The Rationality of Firing John Derbyshire

Obviously this does not apply to all, as my black cousins in Edgecombe are as conservative as can be and the salt of the earth.

National's Review's decision to fire John Derbyshire for his “offensive” but clearly accurate take on race relations has, thankfully, generated immense discussion. Let me add yet one more take on this messenger-killing episode. In a nutshell, silencing the Derb, or at least depriving him of his NR soapbox, is rational in the grand scheme of things. Make no mistake, I would have doubled his salary and honored him with a lavish banquet, and I hope thousands of NR subscribers cancel their subscriptions, but that said, there is a modicum of rationality in what the magazine did.

Let’s begin with the obvious: Every effort, no matter how well-intentioned, carefully planned, and expensive, has failed to transform blacks into whites. Statistically, blacks are about where they were in the 1960s, and what progress has occurred can be attributed to government coercion, policies like affirmative action, and make-work jobs. Moreover, nothing on the horizon hints at progress and if anything, the blackening of cities like Detroit, Newark, and Philadelphia suggests that things will only get worse as blacks increasingly take control of their own destiny.

More @ American Renaissance