Blair Blames Murders on “Black Culture”
Paul | 18 04 2007If you're a first time visitor, you may want to subscribe to our RSS feed, which will keep you up to date with all the latest New School Politics posts. Thanks for visiting!
Late last week, British Prime Minister Tony Blair claimed that “black culture” is causing many of the recent murders in London. With harsh frankness in his final weeks at the top of Britain’s Parliament, Blair was not afraid to confront political correctness head on. Meanwhile, a large majority of responses disagreed with the Prime Minister, declaring the real problem was “social deprivation”. In staunch retaliation, Blair stated that “Economic inequality is a factor and we should deal with that, but I don’t think it’s the thing that is producing the most violent expression of this social alienation. I think that is to do with the fact that particular youngsters are being brought up in a setting that has no rules, no discipline, no proper framework around them.”
I find it particularly intriguing how politicians tend to let their true feelings known when they have the least to lose. Their thoughts are always provocative, and Blair’s message was head-on with one of the largest issues concerning crime in developed countries. Frankly, I do basically agree with him, although I would perhaps word it differently. The problem here is the gang culture, which you can be born into or just as easily dragged into. It’s almost as bad as the poverty cycle. However, the fact remains that the majority in this culture are black people.
Not to blame pop culture, but just listen to the lyrics of rap music. That is the prime example of what gang culture is. Whether or not a teenager falls into it during drug experimentation relies very heavily on his or her upbringing and current situation in life. Although, if born into it, it’s quite natural that you yourself would join in the “family business”.
Obviously, the whole issue is quite a large and hard one to tackle. But, I assume one would want to eliminate the gang culture itself to make any real progress. Drug legalization would go quite far in reducing what is the main feature of the culture. With no drugs to deal, or perhaps rather far less people to sell to, the market would be literally destroyed. This would immediately reduce the number of gang attacks.
From here, by properly funding and aiding organizations who help people get out of the poverty cycle, we could ensure those formerly in the gang culture get proper training or education to get real jobs. This in turn helps create a stable financial situation in which a more acceptable lifestyle can be adopted.
Of course, it’s necessary to boost policing to get the crime leaders off the streets and into a rehabilitation process. Couple that with proper education to teenagers about drugs, alcohol, sex, and the law, as well as extracurricular activities abound. Ta-da: Gang culture eliminated!
Whatever the case, I think the PM made a very strong and important statement by throwing political correctness out of the window. It needed to be said by someone.
Last 5 posts by Paul
- Ice Gaps: Gone by 2020 - May 2nd, 2007
- Why More Guns Isn't The Answer - April 23rd, 2007
- Refusing to Teach the Holocaust - April 10th, 2007
- Banning Smoking - April 4th, 2007
- China and Russia Go to Mars! - March 30th, 2007
Popularity: 68% [?]
Sphere: Related Content
The Blair Blames Murders on “Black Culture” by New School Politics, unless otherwise expressly stated, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.
I am so glad that you posted on this. After
Eftychis | 18 04 2007I am so glad that you posted on this. After the Imus event, some people were saying it in the media, but it was not heard by everyone.
There is something wrong with our society when we embrace the degredation of women, when we glorify gangs, rape, dismissal of authority, murder,and racism and sexism. In essence, the black sub-culture that is feed to people of all colors by the media (IE MTV, BET, music industry as a whole, teen magazines, ect) is not anything that could have even the smallest benefits. All it does is too widen the race divide and to polorize the issue of color even more. The violent, sexist, music and the whole culture is dangerous and does nothing but cause harm, and also, at least in the United States, is what I percieve to be the driving factor in the continued degredation of Black Americans.
After Iransailorgate I thought that Blair may have been casterated by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad but its good to see that he can still hold is own is willing to push the limits every now and again and say something that we all need to hear.
[...] education system in place to nurture such a society,
New School Politics » Why More Guns Isn’t The Answer | 23 04 2007[...] education system in place to nurture such a society, and drugs were legalized to eliminate the gang culture that supports the destructive use and illegal distribution of guns, then there would no longer be a [...]
Just listen to 2 minutes of any rap song and
Arthus Erea | 29 04 2007Just listen to 2 minutes of any rap song and you will hear things 200 times worse than anything that any supposedly racist person has said. Indeed, a double standard has been established in which pop media can get away with anything but if a white man says something, petitions fly in faster than an peregrine falcons.
However, I would have to disagree with you upon the subject of drug legalization. I do agree it would do much to alleviate gang culture. However, we would be setting a standard in which the government does not ban illegal and harmful substances. By the same token, someone could campaign for robbery legalization because it will “save the lives of people protecting their property.” That may be a very extreme example, but I believe the government has certain ethical standards it must uphold.
Arthus, I suggest you go read up about libertarian views. The
Paul Hillsdon | 29 04 2007Arthus,
I suggest you go read up about libertarian views. The whole basis of drug legalisation is that in a free society, any adult should be able to put whatever they want into their body, as long as it doesn’t hinder on the rights or freedoms of another person. I think that is more than reasonable. Of course, the government has a responsibility to inform the public of the potential dangers of any drug. Frankly, it should not be up to the government to dictate what people are and are not allowed to do, in my opinion (to an extent, I mean there is of course laws against crime, etc.). The only thing they are there to do is stuff like run an education system, provide healthcare for all, maintain and build infrastructure, etc.
Similar to the abortion issue. Who is the government to say whether a woman should keep her baby? Obviously, there should be a timeline for when such a procedure can be legal and illegal (i.e.: In Mexico City, it has to be done before the first 3 months). But, really, the government does not know what a person has gone through, nor should it be butting in.
This mentality is also reflected in the civil and gay rights movements. All citizens should be entitled to the same rights and freedoms. It is not the decision of the government to pick and choose favourites, nor is it their right to tell a grown adult what they can and cannot do (again, as long as it doesn’t affect other people).
So, when I talk about drug legalisation, I mean making it legal for any adult to take drugs in the comfort and safety of their homes. There would be harsh laws against providing hard drugs to underage persons, as well as use in the public, similar to drunk driving. And, go do a Google search, because the UK recently released a report that said several drugs such as ecstasy and cannabis have for less risks (in terms of detriments to health and society) than tobacco cigarettes and alcohol.
Perhaps I should have been a little clearer. I too
Arthus Erea | 29 04 2007Perhaps I should have been a little clearer. I too agree that it is not the government’s responsibility to decide what people do in their own home. However, the fact is that in most instances drugs are consumed in a group - not as an individual activity. In any group, there are often unwilling members who have been pressured into it. If it was illegal to do drugs in public, then I might perhaps support drug legalization. What we mustn’t forget is the fact that drugs severely effect thinking and reasoning abilities. Even if people just do it in their own homes, they might do something they don’t mean to such as harm a relative/friend, leave the house and commit a crime, etc. I feel that it is the government’s duty to ensure that people can be rational… preemptive measures save thousands of lives.
I would not be at all surprised if ecstasy and cannabis have less risks than tobacco and alcohol… I don’t support their consumption either. Anything which harms people ability to think rationally should be banned for the protection of the public at large.
"I feel that it is the government's duty to ensure
Paul Hillsdon | 29 04 2007“I feel that it is the government’s duty to ensure that people can be rational… preemptive measures save thousands of lives.”
My definition of a preemptive measure would be education. Have a full run down in school about the exactly what each drug does to a person and any pros or cons it has. Just like proper sex ed.
And the problem with your idea that we should ban any and all drugs (which should include caffeine then Arthus), is that people have been doing it and will continue to do it for years to come. That is why education here is the most important key to the process. Don’t scare kids into into thinking all drugs are evil; no, tell them the truth, how many bad effects and tradeoffs there are for getting a few hours “high”. That it is their right to choose what they want to do, but make sure they understand that they also have a responsibility to the public at large.
What I gathered from your previous comment is that all drugs should be banned. As I pointed out, they are going to be used no matter what. So, if we face that reality, why not at least make the drugs safer for users (you never know what’s going to be mixed in right now), save the government loads of money from putting reasonable citizens in jail, and be able effectively shut down the majority of gang crimes/culture?
Indeed, you have many valid points. I realize how altruistic
Arthus Erea | 29 04 2007Indeed, you have many valid points. I realize how altruistic and hopeless my view of the world is. In fact, it really is how you define the government. Where does the government’s responsibility to it’ s people end? Should they stick with infrastructure and education, because then there would be no laws. Or, do they have a responsibility to keep people from hurting other people, because then drugs and alcohol should be banned. Most governments fall somewhere between these two standards. Actually, with the present state most governments are in, I think that perhaps drug should be legalized - since the government obviously doesn’t have enough resources to establish order. However, should an ideal government ever come about, I believe that drugs should not be legalized since they effect people’s ability to reason.
As for your point about making drugs safe for users, that is rather null. People know they are taking a risk by taking drugs - so it is not the government’s responsibility to protect them. I do not believe that people who take drugs are “reasonable citizens” - otherwise they wouldn’t take such an unreasonable risk.
It is true that education can be much stronger than laws. However, our present drug education courses are extremely ineffective. If anything, they encourage more teenagers to experiment with drugs. Should we be able to reform the education system so that everyone understands and believes the true impacts drugs, then we could feasible legalize drugs so as to ensure everyone can make choices for themselves.