Monday, April 9, 2012

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


  1. Racist! Racist! Racist!

    The Daily Mail has an article on this. The DM is the #1 traffic online newspaper right now, so they aren't just some hard-right nerd fringe hangout. All the comments that might be characterized as racist are getting upvoted by significant margins, all the anti-racist comments are getting downvoted by significant margins.

    Vox says it well:
    "My own perspective should be perfectly clear, but I shall elucidate it anyhow. Due to past desegregation imposed by force of one kind or another, be it private action or government policy, rapid large scale segregation is going to take place because the vast majority of people on every possible side find it to be desirable. That future segregation is going to be either voluntary or involuntary, and will be either violent or non-violent. Therefore, government policies should, to the greatest extent possible, be strongly biased towards voluntary, non-violent, and gradual segregation in order to reduce the risk of rapidly destabilizing multi-ethnic and multi-racial societies."

    And yet, every single politician is desperately attempting to avoid this. The results are predictable, and predicted. But the dam is definitely cracking, from both directions.

  2. Certainly does and posted Saturday. An excellent thinker/writer.