Alt Left: Book Review: “The Negro in Jamaica: : Read before the Anthropological Society of London, February 1, 1866, at St. James’s Hall, London”

Book Review: The Negro in Jamaica: Read before the Anthropological Society of London, February 1, 1866, at St. James’s Hall, London, by Bedford Pim. 1868. London: Trubner & Company.

Great for the first half, the second half is rather boring. It concerns a report to a British anthropological society about the uprisings of the Blacks in Jamaica in the 1800’s when it was a British colony. The portrayal of Blacks here is not complementary at all, and it would be called racist in modern terms.

However, this portrayal is not racist at all. I believe it was simply observational with keen eye of objectivity. The Black man in the Caribbean and in Africa for that matter was a forlorn specimen, barbarous and savage in the worst possible way.

I will briefly add that the book is racist in the way it patronizingly defends colonialism and says the Blacks of Jamaica were not mistreated when obviously they were. The report also says that Blacks cannot govern themselves, which is dubious.  They can govern themselves. Not very well, but they can do it. They do it in the Caribbean, in Africa and even in large US cities. The only solution to this problem then was that Blacks should be put under permanent supervision of Whites until they had gradually become civilized.

By the way, this was also the colonially stated beneficent rationale for apartheid. For all I know, they may have been honest about it. South African Whites felt that Blacks had to be held under apartheid bondage until such time as they had achieved civilization enough to live on equal terms with Whites.

Be that as it may, apartheid was still immoral and had to be done away. Why? Because it was simply the right thing to do and for no other reason. The fact that South Africa has gone seriously downhill under Black rule is irrelevant. Humans have a right to self-rule, and whether they do so well or not so well is strictly up to them.

The solution advocated in this book is to continue to bring Blacks from Africa and work them on five year contracts for White plantation owners, after which they would be returned to Africa. One cannot help but notice that the endless insistence here that the Black man cannot rule himself just so happens to provide a rationale for Britain to retain the colonial possession of Jamaica. Wink win.

Although of course you can see shadows of this barbarous behavior in modern day Africa, the Caribbean and the US Black underclass, what is shocking is the growth of the Black middle class since the Civil Rights era and how they do not resemble the degraded race portrayed here in any way, shape, or form. A large percentage of the Blacks have become, in a word, civilized. The problem was not so much genetic or biological as cultural.

Via exposure to White society over 150+ years, a large percentage of Blacks, the Black middle class, have become civilized people. They bear no resemblance to the barbarous brutes in this book at all. One would be shocked if they were told that they were of the same race. Indeed the difference is so profound that the only sane conclusion is that we are talking about two different races, which is of course not true.

The message here is that integration is the way to go. The deficiencies of Blacks are not so much biological as cultural. All Blacks needed was the guiding hand of the civilizing impulse, as is the case with so many other human groups.

The other message is that White people are good for Blacks. I should amend this to say that good White people are good for Blacks. Obviously, White slavers or enforcers of Jim Crow in the US and elsewhere in the Americas was not good for Blacks, athough this book tries to make the case that it is.

It’s good for Blacks to mix with good, decent Whites or even to marry with said Whites. Left on their own to congregate in large cities, they act like crabs in a barrel, pulling down anyone who tries to escape and driving each other down to the lowest common denominator in a race for the bottom behaviorally. Large groups of Black people don’t seem to work. Blacks act best as a rather small minority, 20% or less, in a larger group of Whites, Hispanics, or Asians.

The Blacks don’t have any numbers, so they don’t influence each other much. Further, the same Blacks who would obviously degrade quickly in the hood do much better when integrated, as they try to mimic the behavior of the races around them, races which tend to set the bar higher behaviorally.

Integration works. The way to ameliorate the Black problem in the US or any other land is to thoroughly mix them in small numbers with Whites, Hispanics or Asians. This brings out the best in the Blacks. It’s good for us, for them, and for society. Everyone wins.

Integration today, integration tomorrow, integration forever!

Please follow and like us:
error3
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

7 thoughts on “Alt Left: Book Review: “The Negro in Jamaica: : Read before the Anthropological Society of London, February 1, 1866, at St. James’s Hall, London””

  1. What do you make of the stereotype that chinese are greedy amoral worker drones with no aesthetic taste and little emotion?

  2. I get the feeling that you are being selective in your book choice as it regards the history of Jamaica.

    https://nljdigital.nlj.gov.jm/items/show/2591#?c=0&m=0&s=0&cv=0

    Why don’t you give that one a read? Actually, anything from the below would suffice.

    https://nlj.gov.jm/riots-and-rebellions/

    >The Black man in the Caribbean and in Africa for that matter was a forlorn specimen, barbarous and savage in the worst possible way.

    Then how was he able to create civilization, complete with taxation system, military, and bureaucracy?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_kingdoms_in_pre-colonial_Africa#West_Africa
    https://www.amazon.com/Jan-Vansina/e/B001HCV892?ref=sr_ntt_srch_lnk_1&qid=1605041141&sr=8-1
    https://www.amazon.com/Basil-Davidson/e/B001IXMLRI?ref=sr_ntt_srch_lnk_1&qid=1605042848&sr=1-1

    >Via exposure to White society over 150+ years, a large percentage of Blacks, the Black middle class, have become civilized people. They bear no resemblance to the barbarous brutes in this book at all. One would be shocked if they were told that they were of the same race. Indeed the difference is so profound that the only sane conclusion is that we are talking about two different races, which is of course not true.

    Never mind my response above, how do you explain a black middle class in societies with a minimal white population?

    I find that exposure to whites has the opposite effect on a national scale p and this is always worse. See, for example, African colonial leaders trained by Harold Lanski, and the neo-liberal finance ministers of majority-black nations.

    1. Never mind my response above, how do you explain a black middle class in societies with a minimal white population?

      Sure, there’s a Black middle class in the Caribbean and Africa. But is that group anywhere near as large and as functional as the group in the US. Most of those Black countries are clusterfucks. US Blacks are the most successful and intelligent Blacks the world has ever seen.

      The Black man in the Caribbean and in Africa for that matter was a forlorn specimen, barbarous and savage in the worst possible way.

      Go read the histories of the first White explorers to Africa. They are gathered in a book called “Negros in Negroland.” One of the most barbarous races on Earth, not that they didn’t have some competition in New Guinea, the Pacific Islands, and the Americas. And read Hobbes sometime. And put down the Rousseau.

      Well, this is a report from the British administrators to the colony of Jamaica about the backwards and barbarous nature of the Blacks there 150 years ago. You trying to tell me they made all this stuff up?

  3. Haiti is what happens when Blacks become free of Whites.

    The time for multiculturalism in Europe was in Ancient Rome. Northern barbarian tribes didn’t really “fuck wit dem niggas” in Africa. Now I think Southern Europeans may have more multicultural ability but seem to want fewer non-Whites. North Euros may want foreign cultures and races more but have had less of both historically. They are fighting nature to gain a token but lose more. A Northern barbarian man is not naturally the Queen of Sheba.

    Europeans are all closer to each other than any non-White group and have bonds. A smooth creamy head of beer goes down easier than an 8-ball.

    1. “A smooth creamy head of beer goes down easier than an 8-ball.”

      There’s always a poetry to your pro-White prose. Whites that openly invite non-Whites into their society for the sake of integration just because are idiots of the highest degree. You can blame the leftist universities for this. All the Culturally Left faggots probably fled the Soviet Bloc and found refuge in the West.

      Whites that historically invited non-Whites for labor (e.g. African slaves, Chinese railroad workers, Mexican farmers) are the historical equivalent of today’s neocons. They want to make money no matter what. Throwing darkies into the bonds of servitude to the detriment of the common White man is not an issue for them. They are high class Whites that simply don’t have to live within the artificially created Niggerdom.

      Jim Crow laws and segregation were just low and middle-class Whites resorting the final desperate measures to deal with non-White crime and aggression. The rich White former-slaver owners got rid of the field slaves, employed some mixed-blood house Negroes and then sold out the South. These wealthy Whites were probably the first to do business with carpetbaggers and Jews.

      Today neocons start wars around the world, send low and middle class whites in combat arms units to die for them, instigate terrorism, and then let Democrats import all these horrors into the West.

      I hate the Left. But I won’t say the Right isn’t without its sins either. I hate the Poor, but I won’t say the Rich aren’t without their sins either.

      1. “Jim Crow laws and segregation were just low and middle-class Whites resorting the final desperate measures to deal with non-White crime and aggression.”

        You guys keep saying this, but it just shows you don’t know the origins of Jim Crow laws. The architects of Jim Crow were explicit about why they were instituting it. It was all about maintaining what they considered the God-given superiority of Whites and keeping Black people “in their place.” They particularly didn’t like the fact that Black people in the South were rising to positions of authority during Reconstruction.

        1. I think their explicit intent was just a moral justification for their practical solution. That’s how politics works. The name or expressed mission bears no realty to the actual motivation or outcome which in this case was, keep non-wealthy Whites separate from lowly blacks.

          I suspect many smart Blacks fled the south and went North leaving behind a slightly dumber freed Black population for regular Whites to contend with. And interesting snippet corroborating this hypothesis:

          https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-25/what-happened-when-blacks-moved-north-during-the-great-migration

          Your facts are not wrong, Alpha, but I think the general common wisdom about what was in Whites’ hearts when they did this is dead wrong. I’ve known too many American Whites to believe they could be so stupidly cruel. Only Cultural Leftists are so cruel en masse. When conservative Whites do “bad” shit en masse, it’s usually for a good reason.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

error

Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)