceful there for the foreseeable future, say, five hundred years, by which time there will be no Europeans left to speak of, to worry about these things, which is really a luxury afforded us, or a burden. I am not aware that the Somalians in Western Europe worry thus. They are surely a challenge for the peoples in Western Europe. When I started going off the EU and the Commissars, I started thinking about survival for the peoples in Western Europe. I thought fortress Europe was the way to go, the only chance. It’s slow going, against the EU tyranny, but with the help from the Visegrad nations and others in that corner minded to fight for survival, the Europeans might yet save themselves.

      The moral dilemma as so well put by en passant is worth going into. It has occupied me for years. The exercise itself is virtually essential in order for people to prepare for survival, wherever they are. It is ultimately a spiritual thing, nothing to do with God imo. For committed Christians it can only be a choice between the O.T. And the N.T. When it comes to the crunch, you are a Christian and stick to the N. Testament or else you are not. The O.T. Is for Israel. True, Jesus said He did not come to overturn The Law, but to affirm it, but He meant obviously, from His other pronouncements and sayings, to affirm The Law, not repeat the history of the O.T. However, that is for Christians to fight over. It will take a few thousand years before they are agreed. Well, only kidding. They will never agree, not in a million years. So that leaves the rest of European society and the rest of humanity insofar as they support civilisation to mull this over.

      Through our parliamentary representatives we can do nothing worthwhile that I can see. By the time the majority of the western electorates have come to their senses they will be powerless to influence affairs of state and as for action through through federal structures, in Europe at least, that would take a bloody revolution in which case government will be no more. In a normative political sense, people in the West are powerless. I said years ago that our governments, political party system and most of the body politic had been hijacked, and the nation-state, for all intents and purposes, with it. It so happens I have known about the story put out by J Witnesses practically all my life. It would be worthwhile to hear what they have to offer in terms of a likely scenario. Personally, I think a Mad Max situation will come about, warlordism, that kind of thing. Where to run? How to defend the place? There is no place on earth that I can think of where one could hide indefinitely and survive, unless one could live off the land and be unmolested by slavetraders. Given the technology of today, no hope of escaping the biggest warlords with the means to survive lesser warlords. One could hope they cancel each other put, but there are too many people on this planet for us to head for the hills and live on berries, roots and leaves. There would be wildlife to kill. That will be the first to go. A conundrum.

      Back to the moral dimension. It will be down to an individual choice between seeking survival for oneself and compatriots, close family, friends and so on, or give up and leave it to fate. The true Christian will turn the other cheek and accept their fate with a loving heart. That, btw, is also a valid choice for non-believers so-called, the not religious. Philosophy can take one there without need for a God to hold one’s hand. As far as I know, the pnly way to do that is through pure Tibetan Buddhist philosophy. However, there may be people who can take a leaf from Viktor Frankl’s philosophy. The problem of what to do about the poor people in Africa, starving and whatever, is for academics, politicians, bureaucrats and the people running charities to worry about, which they will do to the ill-effect as has been obvious for years, until they run out of money that is worth anything. We can rest assured, however, that these people just mentioned will be, as they already are, our, us survivors’, biggest worry. These people now in charge, having a fine time on the gravy train while they are sorring out the world’s problems will pull out all stops and heed nothing in order to keep getting the money to go on as they have been doing. Spending other people’s money to live it up. They are in charge, they will not let go of the power they have, they will not give up control. They will fight tooth and nail, as dirty as can be, to stay on top.

      The moral is: prepare to survive as a nation-state against all odds, which some peoples will be able to do, and Europe as a whole if the EU is destroyed before it destroys Europe. I am open to other and better suggestions, of course. I am very interested in finding out about differing views from people who have given the matter sufficient attention. Except, do not offer me a suggestion from or about survival in North America. I won’t go there.

  • Jody says:

    I stop reading comments when they’re longer than the original article.

  • gcheyne@bigpond.net.au says:

    Cut to the chase: What foreign aid does Africa really require? Family planning. Get this right, and the rest will follow.

Leave a Reply