New lexicon: “random” means “anti-white violence by blacks”

For every Trayvon Martin there are dozens upon dozens of attacks by American blacks, alone or in mobs, against whites, frequently fatal. They are commonly described as “random” inasmuch as a) to call them acts of anti-white racism would upset the narrative that only whites can be racists and b) the word tends to exculpate the aggressor from any conscious agency, which to do so is as racist as anything you could think of, in practice. So the next time you read about “random” attacks or beatings in the United States, remember: “random” means anti-white violence by blacks.

Eric Holder, US Attorney General, says he wants some honest talk about race. Here is an instance. If you need more, just enter “eric holder wants honest discussion of race” into a search engine and see what comes up. Some honest discussion, all right.

The blog site “Stuff Black people don’t like” covers this more fully.

For those of you who like statistics, check out “Crime in the United States, 2011”, collated by the FBI. Even after lumping in Hispanics with whites, “white” crime rates were proportionately far less than blacks, who at 12% of the American population commit about a third of crimes and close to 50% of all murders. See table 43A.

Addendum: I had not been aware I was guilty of citing “hatefacts”. See this article by John Derbyshire on “hatefacts” and “hatenumbers” which covers black on white and white on black victimization. Some of the numbers of white on black crime are so low they are not statistically significant.

Sources of the data used by Derbyshire come from the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics.  Up-to-date figures are not being reported under the Obama regime. The relevant table is numbered 42.