John Derbyshire’s Bizarre Rant

NRO's John Derbyshire went off on a bizarre, racist, rant yesterday.

For reasons that only he can understand, National Review Online’s John Derbyshire decided to put together what he claims is the white version of “The Talk” that black parents have in with their sons. I’m not certain whether he was trying to engage in ridicule here, whether he was trying to “demonstrate absurdity by being absurd,” or whether he had the sarcasm meter turned up to eleven, but whatever he intended to accomplish, the whole thing  just comes across as a racist rant:

10) Thus, while always attentive to the particular qualities of individuals, on the many occasions where you have nothing to guide you but knowledge of those mean differences, use statistical common sense:

(10a) Avoid concentrations of blacks not all known to you personally.

(10b)Stay out of heavily black neighborhoods.

(10c) If planning a trip to a beach or amusement park at some date, find out whether it is likely to be swamped with blacks on that date (neglect of that one got me the closest I have ever gotten to death by gunshot).

(10d) Do not attend events likely to draw a lot of blacks.

(10e) If you are at some public event at which the number of blacks suddenly swells, leave as quickly as possible.

(10f) Do not settle in a district or municipality run by black politicians.

(10g) Before voting for a black politician, scrutinize his/her character much more carefully than you would a white.

(10h) Do not act the Good Samaritan to blacks in apparent distress, e.g., on the highway.

(10i) If accosted by a strange black in the street, smile and say something polite but keep moving.

That doesn’t meant that Derbyshire thinks all blacks are bad, dumb, or dangerous:

(13) In that pool of forty million, there are nonetheless many intelligent and well-socialized blacks. (I’ll use IWSB as an ad hoc abbreviation.) You should consciously seek opportunities to make friends with IWSBs. In addition to the ordinary pleasures of friendship, you will gain an amulet against potentially career-destroying accusations of prejudice.

(14) Be aware, however, that there is an issue of supply and demand here. Demand comes from organizations and businesses keen to display racial propriety by employing IWSBs, especially in positions at the interface with the general public—corporate sales reps, TV news presenters, press officers for government agencies, etc.—with corresponding depletion in less visible positions. There is also strong private demand from middle- and upper-class whites for personal bonds with IWSBs, for reasons given in the previous paragraph and also (next paragraph) as status markers.

(15) Unfortunately the demand is greater than the supply, so IWSBs are something of a luxury good, like antique furniture or corporate jets: boasted of by upper-class whites and wealthy organizations, coveted by the less prosperous

Well, isn’t that very nice of him. The “good blacks” are like a fine wine or a Ferrari, hard to find and expensive to afford but well worth having. I’m sure that makes them feel so much better.

Not surprisingly, Derbyshire’s article has garnered alot of attention since it was published late yesterday afternoon. Those of his NRO collegues who have chimed in on the matter since then — including Editor Rich Lowry, Rammesh Ponnuru, Jonah Goldberg, and Katrina Trinko have condemned the article and made clear that he speaks for nobody at National Review. Josh Barro, who often contributes over at NRO and writes for Forbes, argues that National Review needs to fire Derbyshire:

This is the problem for Lowry and other conservatives who want to be taken seriously by broad audiences when they write about racial issues. Lowry wrote a column containing advice for black Americans. Why should black Americans take him seriously while he’s employing Derbyshire? If Lowry wants NR to be credible on race, he should start by firing John Derbyshire.

Tod Kelly, meanwhile, argues that there’s at least one thing that everyone should be able to agree on regardless of their political ideology:

My titular question is an honest one – can we all agree, right, left and libertarian – that this is racist?

I have long maintained that conservatives are not inherently more racist than liberals. I have simply known far too many quality conservatives (and and far too many icky liberals) in my lifetime to believe such a thing.  I do think, however, that conservatives do an unbelievably bad job and policing their own when in come to racism (or sexism). I think this is because, fair or not, racism (and sexism) is the political turf staked out by liberals, and for too many conservatives it is more important to have a united front in discrediting whatever liberals say than it is to say “Good Lord, what a horrible thing to say” about one of their own.

It seems so clear to me that if the right as a whole is going to shed the reputation it absolutely has (and by and large does not deserve) on these fronts, it needs to be willing to stand up and be counted when lines are crossed, or at the very least to not defend them.

Yes, it does seem clear that the right has hurt itself significantly in recent years by not standing up and condemning that which should obviously be condemned. The most recent example before this article, of course, was the dust up over Rush Limbaugh’s comments about Sandra Fluke. Rather than pointing out the obvious and saying that it was wrong for Limbaugh to deliberately misrepresent this woman’s testimony and call her  a slut, most people on the right rushed to his defense and doubled down on the attacks on Fluke. The fact that the entire incident completely backfire on the right and has contributed to a Gender Gap problem that could be a huge deal for the GOP in the fall doesn’t seem to have occurred to them.

There’s been a similar reaction, in some ways, to the whole Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman shooting incident, and Derbyshire’s article is perhaps just the worst example of those on the right who has spent the last several weeks trying to back up the assertion that there was something dangerous about Trayvon Martin, a fact that may or may not even be relevant to what actually happened on the night of February 26th. Yes, Derbyshire’s piece is vile and racist, made worse so by the fact that he attempts to back up his rather obvious prejudices about an entire segment of American society with pseudo-science and generalizations. It’s good to see his fellow contributors at NRO condemning it’s obvious idiocy. I can’t help but think, though, that there’s some segment on the right that’s going to read it and nod their heads in quiet agreement, not because they know its true but because it confirms their own prejudices. And that, perhaps, is Derbyshire’s greatest sin. I suppose it’s just proof that seemingly smart people can be complete idiots too.

UPDATE: In a not entirely surprising development, John Derbyshire has been fired by National Review.

Photo via National Review

FILED UNDER: Race and Politics, US Politics
Doug Mataconis
About Doug Mataconis
Doug holds a B.A. in Political Science from Rutgers University and J.D. from George Mason University School of Law. He joined the staff of OTB in May 2010. Before joining OTB, he wrote at Below The BeltwayThe Liberty Papers, and United Liberty Follow Doug on Twitter | Facebook

Comments

  1. PJ says:

    For reasons that only he can understand, National Review Online’s John Derbyshire decided to put together what he claims is the white version of “The Talk” that black parents have in with their sons.

    He’s a racist. I think that’s reason enough for him.

  2. Scotch Man says:

    I’ve read Derb enough over the years to think that this probably wasn’t meant to be taken seriously but I’m not sure it matters. It’s disgusting and another piece that puts conservatism in the dark ages. I’ve been saying my whole life as an advocate for small government that the message needs to reach as many as possible regardless of religion, race, sexual preference, etc…The Rick Santorums of the world are doing a fine job on their own trying to shut as many people out from this message and satirical or not, need no help from this disgusting piece. Winning to me was never as important as deserving to win. Right now conservatives do not deserve to win anything.

  3. @Scotch Man:

    Someone asked me on Twitter last night if I thought Derb was trying to be sarcastic or something here, or if there was some point he was trying to make beyond the rather obvious racism. If there is, then I don’t see it.

  4. Tod Kelly says:

    @Doug Mataconis:

    I would have an easier time believing the “satire” angle were every point not linked to, as you rightly pointed out, “pseudo-science and generalizations.” Those links just felt more like trying to prove he wasn’t being racist as he said what he said than anything else.

  5. Ben Wolf says:

    “Well socialized” is the sort of thing I expect to here when discussing dogs, not other humans.

  6. Will says:

    “Yes, it does seem clear that the right has hurt itself significantly in recent years by not standing up and condemning that which should obviously be condemned.”

    They wouldn’t do this to themselves if these kinds of statements weren’t broadly popular among the base. Let’s face it: they are.

  7. Jim Henley says:

    For reasons that only he can understand, National Review Online’s John Derbyshire decided to put together what he claims is the white version of “The Talk” that black parents have in with their sons.

    He’s jealous.

  8. Ron Beasley says:

    @Will: This looks to me like an article written after a few too many adult beverages. The bad news is of course it may be more likely that it reflects his views.

  9. Hey Norm says:

    Frum and Bartlett were fired from uber-right-wing organizations for the unspeakable crime of not parroting the party line. Will Derbeyshire be fired from the uber-right-wing National Review for this racist tirade? And if he isn’t…what does that tell you about the GOP? All you need to know I’d say.

  10. OzarkHillbilly says:

    It seems so clear to me that if the right as a whole is going to shed the reputation it absolutely has (and by and large does not deserve) on these fronts, it needs to be willing to stand up and be counted when lines are crossed, or at the very least to not defend them.

    It might also help if the GOP stopped trying to pass bills that negatively effect women, blacks, and Hispanics too. Just saying…..

  11. Ron Beasley says:

    @ Doug
    The problem isn’t that most conservatives are racists but that most racists are conservative and they are the loudest ones. If the conservative movement is going to escape the racist label the racists among them must be condemned and yes, fired. That’s difficult to do because about half of the Republican base probably agrees with Derbyshire.

  12. Hey Norm says:

    But Ozark…
    That guy in Wisconsin, Walker, just repealed an Equal Pay law…so clearly they aren’t all waging war on anyone who isn’t a rich white guy.
    Oh…wait…er…never mind.

  13. michael reynolds says:

    It’s simply not true to pretend that conservatives and liberals are equally likely to be racist. In fact, it’s nonsense.

    First, the personality types that are attracted to conservatism are more concerned about “the other,” and less tolerant of differences.

    Second, by definition, conservatives favor power structures that already exist, and since power has been held by whites since this country was founded, conservatives almost automatically oppose anything that changes the status quo.

    Third, conservatives in general and the GOP in particular recruited racists, quite deliberately, with the Southern Strategy. They embraced racists in order to gain political power. So let’s cut the bullsh-t, shall we? Without racist votes Republicans cannot win an election.

    And that — the desperate willingness to sink as low as necessary to win power — is why conservatives don’t call out their racists. It’s drivel to suggest it’s the fault of liberals for staking out racism and sexism as issues. The simple fact is that GOP – Racists = Electoral Defeat.

    They need the racist vote. So they cater to the racist vote. And then when it gets too embarrassing their pretend to be shocked, shocked! And then, right back to the race-baiting for power.

  14. Herb says:

    Can’t find the link now, but someone asked him if this was satirical and he responded that it was “social commentary.” He was serious.

  15. It seems to me that Derbyshire has engaged in racist rants before. My recollection is vague, however–anybody have a clearer recall?

    I do specifically remember his ridiculous assertions about the Virgina Tech shootings, including a lot of fantasies about counting rounds and engaging in other action movie activities to stop the shooter (I wrote about it here).

  16. Herb says:

    @michael reynolds: Hmm…..you make some good points, but in this case is the racism for political advantage? Or is it just plain old racism?

    To me, this is the rantings of an unreconstructed and woefully ignorant bigot, not the clever, devious strategy of a political wunderkind.

  17. Brett Keller says:

    @ Steven L. Taylor — yeah, his racism is nothing new. One link: http://web.archive.org/web/20091003135902/http://hbdbooks.com/2009/09/john-derbyshire/

  18. Murray says:

    Note the completely contradictory argument of Tod Kelly.

    He first admits “that conservatives do an unbelievably bad job and policing their own when in come to racism (or sexism)”.

    Then he uses the usual whining argument that it’s because of liberals, who supposedly bring it up all the time, that conservatives have a bad reputation concerning racism and sexism and that it isn’t deserved!

    Of course it is! And it will be as long as they don’t police their own.

  19. Modulo Myself says:

    The great thing about Derbyshire is that he’s smarter than the average conservative, or at least better read. Whatever capacity that allows for the stupefied double-think of a conservative on race to issue freely he completely lacks. Instead of developing carefully a bogus cover story, he drinks, reads Kipling and works diligently on his theory of knowing exactly how to determine when a place is swamped sufficiently by minorities.

    I mean, what exactly do Rich Lowry and Jonah Goldberg think The Bell Curve is about? If you think that book is good and if you accept Murray’s theories as proven (as almost all conservatives do, and virtually no actual scientists do), then you should have no problem with Derbyshire’s little bits of advice.

  20. al-Ameda says:

    I have long maintained that conservatives are not inherently more racist than liberals. I have simply known far too many quality conservatives (and and far too many icky liberals) in my lifetime to believe such a thing.

    No, it really is not the same on this count. Of course there are conservative and liberal racists, but let’s not kid ourselves here – it’s definitely not equal. The Republican Party made a conscious strategic political decision about 45 years ago to appeal to race resentment among white working class voters in order to achieve a permanent electoral majority. It was successful: from 1968 to 2004 Republicans won 7 of 10 presidential elections.

  21. michael reynolds says:

    @Herb:

    but in this case is the racism for political advantage? Or is it just plain old racism?

    God knows what’s going on in this one fool’s mind. I was referring to the party and movement as separate from this particular guy.

  22. @Brett Keller: Yes, thanks: that is a a great illustration.

    The link your provided should also end any debate as to whether Derbyshire is just engaging in satire here. He describes himself in that interview as a “race realist” and allies himself with the Peter Brimelow/Steve Sailer strains of politics on this subject.

  23. Ron Beasley says:

    @michael reynolds:

    They need the racist vote. So they cater to the racist vote. And then when it gets too embarrassing their pretend to be shocked, shocked! And then, right back to the race-baiting for power.

    In the NROs response just doesn’t cut it – one three line post by RL and 3 tweets. The fact that he even wrote any thing for the white supremest site Taki Magazine should be enough to get him fired.

  24. @Ron Beasley:

    the white supremest site Taki Magazine

    There is that, too.

    It is worth noting that one of the main defenders of the contents of the Ron Paul newsletters was some piece over at Taki Magazine.

  25. Modulo Myself says:

    @Ron Beasley:

    It’s not like these were hidden views that his editors just happened across one day, like bodies in a basement. Derb’s thing was that he was a) English, b) racist, and c) pretty conversant in maths. But I think ‘b’ goes before ‘a’.

    Overall, aside from being the cause of a vector of sheer disgust, what exactly did he do that would merit being fired? These were his bodies, and everybody was proud of what he did.

  26. Ron Beasley says:

    Interesting comment thread over at VOX Popoli.

    Damn the messenger and ignore the message. Aside from the factual racial differences, the black culture is broken. I don’t hate black’s but I despise the existing culture. I believe I read in the last week that now 74% of all black births are out of wedlock, essentially single parent families, with no sound male influence to properly shape the next generation. Problem is that cultural cancer is spreading to Hispanic and white races too.

    It’s obvious at this point that race wars are coming (again) to the USA. Kansas City had them in the 60’s when I was in the 5th grade. Schools were shut down for weeks, and my dad had to be very careful of what route he took to work in the city.

    He’s right. Many of those who agree with him will publicly state otherwise. The possible punishments and retaliations levied against those who aren’t independently wealthy or self-supporting will scare most of those who agree to disavow him. A charge of racism or prejudice would destroy my career, which is why this a posted anonymously.

  27. Nick says:

    I want to see Lowry explain what exactly he thinks is wrong about Derbyshire’s article. As a writer elsewhere has noted, his comments are largely an amalgamation of right wing talking points on race; Derbyshire simply collected them in one piece. Let’s see Lowry now refute those positions, explaining HOW they are racist.

    Also, referring to Derbyshire as “Derb” indicates a friendly familiarity that I certainly wouldn’t want to advertise. Acceptance of racists makes you one of them.

  28. JB in VA says:

    Honestly, reading Derbyshire’s column I assumed it HAD to be a joke, something designed to demonstrate just how morally low, factually challenged, divorced from reality, and utterly illogical the racist mindset is.

    Apparently, however, he wrote it in all seriousness. And it still demonstrates just how morally low, factually challenged, divorced from reality, and utterly illogical the racist mindset is.

    I hope NR does the right thing and fires this ridiculous excuse for a human being.

  29. Tsar Nicholas II says:

    This unfortunately is endemic to the bad demographics of the extreme, irrational right wing.

    Derbyshire is the archetypal example of the new-age cracker. He’s a racist. He’s xenophobic. He’s anti-Semitic. He’s spoiled rotten. He’s cocooned in a self-perpetuating echo chamber. He’s on the Internet. He has an audience.

    It really is sad and in large part ironic.

    Despite what you might hear from other sources the reality is that neither political party as a whole has anything approaching a monopoly on racism and xenophobia. The same holds true for anti-Semitism. Let’s not be naive: The echoes of Byrd, Wallace, Stennis, Joseph Kennedy, Sr. and Gore, Sr., still ring deep in the Democrat Party, especially in the South and in the Mid-West.

    For decades the National Review and its ilk have drawn the worst elements of the right. Buchanan and Limbaugh are Exhibits 1-A and 1-B, to the National Review’s Exhibit 1. Now there’s also Levin and Malkin. Their listeners and readers disproportionately are made up of racist and xenophobic malcontents. It feeds on itself.

    It used to be that these wingnuts would sit in their basements, reading the National Review or listening to Rush Limbaugh, fuming and foaming at the mouth, like loons. But alone. Now, however, with the Internet, they can log on and receive in real time visual confirmation of their own ludicrous and irrational viewpoints. In short they’ve found each other.

    This bodes ill for the ultimate health of our politics and thus for the ultimate welfare of the country.

  30. michael reynolds says:

    Despite what you might hear from other sources the reality is that neither political party as a whole has anything approaching a monopoly on racism and xenophobia. The same holds true for anti-Semitism. Let’s not be naive: The echoes of Byrd, Wallace, Stennis, Joseph Kennedy, Sr. and Gore, Sr., still ring deep in the Democrat Party, especially in the South and in the Mid-West.

    Nice try. No sale.

    Those “echoes” were brought into the GOP by Richard Nixon, and are now fed and watered within that party by Rush Limbaugh and the Fox machine. We pushed them out of the Democratic Party when we embraced Civil Rights in the 1960’s. The GOP bought up our rejects.

  31. Herb says:

    @michael reynolds: You’ll find no disagreement with me that blathering racists will find a comfortable home voting for the GOP, and I do think sometimes Republican politicians do dog-whistle some of this stuff, but I also think that racism has gone underground in this country to a large extent. It’s still there, but whispered.

    Usually.

  32. michael reynolds says:

    This “both sides do it” thing is not just wrong, it’s deliberate propaganda. It’s a lie.

    Yes, there are individual racists or anti-Semites within both parties. The difference is that we don’t endorse them, we don’t support them or make excuses for them.

    We had a similar go-round over the NBC Zimmerman tape when conservatives again tried to equate the so-called liberal media with Fox. NBC fired the person responsible after he was condemned by liberals.

    Democrats are not Republicans. We do not excuse lies in the media, and we do not excuse racism in our ranks. We are not two sides of the same coin. We are not morally equivalent. We have nuts. Republicans are nuts.

  33. Hey Norm says:

    “…the extreme, irrational right wing…”

    Nice try. No sale.
    The National Review is at the center of the Republican Party…and the entire party has become extreme, and irrational in response to a centrist, middle-of-the-road Democratic President. Fighting battles over contraception that were settled decades ago. Turning their backs on moderate policies that they once supported originally proposed. Pursuing Social Darwinism…the adolescent fantasy of Ayn Rand, who herself jumped on the Medicare wagon the minute she got sick.
    The GOP of today is way off the starboard rail. It’s not just a few whackos like derbyshire.

  34. michael reynolds says:

    @Herb:

    I believe the Catholics take the position that acting like a Christian is a pretty good substitute for being a Christian at times when you may doubt your faith. I’ll take people who act as though they are not racists, who take stands against racism, even if they harbor some secret racism within.

  35. I wish Derbyshire would stick to writing about math history.

  36. anjin-san says:

    Not sure what is “bizarre” about this, it accurately represents views that are common on the right. If the non-racists OTR are not aware of it, well now that is kind of bizzare…

  37. Tsar Nicholas II says:

    @michael reynolds: Michael, I’m not trying to “sell” you anything. Also, FYI, I’m nearly in complete agreement with everything else you’ve said on this thread. Derbyshire is a vile cracker. Limbaugh is a cement-headed tool. Nixon had his southern strategy. But you’re so hell bent reflexively to ignore and to gainsay the obvious that you’re not thinking straight. Derbyshire no more is the poster child for the GOP as a whole than James Moran — who actually holds elected office, mind you — is the poster child for the current Democrat Party. Limbaugh no more is the poster child for the GOP at large than Cynthia McKinney — who recently held elected office — is the poster child for the Democrat Party at large. NRO no more is emblematic of the GOP than Robert Byrd — revered by Democrats in the Senate literally until his passing — was emblematic of the Democrat Party.

    You’re a smart guy. You know better.

    I’m almost completely on your side here. I’m as aghast at the likes of Derbyshire as you are.

  38. Ron Beasley says:

    @Modulo Myself: If he de- legitimatizes NRO that is grounds for firing.

  39. michael reynolds says:

    People and parties should own their pasts. The GOP wants to pretend the Southern Strategy never happened and yet continue to cash in on it at the same time.

    Democrats acknowledge that we were the proponents of Jim Crow. We know southern Democrats formed the membership of the KKK. We confess, we atone, we vow to do better in the future. The Republicans deny and lie and backslide.

  40. michael reynolds says:

    @Tsar Nicholas II:

    Robert Byrd: Dead. Old as hell before he died. Recanted his racist positions long before his death. But when Byrd was in the KKK, yes, he did represent the Democratic party of the Jim Crow era.

    NRO: still in business today. Still important to the GOP.

    I’m mystified by the connection you seem to see there.

  41. EBL says:

    http://evilbloggerlady.blogspot.com/2012/04/john-derbyshires-talk.html I do not agree with John Derbyshire’s article. But we can disagree with it, without engaging in faux outrage over it. A little introspection is in order, since what Derbyshire said are things I have heard many people (of all races, sexual orientations, classes, and political persuasions) say privately. That does not make it right. But I would caution the best way to disagree is with facts, rational arguments or humor.

  42. @michael reynolds:

    I’ll take people who act as though they are not racists, who take stands against racism, even if they harbor some secret racism within.

    There’s two forms of racism: explicit (where someone conciously believes members of one race are inherently superior to another) and implicit (where there is a subconcious aesthetic bias in favor of one race). While explicit racism is becoming very rare in educated society, implict racism remains a problem precisely because people have no control over their subconcious reactions. People can be aware of their biases and, when making decions, be sure to ask themselves, “now am I letting my biases affect my judgement here?”, but they can’t really stop the visceral reactions.

  43. anjin-san says:

    The echoes of Byrd, Wallace, Stennis, Joseph Kennedy, Sr. and Gore, Sr.

    Faded away many decades ago in the Democratic party. Sorry, that’s just a fact. Deal with it.

  44. Nick says:

    When I read the article, it occurred to me that it could be an attempt to mirror the racist stereotyping inherent in “The Talk”. “The Talk” is largely a warning of the dangers of white racism and how to minimize your chances of becoming a victim of such. Derbyshire’s ‘talk’ attempted to take the same sort of analysis to provide a warning to whites of the dangers of black racism. Both ‘talks’ generalize the behavior of a specific racial group.

    Where does Derbyshire’s “talk” cross the line? What makes his generalizations unacceptably racist? That’s the conversation that conservatives (and liberals) have to have.

  45. Jim Henley says:

    “The Talk” is largely a warning of the dangers of white racism and how to minimize your chances of becoming a victim of such.

    No. As I understand it, “The Talk” is largely about how to avoid getting killed by police.

  46. anjin-san says:

    Limbaugh no more is the poster child for the GOP at large than Cynthia McKinney

    Limbaugh is a giant in GOP politics. McKinney a marginalized embarrassment in Democratic circles. Do we see this endless stream of false equivalencies because it is all you guys have got?
    Is it really that painful to take a hard look in the mirror?

    Wait, I withdraw that question. The answer is patently obvious.

  47. Tsar Nicholas II says:

    @michael reynolds: Michael, there is no connection. I’m not saying there is a connection. There’s a lucuna in your interpretation (misinterpretation, actually) of my comments.

    I agree with you on the major premise here. Derbyshire is a vile, racist cracker.

    But you and I run in different circles and you’re juxtaposing what really is a fringe for the whole ball of wax. Fox News doesn’t hold elected office. Limbaugh doesn’t write statutes or appoint cabinet members. Levin is not voting on legislation.

    Derbyshire no more is representative of the GOP at large than Rep. James Moran is representative of the Democrat Party at large. You don’t have to believe me. But at least consider the possibility. At least think it over.

    Lastly, one thing upon which I presume we all can agree: Derbyshire and his ilk are damaging to our politics and thus damaging to our democracy.

  48. An Interested Party says:

    Limbaugh no more is the poster child for the GOP at large…

    Bulll$hit…if that were truly the case, Republican politicians wouldn’t have to crawl to him begging for forgiveness after criticizing him nor would they be afraid of him…

    NRO no more is emblematic of the GOP…

    More bull$hit, as numerous leading conservatives and GOP politicians post there…

  49. CSK says:

    The entire Takimag.com site, where Derbyshire’s piece was published, seems to have vanished. Derbyshire himself is undergoing chemotherapy.

  50. @CSK:

    It’s stil there It just looks like their server is a bit overloaded

  51. Hey Norm says:

    “…But at least consider the possibility. At least think it over…”

    Good advice…from someone who would never consider it.

  52. anjin-san says:

    I’m as aghast at the likes of Derbyshire as you are.

    Yet quite willing to act as an enabler for deep seated, active racism on the right in the year 2012. You don’t see the contradiction?

  53. michael reynolds says:

    @Tsar Nicholas II:

    We do agree on a lot.

    But there’s no way to pretend that NRO and Limbaugh and Fox are all somehow outside the mainstream of the GOP. They are the GOP. You think any significant number of Republicans gives a rat’s ass for Mitch McConnell or John Boehner? Limbaugh, Hannity, O’Reilly, Beck, Savage, and to an admittedly lesser extent, Derbyshire, are the real GOP. Compared to Rush Limbaugh Mitch McConnell is a midget.

  54. Dazedandconfused says:
  55. jukeboxgrad says:

    They wouldn’t do this to themselves if these kinds of statements weren’t broadly popular among the base. Let’s face it: they are.

    Yes. And this is reflected in the comments in various places defending Derbyshire. For example, see the comments on the Barro article.

  56. jukeboxgrad says:

    Limbaugh no more is the poster child for the GOP at large

    Naturally. That’s why Saint Ronnie himself described Rush as “the Number One voice for conservatism.” And that’s why NR described him as “The Leader of The Opposition.”

    And that’s also why we see this (Gallup, 6/10/09):

    Asked to name the “main person who speaks for the Republican Party today,” Republicans across the country are most likely to name three men: Rush Limbaugh, Newt Gingrich, and Dick Cheney.

    Read the details and notice that Rush was tied with Gingrich, and ahead of Cheney. Notice also that the question was open-ended: that is, the pollster mentioned no names.

    By denying Rush’s importance you’re just demonstrating how divorced you are from reality. And of course Rush’s own racism (“take that bone out of your nose and call me back”) is a feature, not a bug, from the perspective of the racist GOP.

  57. jukeboxgrad says:

    michael:

    People and parties should own their pasts.

    Here’s some relevant background regarding NR’s own past:

    During the Civil Rights Era, Buckley made a name for himself as a promoter of white supremacy. National Review, which he founded in 1955, championed violent racist regimes in the American South and South Africa.

    A 1957 editorial written by Buckley, “Why the South Must Prevail” (National Review, 8/24/57), cited the “cultural superiority of white over Negro” in explaining why whites were “entitled to take such measures as are necessary to prevail, politically and culturally, in areas where [they do] not predominate numerically.” Appearing on NPR’s Fresh Air in 1989 (rebroadcast 2/28/08), he stood by the passage. “Well, I think that’s absolutely correct,” Buckley told host Terry Gross when she read it back to him.

    A 1960 National Review editorial supported South Africa’s white minority rule (4/23/60): “The whites are entitled, we believe, to preeminence in South Africa.” In a 1961 National Review column about colonialism—which the magazine once called “that brilliantly conceived structure” (William F. Buckley, John Judis)–Buckley explained that “black Africans” left alone “tend to revert to savagery.” The same year, in a speech to the group Young Americans for Freedom, Buckley called citizens of the Congo “semi-savages” (National Review, 9/9/61).

    National Review editors condemned the 1963 bombing of a black Birmingham Church that killed four children, but because it “set back the cause of the white people there so dramatically,” the editors wondered “whether in fact the explosion was the act of a provocateur—of a Communist, or of a crazed Negro” (Chicago Reader, 8/26/05).

    Just months before the 1965 Voting Rights Act was passed, Buckley warned in his syndicated column (2/18/65) that “chaos” and “mobocratic rule” might follow if “the entire Negro population in the South were suddenly given the vote.” In his 1969 column “On Negro Inferiority” (4/8/69), Buckley heralded as “massive” and “apparently authoritative” academic racist Arthur Jensen’s findings that blacks are less intelligent than whites and Asians.

    Derbyshire is just carrying on in that same tradition. Nothing new about NR and the GOP being racist.

  58. jukeboxgrad says:

    The GOP wants to pretend the Southern Strategy never happened and yet continue to cash in on it at the same time.

    Yes, the Southern Strategy is alive and well. See here:

    “George W. Bush is appealing as a leader to those Americans who harbor greater anti-black prejudice.” … ” … racial prejudice predicts voting. Republicans are supported by whites with prejudice against blacks. If people say, ‘This takes me aback,’ they are ignoring a huge volume of research.”

    And this is why the 2008 GOP convention was only 1.5% black.

    I think a lot of what going on in US politics is properly viewed as the latest stage of the Civil War, which isn’t really over. For a vivid display of this, see here (click on “Voting shifts”). You can see the exceptional areas where McCain/Palin did better than GWB. These are the places where Rs disliked Obama more than they disliked Kerry (because I think it’s hard to imagine that there were many Rs anywhere who liked McCain in 2008 more than they liked Bush in 2004).

    Of course Rs will dislike both Obama and Kerry, but what kind of R especially dislikes the former? What would be the logic in that? This map lets you see where those people live: mostly rural areas in the South. The area highlighted on this map is the heart of the GOP. I think GOP behavior is much easier to understand when these geographic and demographic patterns are taken into account.

  59. rodney dill says:

    @Tod Kelly:

    I would have an easier time believing the “satire” angle were every point not linked to, as you rightly pointed out, “pseudo-science and generalizations.”

    Yea, I could believe the satire angle if there was documentation for each of his points that there existed a ‘Black talk’ counterpoint that a black parent had actually given to a son or daughter. I didn’t spot anything that looked like that, so as a whole it came across pretty racist. I don’t know that I would call it a rant, but that wouldn’t change the racist nature one way or the other for me. It did seem almost calculated to start with more seemingly benign statements then trend toward more racist opinions. The links used did seemed to be to justify his racist views rather more than anything else.

  60. hogtrashhd says:

    Oh come on.. he was telling the truth.. stop acting so indignant.. all white people have had this talk with their kids.or should have it… blacks kill and maim more (lone child or elderly) white people than the other way around.. if you didn’t have this talk with your white kids it would be like sending them out to be slaughtered.. i’ve seen all this in action. blacks are absolutely more violent towards whites, asians, hispanics.. well just about all races and worst towards their own kind…. and if NRO fires him for this they are as bad as sharpton and jackson, who one time said that he was walking down a street at night and heard footsteps behind him and was relieved when he turned and seen it was a white man.. even good black parents tell their kids to stay away from blacks.. so get off this crap.. let the blacks prove they are upstanding citizens.. make them prove it.. not just submit to them because you’re afraid they might bust you and bust your stuff up.. because they’re going to anyway dumbarses.. stop whistling past the grave. don’t you people get it.. they’re laughing their arses off at white people who claim that blacks are peaceful.. they think you’re stupid and you are if you believe any of it.. you’re being had.

  61. Hey Norm says:

    My guess is that HOGTRASHHD votes Republican.

  62. anjin-san says:

    Here’s a little experiment. Go over to bithead’s blog and do a search for “N**ger”

    http://bitsblog.theconservativereader.com

  63. sam says:
  64. Hey Norm says:

    R. Crumb rocks.
    Hogtrashhd…not so much…

  65. OzarkHillbilly says:

    @Ron Beasley:

    I believe I read in the last week that now 74% of all black births are out of wedlock, essentially single parent families, with no sound male influence to properly shape the next generation.

    That is what happens when you use the War on Drugs to lock up so many young black men. This is the face of American Apartheid.

  66. MarkedMan says:

    I’m surprised no one has mentioned John Derbyshire’s other creepy predilection. He once said that 13 year old girls were the peak of sexual attractiveness and by the time a woman, well, became an actual women, that they were essentially washed up. He is a creepy, creepy man and I don’t know why the right finds him so interesting.

  67. Nick says:

    “Jim Henley says:
    Saturday, April 7, 2012 at 11:42

    “The Talk” is largely a warning of the dangers of white racism and how to minimize your chances of becoming a victim of such.

    No. As I understand it, “The Talk” is largely about how to avoid getting killed by police. ”

    You’re correct. My mistake. And a significant difference between the two ‘talks’.

    I would also add that the police are largely an instrument of white power in this country, and hence represent institutionalized racism, at least vis-a-vis “the talk”.

  68. Ben Wolf says:

    @anjin-san: I found fifteen separate posts using the word n**ger at Bitsblog, including such tasty sentences as:

    The Reverend Al Sharpton is NBC’s designated house [n**ger] . . .

    Dumbo [Obama] is not the most powerful man in the world and the leader of the free world, but just another house [n**ger] doing his master’s bidding.

    In the Twenty First Century democrat plantation, blacks exist to blindly give their votes to their largely white political masters, To keep their plantation blacks in line, the modern plantation masters use well compensated blacks, to keep the plantation hands loyal and obedient to their masters. I will call these willing tools of the plantation masters, house [n**gers].

    House [n**ger] Maxine Waters . . .

    House [N**ger] Elijah E. Cummings . . .

    Said by many after Nine-Eleven: We are all Americans.
    Said by Dubya and many Americans after the Soviet invasion of Georgia: We are all Georgians.
    What should be said after Charlies Rangel and Robert Reich a/k/a Shorty, write the stimulus package: We are all[ n**gers] now.

    Barack Obama is little more than a house [n**ger].

    And for your daily misogynistic needs:

    Fifty three percent of the nation is female. Will the nags simply shut up and quit acting like an unempowered minority.

  69. Jim Henley says:

    I think we can evaluate the alleged symmetry of anti-black racism across Party and ideology using – OTB comment threads! Like this one. And the previous 5,271,009 threads touching racial issues.

    “Right-wing” commenter behaviors include…

    Straightforward denunciation of the racism under discussion
    Denial that the racism in question is endemic to conservatism
    Insistence that Both Sides Do It
    Pivot to anti-antiracism (“making a big deal out of a small thing” etc.)
    Call for posters to WAKE UP and realize that The Blacks really are stupid criminals before it’s too late

    “Left-wing” commenter behaviors include:

    Straightforward denunciation of the racism under discussion
    Insistence that the racism in question is endemic to conservatism
    Denial that both sides do it

    What you NEVER see liberal/left commenters doing here:

    Call for posters to WAKE UP and realize that The Blacks really are stupid criminals before it’s too late

    So somehow, even though “both sides do it,” here on this deservedly popular blog with a commenter population that spans a much wider spectrum than the average Sunday gasbag panel, one side never does it.

  70. Ben Wolf says:

    @Jim Henley:

    So somehow, even though “both sides do it,” here on this deservedly popular blog with a commenter population that spans a much wider spectrum than the average Sunday gasbag panel, one side never does it.

    I don’t think you get it. That African-Americans vote Democrat proves liberals are racists. The blackers aren’t bright enough to vote for the people who truly value them, so therefore they vote for liberals who secretly hate them but hide it really well.

    At least that’s the argument racists continually make.

    My guess is these “conservatives” simply don’t think African-Americans are worth giving a damn about and suspect liberals of some sort of chicanery when they court African-American voters. To those conservatives no one white would actually care, so they must be manipulating the poor dullards. Therefore liberals are secretly racist!

  71. anjin-san says:

    @ Ben Wolf

    Kind of makes one wonder what the off the record conversations between bit and his fanboy david L are like.

  72. James in LA says:

    @michael reynolds: I can report that my grandmother Lucille Browning born and raised in Logan, WV, recanted her racist views shortly after Bob Byrd did the same. It was considered a Big Deal in the day. She later remarked it was simply waiting for the permission of someone she liked and trusted.

  73. Ben Wolf says:

    @anjin-san: I’d say they’re hateful bastards.

  74. Ron Beasley says:

    John Derbyshire in his own words:

    I am a homophobe, though a mild and tolerant one, and a racist, though an even more mild and tolerant one, and those things are going to be illegal pretty soon, the way we are going. Of course, people will still be that way in their hearts, but they will be afraid to admit it, and will be punished if they do admit it.

  75. michael reynolds says:

    @Ron Beasley:

    He thinks he’s just so very precious.

  76. jukeboxgrad says:

    I am a homophobe, though a mild and tolerant one, and a racist, though an even more mild and tolerant one, and those things are going to be illegal pretty soon, the way we are going. Of course, people will still be that way in their hearts, but they will be afraid to admit it, and will be punished if they do admit it.

    What’s interesting about “will be punished if they do admit it” is that he made that statement in 2003, and NR, rather than punish him, continued to employ him. And probably still will, even now. So “will be punished” is not a reality in this instance.

  77. Ron Beasley says:

    @jukeboxgrad: I think this was the final screed of a dying man and he does have soon to be terminal cancer. In spite of the fact I disagree with nearly everything NRO stands for I am going to give them the benefit of doubt here – he published this at takimagazine because NRO wouldn’t let him publish it at their place. NRO won’t fire him – they just won’t let him publish anything anymore.
    That said I suspect the the NRO crew agrees with much of what he said they simply object to his honesty. (well so much for giving them the benefit of doubt)

  78. Ron Beasley says:

    Help – caught in a the spam filter!!!

  79. Ron,

    Liberated. Not sure what caught the filter’s attention. Other than perhaps the words “terminal cancer”

  80. Ron Beasley says:

    @Doug Mataconis: Thanks Doug

  81. DRE says:

    @Ron Beasley: The bad news is of course it may be more likely that it reflects his views.

    The real bad news is that it likely reflects the views of a huge majority of white people, and a slight modification of the views of people of most races in the US (and the world in fact). Only a small number of people would be willing to articulate the views in this way, but it has been my experience that most people (outside of a small number of truly integrated communities) live their lives according to rules like these. The only real difference is that instead of referencing a limited number of “intelligent, well socialized” others, most people are afraid that only a limited number of others are not hostile towards them because of their differences. This is why I’m constantly amazed at the number of people who claim to believe that the US has overcome its history of racial problems. What white people especially seem to ignore is the fact that this type of attitude has limited effect on their daily lives, but has a very large effect on the daily lives of members of minority groups. I have an unusual perspective on this, since I grew up as a (privileged) minority white person in an African country. Even though my minority status came with more benefits than costs, the feeling (or fear) of being conspicuous, different, and disliked or distrusted was always a factor in my behavior and choice of activities. The US has made great strides in dealing with these issues(especially in institutional structures), but anyone who believes that it is largely a thing of the past, or limited to a few areas is fooling themselves.

  82. DRE says:

    @DRE: After reading my own comment I am afraid of a misunderstanding. There is a difference between racism, which believes the other is inferior, and the nearly universal discomfort with the other or the different. The problem that I see is that too often they are treated as the same thing. Racists, like Derbyshire, try to pretend that they are not any more racist than anyone else. Others (especially in the conservative movement) promote policies that are based on the idea that the elimination of overt racism is all that is necessary to solve all the problems of race. The black Africans whose dislike I feared were not racists. The existence of a racist history that resulted in my privileged position was the problem. Similarly the US has a pronounced racist history which has not come close to being overcome.

  83. Gold Star for Robot Boy says:

    One of the more schadenfreude-y elements of this is having conservative bloggers express their extreme disapproval of Derb’s column, and then watching their horrified reactions when their nut-job commenters crawl out from under rocks to post the most vile racism.

    To paraphrase Bill Simmons: Yep, these are your readers.

  84. Gold Star for Robot Boy says:

    NRO just fired Derb.

  85. Jim Henley says:

    This proves that vicious, preening white men can’t get a break in this country.

  86. Ron Beasley says:

    @DRE: You can certainly have tribalism not based on race. We have certainly seen that in the USA – think Irish, Polish etc. But did the tribalists think the Irish or Polish were inferior? I don’t know. I am inclined to think it’s all tribalism. Obvious differences in appearance just make it easier. It is also made easier when a cultural/religious group separates itself from the majority in society. This was responsible for much of the antisemitism in Europe. The same can be said for the Romanies. The reality is tribalism is still in our genes only the make up of the tribe changes. I’m not really sure there is a solution to this.

  87. mattb says:

    Being someone who has spent a lot of time in pretty “liberal” institutions and communities, I actually agree that there’s a lot more racism on the left than people realize.

    It’s not the same sort of “bell curve” or “thug” racism that you see used in conservative circles.

    More often than not, it’s tied to an assumption of being able to “understand” the experience of people of other background. It also often ties into the “white savior” complex (recently on display with the recent Kony/Forgotten Children) thing. And often, it gets masked (often unconsciously) in the language of economic difference or skill level problems.

    I’m not claiming that the two types of racism are equivilent. But to pretend that liberals, as a whole, get a pass on this stuff is missing the far deeper soft racial challenges that we face.

  88. Nick says:

    I think practically everyone contributes to the maintenance of institutional racism. Humans generalize about all sorts of things, including topics involving race, ethnicity, gender and sexual orientation.

    Some studies purport to show that a very small percentage of the population DOESN’T generalize, though how they navigate life that way is anyone’s guess.

    Assuming someone isn’t actively supporting the KKK–an open and overt support of white supremacy, the next step down in personal responsibility for the effects of racism would be someone who supports groups and ideologies that covertly seek to maintain white supremacy (for example, the Southern Strategy).

    One step lower is the person who acknowledges institutional racism, but does to address his or her contribution to its existence (most of us).

  89. DRE says:

    @Ron Beasley: It’s a universal problem that is difficult to deal with, but the greater the history of reasons for distrust, the bigger the problem. The only solution I see is to work as hard as possible to eliminate the causes of distrust between groups. Reduce the negative interactions, increase positive interactions and maximize the ability of historically submerged or suppressed minority groups to have their voices heard. Every family should have a version of “the talk” that addresses the reality of the fears, and the history they are based on, and emphasizes the need to overcome them rather than accepting them, as well as avoiding mistakes that could result from pretending it’s not real. We also need strong civil rights protections, hate crime legislation, and to maximize opportunities for diversity. It’s true that minority groups which isolate themselves from the larger society make themselves easier and more likely targets, but it also important to understand why they might wish to do so, in order to create space for themselves to feel safe. Ignoring, allowing, or worst of all encouraging the reasons for distrust can lead to a vicious cycle that diminishes everyone’s life.

  90. Nick says:

    Lowry fired Derbyshire. To quote Digby:

    “Lowry couldn’t even bring himself to say the word “racist.,” largely because he knows what a backlash that would entail from his deeply racist audience. What a coward.”

  91. michael reynolds says:

    @mattb:

    I think that’s right. I think the left sometimes suffers from — forgive the phrase — the soft bigotry of low expectations. It’s a sort of gentle racism, but it is racist nonetheless.

    We have a right to expect African nations to subscribe to basic human rights, for example, without inventing excuses having to do with colonialism. And we have a right to question thug tolerance in the African-American culture, just as African-Americans have the right to question the apparently eternal racism of whites.

    The problem is that an honest, productive dialog is impossible so long as that conversation is preempted by racist whites. History makes it impossible for us to move forward so long as we are fighting this rear-guard action against the conservatives who in their heart still long for Jim Crow.

  92. Charles Mangerian says:

    We need to end the war to bring not only peace, but freedom to this country. I refer not to the war in the Mid-East, which we should end expeditiously, if not immediately. I refer to the left’s long war on our cultural institutions, which can be summed up under the headings of “racism, sexism, homophobia.. oh my” (with apologies to Dorothy and the rest of the gang at Oz.

    Derbyshire would benefit by an outlook more rooted in traditional Christianity, a little less Churchill and a little more Chesterton. The problem in the African American community has more to do with the false irenicism of the left than genetics, but most of his “rant” reflects a common perception based in a not unreasonable fear of harm.

    We should thank Taki for publishing Derbyshire. While Taki’s webzine can sometimes be over the top, we all benefit from his resistance to the belief system of America’s liberal, and conservative, elite. The retaliation has nothing to do with racism but is a real effort to “domesticate” the GOP and return it to the role envisioned by our elite, an “echo” not an alternative to the values and beliefs of the Democrat party. Our ruling elite likes the idea of a GOP that will allow the public to vent their frustration from time to time against our avatars in their never ending quest to forge the New Man, and if necessary to slow down progress to allow the Christians and the rednecks to catch up, but “progress” must resume none the less.

    The best current example of the foregoing is public “acceptance” of homosexual unions, a subject of discussion unimaginable as little as 30 years ago, yet is now considered inevitable and, indeed risible, if opposed. Today’s GOP is all but ready to accede to “gay marriage”, just as they all but abandoned the pro-life movement.

    For the good of us all, we need to end the war on “racism, sexism, and homophobia” and allow normalcy to return.

  93. michael reynolds says:

    @Charles Mangerian:

    You’re a dinosaur.

    There’s the asteroid!

    Bye bye.

  94. jukeboxgrad says:

    gold:

    One of the more schadenfreude-y elements of this is having conservative bloggers express their extreme disapproval of Derb’s column, and then watching their horrified reactions when their nut-job commenters crawl out from under rocks to post the most vile racism.

    Yup. For example, over at Tucker Carlson’s place, Matt Lewis condemned Derbyshire. Now he has 278 comments, and the comments with the best rating are the ones defending Derbyshire.

    The GOP can’t really separate itself from its racists, because there are too many of them, and they’re too important, collectively.

  95. Gold Star for Robot Boy says:

    General theme amongst commenters: “I’m afraid of blacks, and I’m proud to say so!”

  96. el polacko says:

    i read the article. he simply said “look at the statistics…and use common sense” in your daily activities. apparently, statistical facts are just too shocking for the delicate sensibilities of some folks. is it better to pretend that none of it’s true ? how can things improve if we are too afraid to face reality ? shouting “that’s racist!” solves nothing.

  97. Gold Star for Robot Boy says:

    @el polacko: Because Derb’s advice, to avoid becoming a crime statistic, is to avoid an entire race of people. Also, look for “good” blacks, as that will give you cover.

  98. David M says:

    @el polacko: Somehow I missed the statistics in the following statements by Derb:

    intelligent and well-socialized blacks.

    Do not settle in a district or municipality run by black politicians

    Before voting for a black politician, scrutinize his/her character much more carefully than you would a white

    I agree with Tod Kelly (and others), that yes this is racist.

  99. @DRE:

    Only a small number of people would be willing to articulate the views in this way, but it has been my experience that most people (outside of a small number of truly integrated communities) live their lives according to rules like these.

    My personal rule for deciding whether a neighborhood is safe/unsafe actually has nothing to do with the people in it at all. I look at the cars parked along the street. If they’re relatively new, you’re good. If they’re older but still well maintined, you’re okay. If they’re beat up clunkers, be on your guard. And if you ever end up in the part of the city where the cars disappear entirely, get your butt out of there ASAP.

  100. MarkedMan says:

    Another instance of creepiness from Derbyshire from 2007 A small story, meant to be amusing, but the latent meanness and misogyny of this story caught me by surprise, as it had been linked to as a “funny” story by Andrew Sullivan (in retrospect, no surprise there. Sullivan just doesn’t seem to have much empathy for women, IMHO).

  101. superdestroyer says:

    OK, so after a multitude of articles where black writers accused vritually all whites and especially all white policemen of being racist, how does a any white writer address the issue of crime and violence in the black community.

    Has the U.S. become so politically correct and involved in group think that even reviewing federal crime statistics is now considered racist. What should white families tell their children to do if they end up in a black neighborhood or end up in a crowd that is predominately black. Is it OK for your family or children to be attack just so someone cannot call you racist?

  102. @superdestroyer:

    sd, you are always good for “news from the underside of the rock.”

    fwiw though, my dad (an inner city teacher and one who worked for racial equality) occasionally said things like “don’t go to the projects, nobody goes to the projects, not even the police.”

    It’s the difference between “the projects” or “a bad neighborhood” and “black people,” you see.

  103. Eric Florack says:

    from a statistical standpoint, Derb has a point.
    thing is, I view these issues as cultural, more than racial.

  104. @Eric Florack:

    No, his was not a post about crime statistics. If it was, it would have been much shorter. He could have just said “use this page to check crime rate by zip code.” Done and done.

  105. michael reynolds says:

    @Eric Florack:
    No you don’t: you’re a racist. Many of us finally took a look at your blog, at Anjin-San’s suggestion. You can stop wearing yourself out trying to find euphemisms.

  106. superdestroyer says:

    @john personna:

    It is more than the projects. Look at how many liberal whites kids want to attend the University of Wisconsin (2.4% black http://collegeresults.org/collegeprofile.aspx?institutionid=240444 even thought I dread giving a cite since giving citese these days is considered racist) while no liberal white kids wants to attend the Univeristy of Memphis that is 37% black http://collegeresults.org/collegeprofile.aspx?institutionid=220862

    Look at how all of the elite white kids claim that they want diversity in their education and then attend universities that are 70% white, 20% Asian, and 10% others and where 95% of the students are liberal progressive Democrats.

  107. michael reynolds says:

    The crime stats prove conclusively that poorer people are more likely to be associated with violent crime. So if you want to avoid violent crime, stay out of the poorest areas, whether they are white, Hispanic or African-American.

    As Stormy says above: look at the cars. I’d also add, look at doors and windows and trash collection. If you’re in a white area with cars up on blocks and crap in the yard, guess what? You’re very likely to be in a high crime zone and you might want to leave. On the other hand, if you’re in an African-American neighborhood that has Priuses and Minivans in the driveways and no bars on the windows, relax.

  108. superdestroyer says:

    @michael reynolds:

    MR,

    You would consider anyone who does not believe that blacks should get whatever they want is a racist. Of course, many people would consider you a racist since you believe that the government at all levels should be able to ask everyone their race/ethnicity and should be able to treat them differently based upon the answer given.

  109. michael reynolds says:

    @superdestroyer:

    No, SD, but you are a racist. Pure and simple. So is Eric. You are a brainwashed, brain-dead, nasty, narrow little racist creep.

    And you compound it by pretending otherwise. You’re not only a racist creep, you’re a dishonest racist creep who lacks the courage to admit what he is openly, honestly and for all to see.

    So why don’t you see if you can manage that at least? Can you summon the courage to say it loud and proud?

  110. @superdestroyer:

    Oddly (sarc.) 8,677 white kids do attend the Univeristy of Memphis.

    It really is hard to find structure to your complaint, other than underlying racism. Why would you assume those kids don’t want to be there, and even more strangely, why do you assume all of their parents are conservatives?

  111. superdestroyer says:

    @michael reynolds:

    I find it odd that individuals who believe that the government should treat all people equally are considered racist but the people who support race-based governance in the form of qutoas, Affirmative action, race norming, and reserve discrimination consider themselves enlighted progressives and believe that they are not racist.

    How do you explain to middle class white students that they need 200 additional points on the SAT test to have the same educational opportunities as blacks?

  112. Eric Florack says:

    @m@Eric Florack:

    No you don’t: you’re a racist. Many of us finally took a look at your blog, at Anjin-San’s suggestion. You can stop wearing yourself out trying to find euphemisms. ichael reynolds

    :

    You’re a futile attempts to fit the real world into your alarmingly narrow minded mantra, are herewith noted.

    But before you go marching down that particular road two quickly, perhaps you should do another experiment. Do a search against Thomas Sohl. Note the frequency with which we quote him. Note our interest in Herman Cain. Similarly make note of the name Shelby Steele, who is similarly quoted fairly frequently. Most recently, yesterday morning.

    and note, please, what Steele suggests in the quote posted most recently:

    all cultures are not equal. The fact of a black socioeconomic disparity is obvious. While I do not deny the continued existence of white anti-black racism, I content that such racism to no longer a major contributing factor. However, while I do not deny that Mother Nature may well be a racist, such is life, sue her, the major cause of the black socioeconomic disparity is chronically dysfunctional culture, from rom Shelby Steele, Wall Street Journal:

    The civil rights community and the liberal media live by the poetic truth that America is still a reflexively racist society, and that this remains the great barrier to black equality. But this “truth” has a lot of lie in it. America has greatly evolved since the 1960s. There are no longer any respectable advocates of racial segregation. And blacks today are nine times more likely to be killed by other blacks than by whites.

    If Trayvon Martin was a victim of white racism (hard to conceive since the shooter is apparently Hispanic), his murder would be an anomaly, not a commonplace. It would be a bizarre exception to the way so many young black males are murdered today. If there must be a generalization in all this—a call “to turn the moment into a movement”—it would have to be a movement against blacks who kill other blacks. The absurdity of Messrs. Jackson and Sharpton is that they want to make a movement out of an anomaly. Black teenagers today are afraid of other black teenagers, not whites

    A media inspired judicial lynching of George Zimmerman will do nothing to solve the problems besetting the black population.

    As always, the real world doesn’t seem to fit into your mantra.

  113. Eric Florack says:

    Oh, and do us a favor; in your certain to be angry response be so kind as to avoid the use of the phrase “token black” or anything with that meaning therein.

    I tend to doubt that you have that ability.

  114. superdestroyer says:

    @john personna:

    The white kids who attend Memphis are middle class and lower middle class white kids who could not get admitted to UT-Knoxville or do not have the money to attend an out of state university.

    Any white kid who is attending Memphis knows that they are at a huge disadvantage compared to the white kids at Wisconsin. Wisconsin has a 6 year graduation rate of 80%. Memphis has a 6 year graduation rate of 35%. If you want to lower your chance of graduating from college, be a white kid attending a university where a large percentage of the student body is black.

  115. Jim Henley says:

    @superdestroyer:

    I find it odd that individuals who believe that the government should treat all people equally are considered racist but the people who support race-based governance in the form of qutoas, Affirmative action, race norming, and reserve discrimination consider themselves enlighted progressives and believe that they are not racist.

    You find it odd because of two major errors in your thinking:

    1. Imagining that “the government” is all there is to society.
    2. Imagining that what people “believe” is all there is to their impact.

    These are very hard errors for a right-wing mind to get past. I’ve lived that first-hand! But I’m not sure anyone can get past it while remaining right-wing.

  116. Eric Florack says:

    Almost forgot;

    We should make note of this Steele quote:

    There is a price to be paid even for fellow-traveling with a racial identity as politicized and demanding as today’s black identity. This identity wants to take over a greater proportion of the self than other racial identities do. It wants to have its collective truth— its defining ideas of grievance and protest—become personal truth. . . . These are the identity pressures that Barack Obama lives within. He is vulnerable to them because he has hungered for a transparent black identity much of his life. He needs to ‘be black.’ And this hunger—no matter how understandable it may be—means that he is not in a position to reject the political liberalism inherent in his racial identity. For Obama liberalism is blackness.

    Ponder how those points fit into the rest of your argument. As any speaking against liberalism of all, inherently racist?

    Again I say, this is not about race. This is about culture. Particularly, Liberal culture, which a large number of blacks tend to subscribe to. To their own destruction, I think.

  117. The sad thing about modern racists is that they’ll keep sliding around the conversation, as MR notes, and keep making weak peripheral attacks. First “no liberal white kids” want to go to school with blacks (when they are actually the people most open to it), and then:

    The white kids who attend Memphis are middle class and lower middle class white kids who could not get admitted to UT-Knoxville or do not have the money to attend an out of state university.

    Dude. That is obviously held together by your own racism and your own aversion to Memphis. You didn’t talk to those kids, you just put your values on them.

    You’d probably do more good for your cause if you got back under your rock at this point.

  118. Eric Florack says:

    Perhaps it’s time to start questioning whether not the prevailing black culture adds to that poverty, Persona.

    Does anyone remember short time ago, where in the discussion came up incidental to limiting the welfare state that doing so was inherently racist, despite the fact that the vast majority of those on public assistance were white?

  119. anjin-san says:

    bit… you really don’t have a clue how pathetic you sound, do you?

  120. superdestroyer says:

    @john personna:

    The elite white kids are the least likely to attend a school that has more than 10% blacks. Poor and middle class white kids (those who are the most likely to vote Republican) are the ones who end up at schools from Temple to Georgia State to Houston to Memphis that have significant numbers of black students.

    If you doubt that white liberals will not send their children to schools with large number of blacks then you have to find a reason why the bluest cities in the U.S. seem to all have public schools systems that have few whites. Why else do you think that DC has a public school system that is less than 5% white?

  121. @michael reynolds:

    As Stormy says above: look at the cars.

    The car thing isn’t even strictly about poverty: it’s more that the fact people are willing to leave an expensive piece of property sitting around unattended signals something important about safety. There are relatively wealthy neighborhoods where it’s still dangerous to be around at night, and you can tell them because everyone uses off street parking. Likewise, (and this may be a strictly Philadelphia thing), there’s certain neighborhoods in South Philly that are perfectly safe despite being rather poor (because people know if you cause trouble there, someone who works for Joseph Ligambi is gonna want to talk to you about it).

  122. Eric Florack says:

    @anjin-san: Your argument seems wanting in reality, Anjin. Perhaps it’s time to rethink. Or perhaps, just think, since you do not appear to have applied much in the way of thought to the first one.

  123. superdestroyer says:

    @Jim Henley:

    so, are you really proposing that it is OK for the government to be able to discriminate on the basis of race just as long as people do not publicly acknowledge that they base the personal decisions based upon race.

    Whites have to consider race when they choose where they live, where their children attend school, or even what public events they attend. Why is odd is that many businesses have suffered by the changing in the demographics of their customers but because of PC they are not allowed to talk about their issues in public.

  124. al-Ameda says:

    @superdestroyer:

    “thought I dread giving a cite since giving citese these days is considered racist) while no liberal white kids wants to attend the Univeristy of Memphis that is 37% black.”

    It JUST might have something to do with the ranking or the respective schools, right? Are you saying that liberal kids are racists for electing to attend a better school?

  125. Eric Florack says:

    @Stormy Dragon: That’s true enough.
    And these don’t seem to be racial issues…. but cultural, no?
    (Mini-culture, micro-culture, whatever they’re using to describe such these days.)

  126. anjin-san says:

    Your argument seems wanting in reality

    I did not make an argument. Run along junior, you’ve been outed.

  127. Eric Florack says:

    @al-Ameda: But WHY are they better?
    Can you tell us?

  128. Eric Florack says:

    @anjin-san: Yes, you did.
    You’re still doing it.
    And you’;ve yet to come up with anything that actually supports your position.

    Go outside and play for a while. The adults are busy.

  129. al-Ameda says:

    @Eric Florack:

    “Does anyone remember short time ago, where in the discussion came up incidental to limiting the welfare state that doing so was inherently racist, despite the fact that the vast majority of those on public assistance were white?”

    Then why is the focus of all of the conservative angst on “black culture” rather than “white culture”?

  130. al-Ameda says:

    @Eric Florack:

    “But WHY are they better?
    Can you tell us?”

    Why is the University of Wisconsin better than the University of Memphis? Probably due to a strong midwestern tradition that values higher education, versus a Southern tradition that generally does not result in great public universities.

  131. anjin-san says:

    The adults are busy

    Since you claim to be on old internet hand, you should know that line was tired back in the 90s.
    I guess that’s what passes for clever in your tiny little world.

  132. Rick Almeida says:

    @superdestroyer:

    no liberal white kids wants to attend the Univeristy of Memphis that is 37% black

    I attended the University of Memphis, and there were plenty of “liberal white kids” there.

  133. al-Ameda says:

    @anjin-san:

    “The adults are busy”

    It is kind of trite, isn’t it.? After all, it depends: at Jonestown the adults were busy drinking Kool Aid, and more recently, a majority of Republican adults were demanding to see the President’s Birth Certificate.

  134. Eric Florack says:

    @anjin-san:
    Since you obviously comprehensive a little of what you read, the line has the virtue of being relatively new, for you.

    @al-Ameda: I think there are probably several graduates of southern universities who would tend to disagree. Loyola, Belmont, James Madison, etc. That said, my thought was more aimed toward schools in general, not just colleges and universities.

    @al-Ameda:
    Probably, that has as much to do as anything with the crime rate among black culture. The murder rate. Rates of unemployment. All points which have been examined by black authors, from a cultural perspective. As an example I would suggest you read Bill Cosby’s recent work “Come On People “.

    Further, if you look at the crime rates involved broken down by race you’ll notice that there is a large disparity between crime rates among the impoverished whites and the impoverished blacks. Again, that would seem to be cultural in nature.

  135. anjin-san says:

    @ al-Ameda

    Yep. And grownup bithead and his grownup friend david L pass their time writing blog posts about Obama and plantations and blackface. And house n**gers.

    And you just know that neither one of them would have the nerve to say “boo” to a random black man on the street.

    Funny how brave people are on the internets.

  136. Clarence says:

    I, a black person, have become immune to this kind of rant. In fact, given how racist this country is, I expect it. I will say I take heart in seeing how many people are condemning the rant.

  137. James in LA says:

    @Eric Florack: “Again, that would seem to be cultural in nature.”

    Which conveniently justifies your “opinions,” which also conveniently do not include you as a participant, in either cause or solution. Your only requirement seems to be for a box of kleenex.

  138. Eric Florack says:

    @James in LA: That’s what happens when your opinions are based on fact.

    If more people tried that, there would be far smaller numbers of liberals, I suppose.
    Cheers,

  139. Jim Henley says:

    @superdestroyer:

    so, are you really proposing that it is OK for the government to be able to discriminate on the basis of race just as long as people do not publicly acknowledge that they base the personal decisions based upon race.

    Whites have to consider race when they choose where they live, where their children attend school, or even what public events they attend. Why is odd is that many businesses have suffered by the changing in the demographics of their customers but because of PC they are not allowed to talk about their issues in public.

    Dude, I can’t even figure out what you’re trying to say now.

  140. An Interested Party says:

    So superdestroyer and Eric Florack chime in right on schedule as part of the Derbyshire Amen Corner…hardly surprising…

  141. al-Ameda says:

    Maybe we need to start talking about the “White Culture” that has: (1) virtually franchised and spread Meth Labs across the country, and (2) now considers “reverse racism” and affirmative action laws to be a bigger problem than slavery, apartheid, segregation and Jim Crow laws were to America.

  142. anjin-san says:

    “White Culture”

    And lets not forget “Jerry Springer” “Jersey Shore” and “16 and Pregnant”, along with a general glorification of stupidity, ignorance, and celebrity worship.

  143. Eric Florack says:

    @An Interested Party: Look at what I said again, carefully. I said statistically speaking he has a point. Are we afraid of those statistics? And if so, why?

    Can it be that what we are reacting to falls into line directly with the Obama White House saying they didn’t need to worry about white America in their reelection campaign? all of a sudden hypersensitivity about race these last several months, takes on an undeniable quality of being ginned up. Just before an election too. Who might benefit politically from this?

    Oh, but don’t listen to me. I’m just your average white racist. Right?
    (spit)

  144. Eric Florack says:

    @Jim Henley: So anything beyond “conservative bad, Liberal good” confuses you? One is reminded of the sheep on Orwell’s “animal farm”.

  145. Peter says:

    Derbyshire wrote a couple of months ago that the powerful drugs given in his first chemotherapy treatment affected his mind as well as his body. He said they felt like a big dose of steroids, rendering him so aggressive that he had an urge to run cars off the road while driving home from the treatment. Could this screed be a side-effect of the treatment?

  146. Peter says:

    Any white kid who is attending Memphis knows that they are at a huge disadvantage compared to the white kids at Wisconsin. Wisconsin has a 6 year graduation rate of 80%. Memphis has a 6 year graduation rate of 35%. If you want to lower your chance of graduating from college, be a white kid attending a university where a large percentage of the student body is black.

    Wikipedia isn’t much help, but I’m going to guess that given its location Memphis attracts a fairly high percentage of students who attend part-time while working and/or are past traditional college age. It’s pretty much inevitable that students of this type will take longer to graduate than the more traditional students.

  147. Jim Henley says:

    @Eric Florack:

    No, anything other than at least somewhat coherent thoughts stated with moderate-or-greater clarity confuses me. superdestroyer tends to try to get all of his resentments into every sentence, all pitched according to his . . . signature style of reasoning. This leaves any given passage of his writing resemble a dog when you throw it three balls at the same time.

  148. jmc says:

    Everyone seems to be missing the point..what John Derbyshire wrote is a fairly accurate description of the basic truth of how modern America really works. As a white Anglo who has lived the last 25 years in the US, mostly in minority majority cites, I have discovered that there are two very different types of blacks. The first group are no different from any other ethnic / racial group. The usual range of the good, the bad, the indifferent.. Who just try to get along. The second group is at least 50% outright racist. Not just against whites, but towards everyone else. From the moment you meet them the race hatred is palpable and unrelenting. They are usually profoundly unpleasant people to deal with.

    So what is the defining difference between the two groups?The first group are African immigrants and their children. The second group are American born blacks. Even though they both live in the same country, and both supposedly suffer from the same “institutional racism” the first group, the Africans, I have found to be almost without exception free of racism and the second group, the American born, utterly poisoned and debilitated by their racism. They have trapped themselves in a horrible negative feedback loop. They think everyone else dislikes them because they are black, so therefore everyone else is racist. . Whereas the truth is everyone dislikes them because they are unpleasant and nasty.

    The problem will only go away when they change their utterly self defeating culture. The problem is not us, its them. And there lies the real tragedy.

  149. al-Ameda says:

    @anjin-san:

    And lets not forget “Jerry Springer” “Jersey Shore” and “16 and Pregnant”, along with a general glorification of stupidity, ignorance, and celebrity worship.

    Jeez, what has happened to ‘my people’?

  150. mattb says:

    @Eric Florack:

    @Jim Henley: So anything beyond “conservative bad, Liberal good” confuses you? One is reminded of the sheep on Orwell’s “animal farm”.

    Eric, that you wrote this with a straight face suggests that you either have the biggest set of balls or the most amazing lack of self-awareness that I’ve ever seen on the internet. I suspect it’s the latter.

    Can you point me to anything you have written that has to deal with political or social issues that cannot be reduced to: “Conservative good. Liberal bad.”?

    You’re knee jerk conservatism epitomize a sheep that has convinced himself he’s a wolf by dressing himself in wolf’s clothing.

  151. al-Ameda says:

    @jmc:

    “They have trapped themselves in a horrible negative feedback loop. They think everyone else dislikes them because they are black, so therefore everyone else is racist. . Whereas the truth is everyone dislikes them because they are unpleasant and nasty.

    The problem will only go away when they change their utterly self defeating culture. The problem is not us, its them. And there lies the real tragedy.”

    Well, maybe it’s just me but, you’d think that 200 years of slavery and 100 years of apartheid, segregation and Jim Crow laws might lead to some problems.

  152. Ben Wolf says:

    @jmc:

    Everyone seems to be missing the point..what John Derbyshire wrote is a fairly accurate description of the basic truth of how modern America really works.

    See, this is the definition of pre-judgement, from which we derive the word prejudice. When you provide serious empirical evidence that there are “good” and “bad” blacks, with the latter group being “at least 50% racist” let me know. Otherwise, get to steppin’.

  153. Ben Wolf says:

    @Peter: It wouldn’t surprise me if his alcoholism combined with chemo resulted in writing something he normally wouldn’t. But those drugs would only have helped what he believed make its way past his brain’s filters. They wouldn’t have turned him racist.

  154. An Interested Party says:

    They wouldn’t have turned him racist.

    Derbyshire has expressed repellent opinions for years, the only thing new here is the depth and breadth of the filth he’s spewing…the most illuminating thing about this incident is that it allows so many other scumbags to crawl out from under their rocks to share with the rest of us their little theories about black people, as some of the comments on this thread make quite clear…

  155. wr says:

    @Eric Florack: Oh, goodie, an Animal Farm reference. Next up: 1984 and some Ayn Rand swill. Why is that no conservative commenter ever cites a book that isn’t primarily read in high school? Is it possible they haven’t read anything since then?

  156. Dazedandconfused says:

    @Ben Wolf:

    He’s always been an Intelligent, well-socialized racist.

  157. anjin-san says:

    Oh, but don’t listen to me. I’m just your average white racist. Right?

    Somewhat below average. You are a dolt who has a racist blog, and then whines like a child when called on it.

    And the (spit) thing? Classy move on Easter Sunday.

  158. superdestroyer says:

    @Rick Almeida:

    But did you really want to attend Memphis or did you settle on Memphis despite the university being 37% black?

  159. superdestroyer says:

    @Peter:

    25% of the freshmen at Memphis never come back for their sophmore year. It is more than just having lots of part time students. Collegeresults.org says that 25% of the students at Memphis are part time students.

    Maybe you can find a unveristy that has somewhere between 30% and 50% black students that has the same graduation rate as Wisconsin.

  160. Jim Henley says:

    Maybe you can find a unveristy that has somewhere between 30% and 50% black students that has the same graduation rate as Wisconsin.

    This is another case of what the hell do you even think you’re trying to say?

  161. superdestroyer says:

    @Ben Wolf:

    If the biases are statistically true, are they still irrational perjudices. Maybe if you could point out some point made by Derbyshire that was statistically incorrect, then you could argue that it was prejudiced.

  162. Ben Wolf says:

    @superdestroyer: Stop dodging the question. Show that the “bad” blacks are at least 50% racist,, since that’s the post you’re responding to. You can’t claim accuracy for a statistic someone made up.

  163. Hey Norm says:

    “…Oh, but don’t listen to me. I’m just your average white racist. Right?
    (spit)…”

    No…I went to your website…you’re far, far beyond average. You are a sick, twisted individual…as are your cohorts…and I’m sure, readers. I would suggest you get help. But based on your level of rank bigotry you probably aren’t intelligent enough to understand how badly your are need of it.
    I apologize to the rest of the OTB community if this seems harsh or over the top.

  164. J-Dub says:

    I grew up in Prince George’s County, MD, the only predominantly black county in the country. As a white male, the only “rule” I needed to follow was to never humiliate yourself by getting undressed in a locker room full of black men.

  165. J-Dub says:

    It’s easy to be racist. It’s easy to blame your failure in life on someone else. If you are white then you were born with a winning hand. It’s your choice whether you use that hand to help raise others up or to hold them down.

    It’s pretty easy to see from the comments on this post into which category each of you fall.

  166. Brummagem Joe says:

    @An Interested Party:

    Derbyshire has expressed repellent opinions for years,

    Exactly. This has been routine Derbyshire for years and the NR has been well aware of it as Lowry tacitly admits with his dancing around on the borderline comment. The problem for NR going into an election is that they couldn’t afford to be associated with this sort of stuff. After the Trayvon Martin case, these Tulsa shootings and the conviction of that 21 year old for the car park shooting in MS(?) it’s all getting too close to home. As others have observed this is why Lowry didn’t open his statement to comment because he knows it would be full of the racist rants or apologias that are standard at a lot of conservative web sites (the tip of which iceberg we’ve seen here).

  167. Eric Florack says:
  168. MBunge says:

    @Steven L. Taylor: “I do specifically remember his ridiculous assertions about the Virgina Tech shootings, including a lot of fantasies about counting rounds and engaging in other action movie activities to stop the shooter (I wrote about it here).”

    Getting beyond the whole question of racism, the conservative movement has become far too tolerant of cranks and non-serious thinkers of all sorts.

    Mike

  169. Brummagem Joe says:

    @MBunge:

    Getting beyond the whole question of racism, the conservative movement has become far too tolerant of cranks and non-serious thinkers of all sorts.

    They were always there. The GOP’s embrace of identity politics and the growth of new media has just made them more visible.

  170. Rick Almeida says:

    @superdestroyer:

    But did you really want to attend Memphis or did you settle on Memphis despite the university being 37% black?

    I chose to attend Memphis from a number of options.

  171. An Interested Party says:

    I see that Florack is now using the Juan Williams defense…nice try, but you’re still a racist bigot and no amount of trying to change the subject will change that…and getting past racism would be a wonderful thing, if only the racists could get past their own bigotry…Eric Florack, for example…

  172. An Interested Party says:

    I chose to attend Memphis from a number of options.

    In other words, you aren’t terrified, like superdestroyer is, of people with a darker skin color than you…

  173. J-Dub says:

    I see now that NRO editor Rich Lowry considers Derbyshire’s post to also be his “resignation letter” from NRO.

  174. mantis says:

    @Eric Florack:

    But before you go marching down that particular road two quickly, perhaps you should do another experiment. Do a search against Thomas Sohl. Note the frequency with which we quote him. Note our interest in Herman Cain. Similarly make note of the name Shelby Steele, who is similarly quoted fairly frequently.

    Short bithead: I have several black friends, and they all tell me that blacks are the real racists!

  175. Ben Wolf says:

    @mantis: Is Florack referring to Thomas Sowell?

  176. Brummagem Joe says:

    @Ben Wolf:

    Is Florack referring to Thomas Sowell?

    Yep Sowell’s name is constantly on their lips, they just can’t spell it….LOL

  177. Jim Henley says:

    Is Florack referring to Thomas Sowell?

    I think so.

    During my years as an anti-anti-racist white git, I loved me some Shelby Steele and Thomas Sowell. Pizza Guy came along after I’d given up that dodge, though.

    What bithead is saying is, “We love to cite the opinions of African-Americans who agree with what we already think.” Specifically those parts of their opinions that already agree with the white dude’s opinions. If the parts that don’t agree are mild enough, those can be politely ignored. If those parts start to become too prominent, the white dude’s take away your Respectable Negro badge. Viz. Glenn Loury.

    Relatedly, lots of pale-male chuckleheads like to quote Chris Rock’s “I Hate [N-Word]s” routine. And some of Derbyshire’s defenders are running around saying, “But Jesse Jackson said the exact same thing!” But you know, those weren’t the only things Chris Rock and Jesse Jackson ever said. If you really want to make Jesse Jackson and Chris Rock the arbiters of American racial discourse, hey – bring it on.

  178. Sam says:

    Between 1976 and 2005 blacks were 13% of the US population but committed 49% of all murders. They also lead the league in every other category of violent crime (www.fbi.gov)

    Given these stats, and those Derbyshire cites, where is he wrong?? If he’s wrong, refute him.

    How many of you chicken squat liberals actually LIVE in inner city Detroit, Newark, Gary, East St. Louis, etc? You wouldn’t in a million years. Many of you live by Derbyshire’s suggestions. To not do so greatly increases your odds of adding to the violent crime stats above, AND YOU KNOW IT.

  179. Jim Henley says:

    Given these stats, and those Derbyshire cites, where is he wrong??

    Because you’re looking at the wrong fraction.

    How many of you chicken squat liberals actually LIVE in inner city Detroit, Newark, Gary, East St. Louis, etc? You wouldn’t in a million years.

    Neither do black people who can afford not to. High crime neighborhood is high-crime neighborhood. Wow.

    Meanwhile, I am a “chicken squat liberal” and I live on a mixed-race block in a mixed-race neighborhood and send my kids to “majority-minority” public schools. Our liberalism is locally very light on limousines, but we get by.

  180. Brummagem Joe says:

    @Sam:

    Between 1976 and 2005 blacks were 13% of the US population but committed 49% of all murders. They also lead the league in every other category of violent crime (www.fbi.gov)

    Sammy boy, does it ever enter you’re head to ask why this might be? Or do you think it a matter of genetics?

  181. Sam says:

    @Jim Henley:

    Jim Henley said Derbyshire is wrong because he and I are “looking at the wrong fraction.”

    What “wrong fraction?”

    Jim, the point is that there’s a very high correlation between crime and the number of blacks in a neighborhood. High crime neighborhoods are that way BECAUSE a high percentage of its population is black (or Hispanic). What’s so hard to understand about this?

    Your mixed neighborhood will be transformed to a high crime neighborhood should the percentage of blacks cross a numerical threshold.

  182. Dazedandconfused says:

    @Sam:

    The flaw in the “Bell Curve” data Derby sited was that it never established a genetic link.

    When the Irish were the poor, the crime rates were comparable, something “Bell Curve” Charles Murry points out in his most recent work.

    Replace “Black” with “Poor”, and read Derby’s screed to know what the problem mainly is. We all fear the poor. Even the poor fear the poor. Then go read about the history of how black became synonymous with poor. We screwed the pooch when we failed to honestly address our addiction to slavery in the 1780’s.

  183. Sam says:

    @Brummagem Joe:

    Brummagem Joe:
    Since at least LBJ we’ve seen endless affirmative action and “diversity” jobs and scholarships, minority set asides, ad infinitum to blacks, and trillions of dollars in transfer payments. There’s little to show for it.

    Asians, by comparison, are doing quite much better in the US, and have needed relatively little of this.

    Brummy boy, does it ever enter your head to ask why this might be?

  184. Sam says:

    @Dazedandconfused:

    Dazed:

    Of course Charles Murray could not say blacks are “genetically” inferior. His book would never have been published.

    The Irish crime rates you mention occurred at a time when in your face “No Irish Need Apply” signs were common, and there was NO public welfare. The most the Irish might get was alms from the church. Compared to the poor of the 19th century, today’s welfare recipients are flush with cash.
    Blacks ARE the poor, disproportionately, not just here, but the world over. If there was a prosperous black nation many might be less inclined to believe there is a genetic component to their endless poverty.

  185. Dazedandconfused says:

    @Sam:

    He couldn’t say it because there is no science to support it. Correlation is not causation. He didn’t pretend to know the whys in losing ground either. Unlike some….

  186. Brummagem Joe says:

    @Sam:

    Since at least LBJ we’ve seen endless affirmative action and “diversity” jobs and scholarships, minority set asides, ad infinitum to blacks, and trillions of dollars in transfer payments. There’s little to show for it.

    Asians, by comparison, are doing quite much better in the US, and have needed relatively little of this.

    Actually Sammy boy there’s an enoromous amount to show for it. And what exactly are you saying….. LBJ’s civil rights legislation was all a bit mistake?

  187. An Interested Party says:

    I guess it isn’t so amazing that some people would actually try to use statistics to mask their racism…it was probably more refreshing to hear from racists back in the 50s…at least they were honest with their bigotry…

  188. superdestroyer says:

    @Ben Wolf:

    All you have to do is look at polling data for blacks. Between 70% and 80& of black support reparations. Can anything be more racist that the belief that blacks should get extra government money just for being black?

    I would also assume that more than 80% of blacks support quotas, racial set asides, race norming, and racial preferences. Everyone of those programs is racist and encourage the continuation of discrimination.

  189. Jim Henley says:

    Can anything be more racist that the belief that blacks should get extra government money just for being black?

    Sure. For instance, actual racism.

  190. skysoldier4evr says:

    When common sense is labeled rascist we are lost. I believe any one reading this that does not acknowledge in their heart the truth in these social guidelines is a hypocrite. As to IWSB, I have just two words. Barrack Obama.

  191. Rob in CT says:

    We screwed the pooch when we failed to honestly address our addiction to slavery in the 1780′s.

    And failed again with Reconstruction & its roll-back (“Redemption”). Major steps forward were taken in the 60s, but those caused a backlash. Imagine if the Civil Rights Act of… was it 1866? was passed. Imagine if there really had been “40 acres and a mule.” Ah, but those things didn’t happen.

    There’s a strong element of “hey, we ALLOWED them equality under the law! Why are they still poor?” out there. It’s ridiculous* Centuries of terrible treatment has consequences. That’s not easily undone. It’s not quickly undone. And poverty, even without any racial issues, is a tough nut to crack.

    I’m frankly uneasy with affirmative action. But if you really want to grapple with the problem and come up with a solution to it (rather than just say “enough, they’re hopeless!”), you’ve got to come up with some sort of policy that helps to lift up the most disadvantaged among us. That group is disproportionately, though certainly not entirely, black. What’s your plan? Just ignore and avoid them? ~12% of the population?

  192. Jim Henley says:

    Fun Fact: The first time I heard a white person complain that we were now “bending over backwards” for black people was – 1971. My 6th-grade teacher, in class.

  193. Sam says:

    @Dazedandconfused:

    Dazed: yes, correlation is not causation. But there isn’t a prosperous black city (much less a nation) anywhere, and there never has been, in the history of the West. Blacks in Canada and the UK are chronically proverty-stricken, just as blacks in the US are, even though the slavery never existed in those countries.

    When you consider these results, in the light of the endless trillions in transfer payments, head start style programs, affirmative action, Live Aid, Live 8, minority set asides, ad nauseum, common sense would indicate there is likely a genetic factor in intelligence.

  194. Sam says:

    @Brummagem Joe:

    Brummagen Joe said there’s a lot to show for the trillions of dollars in transfer payment, affirmative action, minority set asides, etc to blacks, since the LBJ administration.

    Really, Joey boy? Like what? Red ink? Name something. Black social pathologies are as alive as ever. The black middle class has been almost wiped out, according to some, in this recession, as many government jobs and make-work, diversity mandated private sector jobs have been eliminated.

  195. Dazedandconfused says:

    @Sam:

    The crystalline, glistening logic of my argument is that I am citing Charles Murry’s views in “Falling Behind”. He believes that there is no significant difference between poor blacks and whites. If you are going to arrive at “common sense” conclusions based on Charles’s data, you must use all of it.

  196. Sam says:

    @Dazedandconfused:

    In The Bell Curve Herrnstein and Murray state the average white IQ is 100, the average black IQ 85. They also point out that the average IQ of poor whites (90 to 95) is still higher than the average IQ of upper class blacks, not to mention poor blacks.

    Why would Murray now say there’s no difference between poor blacks and whites? Probably because his new book would never get published if he didn’t.

    Murray’s data is interesting, but as with anything, actual accomplishments show the true measure of an individual, or a race’s intelligence, more than an IQ test. Forget how blacks perform in white societies. Look at Africa. There were no written languages, much less books, in sub-Saharan Africa before the arrival of Arabs and whites.

  197. Dazedandconfused says:

    @Sam:

    Well then, now that we have impeached Charles’s integrity, what have you got left? The whites and Arabs came from Africa, by most current genetic information.

    Languages? Weak Tea. Most of the pre-Roman Celtic languages were lost because they didn’t have writing either.

  198. Sam says:

    @Dazedandconfused:

    Dazed- I don’t think Murray’s integrity has been impeached. I think it’s fairly obvious that he cannot report all the facts about blacks and IQ, much less make all the policy recommendations he may want to. Look at the firestorm that started when The Bell Curve first came out.

    Some white ethnic groups had writing, some didn’t, in pre-Roman times. NO black ethic groups did. That’s the difference.

    When you say white and Arab origins are in Africa, you’re seem t be saying we’re all the same, and of one race. This view makes no sense. All dogs are descended from a common wolf-like ancestor from only 5000 years ago. Chihuahuas, St. Bernards, Alsatians, poodles, Doberman, are all dogs, and can all reproduce with each other. They are not separate species. Yet would you ever say there’s no difference between different breeds of dog? If you’re a mailman being chased by a dog, would it really not matter to you whether that dog is a chihuahua or a pit bull?

  199. In other words: @Sam is that clearest and purist of racist, the type who things that whites are superior to blacks (you know, like breeds of dogs).

  200. Mark Logan says:

    @Sam:

    You may be wrong about no black groups ever developing a written language.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Writing_systems_of_Africa

    I don’t think developing a written language is all that definitive myself. Many peoples didn’t until it became necessary to do so, but virtue of strong central governments. Not all terrains lend themselves to that sort of thing. Sometimes the land can only support small, self-sustaining, widely scattered communities.

    Until very recent times, reading and writing, even where it existed, was an ability that only a very small percentage of the population possessed.

  201. Sam says:

    @Steven L. Taylor:

    No Steven, I never said whites are “superior” to blacks. As The Bell Curve and other studies have shown, there are intelligent and decent blacks, and whites of low IQ.

    The problem is that the reverse is far more often the case. I’m concerned with reality, as you are. You wouldn’t live in an overwhelmingly black neigborhood for all the tea in China. Does that make you a racist?

  202. Sam says:

    @Mark Logan:

    Mark: The writing systems/alphabets native to sub-Saharan Africa all originated AFTER Arabs and whites arrived. In many cases and Arab or white created the alphabet.

    The African writing systems/alphabets that pre-date the arrival of Arabs and whites are not from sub-Saharan Africa, but rather Egypt, Yemen, etc.

    Having a written language is certainly not the only measure of a culture, but it certainly helps express abstract ideas.

  203. Mark Logan says:

    @Sam:

    Can you cite anybody on that? Perhaps someone who specifically refutes the source I cited?

  204. Sam says:

    @Mark Logan:

    Mark- I researched the sub-Saharan languages mentioned in the Wikipedia article you linked to.
    All of them were imported from Semitic cultures in North Africa, or occurred after the arrival of Arabs and whites. Apparently Jared Diamond, in Guns, Germs, and Steel acknowledges that there were no written languages in sub-Saharan Africa before whites and Arabs arrived. He attempts to explain it by blaming the environment.

  205. Mark Logan says:

    Then cite the source of your research. Guns Germs and Steel is not even close to being primarily about linguistics.

  206. Sam says:

    @Mark Logan:

    I cannot find evidence anywhere on the web that a written language DID exist in sub-Saharan Africa.

    The Wikipedia article you cited says that because of “European colonialism”… it is a “misconception… that the languages of Africa were put in written form only recently…”

    The article then proceeds to give NO EVIDENCE of a written sub-Saharan African language before the arrival of whites and Arabs.

    Where’s your evidence?

  207. Mark Logan says:

    @Sam:

    Nonsense. There is a whole section labeled “indigenous writing systems” in my link. I’m done with this conversation.

  208. Sam says:

    @Mark Logan:

    You didn’t even read the your own link. EVERY sub-Saharan African language in the Wikipedia article you linked to originated either amongst Semitic groups in North Africa or Arabs and whites.

    Even the truly African languages were put into writing AFTER whites and Arabs arrived.

    Try reading your links before you link to them next time.

  209. Mark Logan says:

    @Sam:

    You can only fool the people who hope and wish to be fooled, Sam. Everybody else will actually look at that link and discover what’s actually in there:

    The Nsibidi set of symbols is independent of Roman, Latin or Arabic influence and a completely indigenous creation of these peoples.

    Have a nice life, Adolf.

  210. Jim Henley says:

    @Mark Logan:

    There’s also

    a) the cherry-picking aspect – of lots of technologies one could focus on, pick the one that happens, so far as we know, to be rare in “black Africa” and harp on it endlessly. One occasionally sees Euros pull a similar move with the wheel and pre-Columbian America to justify our ancestors’ depredations on this continent. Sam’s obsessive focus on it, and the lessons he insists on drawing from it, are themselves racist.

    b) archaeology and pre-history are, to say the least, unsettled fields! So far we may have discovered a single indigenous writing system south of the Sahara. Assuming we won’t find more is letting racism do the work of historiography.

    c) speaking of which, so far as we know, almost all writing originated among Semites in the Middle East and diffused outward from there. That means that white people as such stand in the exact same relationship to the real originators of that tech as black people as such. But Sam wants to give us* credit, and blacks blame, for the same method of adopting writing. (Given that the Dacian find is not a settled issue.)

  211. Sam says:

    @Mark Logan:

    Wrong again, Mr. Loughner.

    Nsidibi is a series of symbols that “corresponds to no written language.” http://africa.si.edu/exhibits/inscribing/nsibidi.html

    Try again, Mr. Loughner.

  212. Jim Henley says:

    @Sam: So is that you lying or you misreading the text at the link? Actual text: “Aesthetically compelling and encoded, nsibidi does not correspond to any one spoken language.”

    My emphasis. Cause sometimes, apparently, you gotta.

  213. Sam says:

    @Jim Henley:

    My mistake. The article does say Nsidibi corresponds to no spoken language. But the point is the same. If Nsidibi corresponds to no spoken language, then it’s not exactly what most people would call a language.

    It is symbology akin to the stick men symbols of pedestrians on street signs, or the icons used as international warning images on a new computer or machine.

  214. Jim Henley says:

    @Sam: Oddly enough, the people who know what they’re talking about say Nsidibi works rather differently.

  215. Sam says:

    @Jim Henley:

    The people who know what they’re talking about consider Nsidibi to be symbology, or a logographic system. It is essentially pictures or drawings of things. If you want to be generous, you can call it a proto-language. But if you call it a language then you would also call the drawings on the flipside of children’s flash cards, or pedestrian crossing symbols, languages too.

  216. Sam says:

    @Jim Henley:

    Jim, regarding a)

    Which “Euro” person justified “depredations” against American Indians because they didn’t have the wheel??

    Much of the history of humanity consists of one group taking the land and killing the inhabitants of another group, whether the other group is of the same, or a different race. How do you think the sundry Indian tribes established boundaries BEFORE whites showed up? By holding hands and smoking peace pipes? You’re cool with Indian-on-Indian violence, but throw whites into the mix and you become righteously indignant.

    And no, I don’t obsess on the lack of a true written language in sub-Saharan Africa. I look at the sum total of a civilization. By what measure would you consider black civilization equal to all others? Please, name one.

    Yes, much writing originated in Semitic cultures, but so what? Many Semitic peoples ARE white, or had a larger white population at the time writing began than they do today. You need to get out of the house more. Many people in Syria, Lebanon, Iran, Iraq, Turkey, Afghanistan, Egypt, etc are indistinguishable from whites of Europe. Paintings from ancient Persia, Assyria, show the same thing.