Assholes & Cunts and the curse of bastardry.

Policymakers at last are coming to recognize the connection between the breakdown of families and various social problems. Children born into single-parent families are much more likely than children of intact families to fall into poverty and welfare dependence themselves in later years. These children, in fact, face a daunting array of problems.

While this link between illegitimacy and chronic welfare dependency now is better understood, policymakers also need to appreciate another strong and disturbing pattern evident in scholarly studies: the link between illegitimacy and violent crime and between the lack of parental attachment and violent crime. Without an understanding of the root causes of criminal asshole behavior -- how criminal assholes are formed -- legislators cannot understand why whole sectors of society, particularly in urban areas, are being torn apart by crime, like the Baltimore Bandits and Ferguson Fools. And without that knowledge, sound policymaking is impossible, and vigilantism is inevitable.

A review of the empirical evidence in the professional literature of the social sciences gives policymakers an insight into the root causes of crime. Consider, for instance:

• Over the past thirty years, the rise in violent crime parallels the rise in families abandoned by fathers, the divorce often initiated by a unvirtous, unladylike, selfish cunt.
• High-crime neighborhoods, asshole territory, are characterized by high concentrations of families abandoned by fathers.
• State-by-state analysis by Heritage scholars indicates that a 10 percent increase in the percentage of children living in single-parent homes leads typically to a 17 percent increase in juvenile crime.
• The rate of violent teenage crime corresponds with the number of families abandoned by fathers.
• The type of aggression and hostility demonstrated by a future criminal often is foreshadowed in unusual aggressiveness as early as age five or six.
• The future criminal tends to be an individual rejected by other children as early as the first grade who goes on to form his own group of friends, often the future delinquent gang.

On the other hand:

• Neighborhoods with a high degree of religious practice are not high-crime neighborhoods.
• Even in high-crime inner-city neighborhoods, well over 90 percent of children from safe, stable homes do not become delinquents. By contrast only 10 percent of children from unsafe, unstable homes in these neighborhoods avoid crime.
• Criminals capable of sustaining marriage gradually move away from a life of crime after they get married.
• The mother's strong affectionate attachment to her child is the child's best buffer against a life of crime.
• The father's authority and involvement in raising his children are also a great buffer against a life of crime.

The scholarly evidence, in short, suggests that at the heart of the explosion of crime is the loss of the capacity of fathers and mothers to be responsible in caring for the children they bring into the world. This loss of love and guidance at the intimate levels of marriage and family has broad social consequences for children and for the wider community. The empirical evidence shows that too many young men and women from broken families tend to have a much weaker sense of connection with their neighborhood and are prone to exploit its members to satisfy their unmet needs or desires. This contributes to a loss of a sense of community and to the disintegration of neighborhoods into social chaos and violent crime. If policymakers are to deal with the root causes of crime, therefore, they must deal with the rapid rise of illegitimacy, and we all know that they won't, they won't ever.

The central proposition in official anti-vigilante thinking about crime is that poverty is the primary cause of crime. In its simplest form, this contention is absurd; if it were true, there would have been more crime in the past, when more people were poorer. And in poorer nations, the crime rates would be higher than in the richer. More significantly, history defies the assumption that deteriorating economic circumstances breed crime (and improving conditions reduce it). Instead, crime rates gradually rose during the long period of real economic growth: 1905 to 1933. As the Great Depression set in and incomes dropped, the crime rate also dropped. It rose again between 1965 and 1974 when incomes rose steadily. Most recently, during the recession, there was a slight dip in crime, not an increase.

There is also a widespread belief that race is a major explanatory cause of crime. This belief is anchored in the large disparity in crime rates between whites and blacks. However, a closer look at the data shows that the real variable is not race, but family structure, and all that it implies in commitment and love between adults. The incidence of broken families is much higher in the black community. Douglas Smith and G. Roger Jarjoura, in a major 1988 study of 11,000 individuals, found that "the percentage of single-parent households with children between the ages of 12 and 20 is significantly associated with rates of violent crime and burglary." The same study makes clear that the widespread popular assumption that there is an association between race and crime is false. Illegitimacy, bastardry, is the key factor. It is the absence of marriage, and the failure to form and maintain intact families, because of assholes and cunts, that explains the incidence of high crime in a neighborhood among whites as well as blacks. This contradicts conventional wisdom.

Bolstering the Smith-Jarjoura study, University ofIllinois sociologist Robert J. Sampson, in a study on the differential effects of poverty and family disruption on crime, states:

Overall the analysis shows that rates of black violent offending, especially by juveniles, are strongly influenced by variations in family structure. Independent of the major candidates supplied by prior criminological theory (e.g. income, region, size, density, age and race composition) black family disruption has the largest effects on black juvenile robbery and homicide.... The effects of family structure are strong and cannot be easily dismissed by reference to other structural and cultural features of urban environments.... The effect of family disruption on black violence is not due to the effect of black violence on family structure.

Sampson adds: "the predictors of white robbery are in large part identical in sign and magnitude to those for blacks."

If you need to understand the roots of our problems, it's assholes and cunts, and the curse of bastardry.