A brief note on NRO’s personnel decisions

posted at 8:41 am on April 9, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Over the Easter weekend, as I was finishing up my vacation, National Review terminated longtime contributor John Derbyshire over a column he wrote for Taki Magazine that was breathtakingly offensive and, as fellow NRO contributor Jonah Goldberg tweeted, indefensible.  I only read the column late on Saturday afternoon after Rich Lowry had already announced Derbyshire’s termination, and assumed it was a badly-handled attempt at satire until it got to point 11 of Derbyshire’s version of “the talk,” which baldly asserted that blacks are intellectual inferiors to whites as a group.  The entire piece as a whole demonstrated an almost unhinged hostility towards blacks, and it’s not surprising that NR would want to disassociate themselves from Derbyshire after the mask slipped.

Other writers were interested in engaging this topic over the weekend.  Matt Lewis, for instance, called for a shunning of Derbyshire on the Right:

Derbyshire’s screed (which was actually written at Taki’s Magazine) is, of course, incredibly harmful to conservatism because it reinforces a bogus stereotype that conservatives are inherently racist.

In one fell swoop (actually, Derbyshire has a history of flirting with this sort of thing, but it has finally caught up with him), he has done more harm to the conservative cause than any liberal ever could.

Too often, conservatives reflexively defend anyone attacked by the left, presumably based on the logic that the enemy of my enemy is my friend. I’m happy to see his colleagues are instead standing on principle.

Rick Moran at American Thinker argued that Derbyshire shouldn’t be fired, but should learn a lesson from the criticism:

Should he be fired? Derbyshire makes his living trying to be provocative. But if you were to fire him, you’d have to fire every liberal and conservative columnist who ever wrote something insensitive toward this group or that. It’s an occupational hazard for a Derbyshire, or a Krugman to give offense — even where none was intended. Unless you are Thomas Friedman, whose only offense appears to be an obliviousness to reality, columnists will step in it every once and a while.

The torrent of criticism directed toward Derbyshire is well deserved. Rather than fire him, let us hope that the criticism chastens him and teaches him a lesson in humility, if not empathy and understanding.

John Hinderaker’s post-termination reaction notes the long record Derbyshire had already accumulated along these lines, and wondered how Derbyshire lasted this long at NRO.  That history — which goes back at least to 2003, as John cites — almost certainly played a part in Lowry’s decision to end the relationship between NR and Derbyshire.  Although the column didn’t appear in NR or NRO, Lowry understands that Derbyshire’s work elsewhere reflects on the publication, and as a managing editor, that is his primary concern.

Some on Twitter claimed that Lowry had attacked Derbyshire’s right to free speech, which is ludicrous.  Derbyshire is still free to write and speak his mind, but NR is under no obligation to publish him.  The First Amendment protects people from government infringement on speech, not from the normal editorial judgment in private-sector publication.  Barring the existence of contractual obligations, Lowry and NR have every right to choose whom to publish and why.  In this case, Lowry acted correctly to protect NR from further reputational damage.

Finally, we received a torrent of e-mail over the last 36 hours wondering why we hadn’t weighed in on the subject, which has us a little bemused.  We have barely mentioned Derbyshire at all over the four-plus years I’ve been at Hot Air, only five times — and only twice to quote anything he actually wrote, the other three being hat-tips on links.  I’m a little non-plussed as to how our delay on Derbyshire was significant in any way whatsoever.  If a few readers thought a personnel change at NR was so important that it necessitated  taking time from our families over the Easter weekend, I’d say that those readers need to adjust their priorities a bit going forward.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

If a few readers thought a personnel change at NR was so important that it necessitated taking time from our families over the Easter weekend, I’d say that those readers need to adjust their priorities a bit going forward.

Or, perish the thought, they can start their own damned blog.

nukemhill on April 9, 2012 at 6:12 PM

Derbyshire was able to bring a lot of people on this site out of the closet, huh? This is a thread that liberals can point at and say: “See, I told you!” and what will our argument be? “Not everyone feels that way!”, right? Well, as is evidenced by this thread, way too many do.

There are many things wrong with the current African American culture but let’s be honest, we didn’t get here on our own; we had LOTS of help. When I was growing up in the projects, it was difficult dealing with the low expectations that the teachers had for me based off of nothing other than the color of my skin. It was hard to focus on the three “R’s” when I was primarily concerned with whether or not there’d be something for me to eat at home each night. Focusing on survival has a way of trumping education and all of the tests that go along with it – including IQ tests and that is reality.

I can hardly believe that some of you “brilliant” people with your grande I.Q.s didn’t have the far-sight to see that it is never a good idea to reinforce a negative stereotype that people have of you. I can’t defend what I’ve seen in this thread. One “genius” was even asking if Africans had ever made any contributions – ever (I’m paraphrasing).

I get as sick of the PC police as the next guy but some of you guys are applauding this crap and crap is what it is.

I have never been more ashamed of this site than I have been today.

BDev on April 9, 2012 at 6:31 PM

I agree that Morrissey’s rebuttal is lame, as is much of what he writes. I’d like to see him spend much of his day in the “no-go” areas of the Twin Cities and report back to us. I’d bet a bunch he’s too cowardly to have the courage of his convictions, such as they are, to do anything like that.

Contra some posters here, the science in “The Bell Curve” is solid. IQ testing has had the bugs pretty much worked out and is not bias against people that are poor test takers, or any cultural sense either. Both ideas were bogus to begin with, and have long been discredited.

John Derbyshire has cancer and at his age is likely to be terminal. He is also in a mixed race marriage.

That Lowry has “fired” Derb is not surprising to me. The NR crowd has been intellectually cowardly ever since Buckley became a doddard and turned the mag over to a bunch of callow youths in over their heads. Buckley did not end his life as a conservative, and it questionable that he ever was one. Neoconservative, certainly, but not much of a conservative.

It is unlikely that any of the people screaming for the head of Derb will ever deal with what he wrote. Like the rest of the left, they will simply cry for his head as they have cried for the heads of anyone that refused to toe the PC line. They won’t try to deal with what he wrote because they know they can’t. They have neither the intellectual ability, nor the ammunition to do so.

The plain fact is, if anyone watches, they know in their hearts that what he wrote is on the button, and that scares them more than any else they could think of. The real world has a bad tendency to come up and smack those who deny it pretty hard.

Quartermaster on April 9, 2012 at 5:35 PM

+1

Aside from Mark Steyn, John Derbyshire’s excellent monthly Diary column was about the only thing worth reading on National Review Online. The rest of the site is permeated with unreadable Romney-hype or similar garbage.

As for Ed’s awful rebuttal, I have to suspect it is in part so bad because he cannot logically rebut anything Derbyshire wrote.

Norwegian on April 9, 2012 at 6:33 PM

I get as sick of the PC police as the next guy but some of you guys are applauding this crap and crap is what it is.

I have never been more ashamed of this site than I have been today.

BDev on April 9, 2012 at 6:31 PM

It’s called backlash. When you get the media creating complete falsehoods to further the whites are racist against blacks story, while failing to even mention when a white kid is set on fire by black kids, then this is what you get, and I hate to break it to you, but it’s just getting started. Wait till the wildings start up again this summer.

DFCtomm on April 9, 2012 at 7:15 PM

So the media is controlled by blacks and that’s your justification. Blacks control the media so it’s ok to attack them and call them names, right?

BDev on April 9, 2012 at 7:42 PM

So Morrissey and half the commenters here are getting closer to full blown liberalism. Speak no truths when it comes to racial matters and demonize those that do. Couple more years and Morrissey will be writing articles on the benefits of Islam in our country.

lowandslow on April 9, 2012 at 7:45 PM

Blacks control the media so it’s ok to attack them and call them names, right?

BDev on April 9, 2012 at 7:42 PM

How were blacks attacked?

lowandslow on April 9, 2012 at 7:47 PM

It’s a bit late for me to weigh in on this one, but I can’t believe we’re now having a debate on the merits of IQ tests at HA. Would those who object to the suggestion that the median IQ of blacks is lower also cry ‘racism’ when it is suggested that they perform better in marathons? Murray and Herrnstein made the point much more subtly almost twenty years ago, but got heaped with scorn by the MSM for it anyway. In addition, Derb was just saying out loud what every common-sense parent in a big city tells his kids in private.

Columnists are meant to cross the line here and there. If they don’t, we get stuck with Ramesh Ponnuru and David Frum. Is that what National Review wants to be? I was actually debating whether or not to renew my subscription, so I’m glad this happened now and not a month from now. NR has put itself on the road to obsolescence, and in doing so has allowed the race-baiting Left to set the parameters of this (non-)debate once more. Do Chris Matthews and Soledad O’Brien ever have to worry about their job?

Poor Derb. His take on the Fluke/Limbaugh incident was second to none, and now he’s being hung on the same gallows as Rush. You can call me a racist or ban me if you will. But when America’s political division along ethnic lines is completed thirty years from now, I hope we will all remember good old John Derbyshire, who saw it coming all along.

Alexis on April 9, 2012 at 7:51 PM

“There is nothing more painful for me at this stage in my life,” Jesse Jackson said several years ago, “than to walk down the street and hear footsteps and start thinking about robbery—and then look around and see somebody white and feel relieved.”

Wouldn’t Jesse have had a similar “the talk” with his kids to the one Mr. Derbyshire had? Certainly he wouldn’t want his children in a situation that he himself found so terrifying.

Buddahpundit on April 9, 2012 at 8:05 PM

So the media is controlled by blacks and that’s your justification. Blacks control the media so it’s ok to attack them and call them names, right?

BDev on April 9, 2012 at 7:42 PM

I like how you equate any mention of wrong doing with racism. I never said I disliked blacks, or wished any harm to come to them, but to you the truth is attacking and name calling.

DFCtomm on April 9, 2012 at 8:08 PM

Wait till the wildings start up again this summer.

DFCtomm on April 9, 2012 at 7:15 PM

That is you, right? You did call those kids “wildlings”, right? I guess because they’re black, it doesn’t matter much to you.

BDev on April 9, 2012 at 8:20 PM

lowandslow the last time I checked, name calling is an attack.

BDev on April 9, 2012 at 8:24 PM

And for the record, I am the most conservative person that most people have ever met so please resist the urge to call me a liberal.

BDev on April 9, 2012 at 8:31 PM

BDev on April 9, 2012 at 8:20 PM

A wilding is a kind of group behavior, not a person or people.

“Wilding
An unprovoked, motiveless assault by a group, usually of young men, on another, often a stranger, merely for the sake of committing violence
Examples Gang rape, stabbing, shooting, homicide”

fadetogray on April 9, 2012 at 8:40 PM

I don’t, in fact, care whether the intelligence-related part of the discussed writing is true. The IQ comparison between blacks, whites, Asians, and polka-dotted lizard people does not affect my life in the least.

What does affect my life, however, is a comparison of character. I cannot help but notice that the percentage of corrupt and criminally minded individuals exposed to the press is significantly higher among African Americans than, say, among Asians. As a statistician by profession, however, I also notice that there is a powerful correlation between people being corrupt and people being Democrats. Most blacks are Democrats or their supporters; that’s what is wrong with them.

Archivarix on April 9, 2012 at 8:45 PM

This entire thread is a disaster. Though being as my genetics are Scottish, Irish, German, English, French, African and Indian…All I can say is, I’m the smartest person here. Carry on.

Jesse on April 9, 2012 at 9:00 PM

That is you, right? You did call those kids “wildlings”, right? I guess because they’re black, it doesn’t matter much to you.

BDev on April 9, 2012 at 8:20 PM

Don’t feel bad. We’ve all been schooled here from time to time. At least you now know what wilding is.

DFCtomm on April 9, 2012 at 9:14 PM

Derb was right on almost all points, and everyone knows it. He said things too harshly and things that shouldn’t have been said, and none of this is acceptable in polite company.

Someone said it earlier in the thread — he picked a fight NRO didn’t feel like fighting, and who can blame them? But let’s not even pretend that his points about the bizarre degree of anti-social behavior among American blacks are somehow wrong or the result of racial prejudice. These are so well documented as to be crucial common sense for survival in urban areas, and even the most liberal people agree completely and demonstrate their agreement by not living there and staying clear of the resulting danger areas.

Duh.

Jaibones on April 9, 2012 at 9:38 PM

I have never been more ashamed of this site than I have been today.

BDev on April 9, 2012 at 6:31 PM

Oh be quiet, you whiny little b!tch.

Jaibones on April 9, 2012 at 9:40 PM

It is unlikely that any of the people screaming for the head of Derb will ever deal with what he wrote. Like the rest of the left, they will simply cry for his head as they have cried for the heads of anyone that refused to toe the PC line. They won’t try to deal with what he wrote because they know they can’t. They have neither the intellectual ability, nor the ammunition to do so.

The plain fact is, if anyone watches, they know in their hearts that what he wrote is on the button, and that scares them more than any else they could think of. The real world has a bad tendency to come up and smack those who deny it pretty hard.

Quartermaster on April 9, 2012 at 5:35 PM

I dealt with what he wrote, until I had enough. He couldn’t stop talking about how blacks, Hispanics and women in general are genetically inferior to white men. It was infuriating.

And no, I don’t know in my heart that people like Thomas Sowell are intellectually inferior to you, just because they are black.

Gelsomina on April 9, 2012 at 9:55 PM

Someone said it earlier in the thread — he picked a fight NRO didn’t feel like fighting, and who can blame them? But let’s not even pretend that his points about the bizarre degree of anti-social behavior among American blacks are somehow wrong or the result of racial prejudice. These are so well documented as to be crucial common sense for survival in urban areas, and even the most liberal people agree completely and demonstrate their agreement by not living there and staying clear of the resulting danger areas.

Duh.

Jaibones on April 9, 2012 at 9:38 PM

But there is no genetic reason for this behavior, as John Derbyshire claims. Thomas Sowell wrote an entire book about the issue.

Gelsomina on April 9, 2012 at 9:58 PM

I dealt with what he wrote, until I had enough. He couldn’t stop talking about how blacks, Hispanics and women in general are genetically inferior to white men. It was infuriating.

Gelsomina on April 9, 2012 at 9:55 PM

So what you’re saying is that you didn’t actually read the article?

eforhan on April 9, 2012 at 10:02 PM

I think what went over the line was the advice to find yourself a “smart black friend” as a beard to hide your racist face behind. Guess that’s how Derb sees Drs. Sowell and Williams….

(And, by the way, Derb, maybe you should rethink that part of your talk. See how much good it did you.)

notropis on April 9, 2012 at 10:10 PM

There are a lot of people who can’t handle the truth about genetics, but that’s not the most important thing. The most important thing is the anti-White double standard.

Nobody fired Black writers for giving their children “the talk” and publishing the anti-White messages that their “talk” consists of. It shows an anti-White double standard to fire John Derbyshire for publishing the parallel talk he gave to his children, and that every responsible White parent gives to their children in some form, whether they admit it or not.

The reason that Whites warning their children about real dangers is “racist” while Black parents indoctrinating their children isn’t is that “racist” is a code word for “White”.

David Blue on April 9, 2012 at 10:30 PM

But there is no genetic reason for this behavior, as John Derbyshire claims. Thomas Sowell wrote an entire book about the issue.

Gelsomina on April 9, 2012 at 9:58 PM

Go for a walk through the lower NW side of Milwaukee after midnight and tell me about genetics. I’m not a geneticist nor a statistician, and I am not a racist. I don’t care what color you are and don’t have any investment in trying to feel smarter because of my melanin content. I am what I am.

You can wring your hands all night over what Derbyshire wrote, but if your only point is to argue the validity of IQ tests, I’ll concede the point. And no matter what color you are, I’ll bet you don’t want your kids downtown in a crowd of blacks.

Jaibones on April 9, 2012 at 10:35 PM

I think what went over the line was the advice to find yourself a “smart black friend” as a beard to hide your racist White face behind.

-

Fixed it for you.

This is all about firing a White guy for publishing “the talk” parallel to what Black writers had already not been punished at all for.

Why? Because from him it was “racist,” with “racist” being code for White.

David Blue on April 9, 2012 at 10:37 PM

I think what went over the line was the advice to find yourself a “smart black friend” as a beard

notropis on April 9, 2012 at 10:10 PM

I agree completely. That’s where he lost good faith.

Jaibones on April 9, 2012 at 10:37 PM

David Blue on April 9, 2012 at 10:37 PM

Also agreed. It’s anecdotal and off-topic, but I have a “my black friend” story. I’ll call him Dave…we worked together and got along great; drinking buddies. He lived down the street in my neighborhood (the better part of it), had a nice house and a lovely wife and three kids.

He moved from our increasingly diverse area, once all-white, to a nearly all-white area a few miles away and I asked him why he was leaving: “too many black people”. I laughed (he was a joker), but he told a story about going across the street to the White Hen, and some 18 year old kid in a tricked out Mercedes was at the counter, gold jewelry, etc., telling them he needed change for a $100 bill.

He went home and told his wife “we’re outta here, honey”. I still live here. Got a shotgun.

Jaibones on April 9, 2012 at 10:44 PM

A few years back I had a run-in with Derbyshire about a Corner post he wrote insisting that if a school had higher than a certain percentage (25%, I think) of black students, he wouldn’t send his kids there (don’t bother looking through the archives at the Corner, he cravenly re-wrote his post, without ever bothering to admit that he’d changed it). He said that almost unfailingly, these schools had lower test scores, higher crime, etc.

I asked him whether sending my (black) daughters to the school would cause him to remove his kids, if it pushed the school over his arbitrary threshold. He said it would. I then questioned his desire to use a proxy statistic (race), however high the correlation, when the actual statistics (test scores, crime rates, etc.) existed with a single click of the mouse – and provided the link to data for the school district in question.

It is the height of shoddy science to use proxy data, when the actual data that interests you is available (see Climate “Science” for a good example.) His response was to demand that I produce examples where the proxy failed. I didn’t need any. His approach was wrong on first principles, and yet he stood by it, apparently reveling in his righteous martyrdom, which I assume he’s doing even now. His point was, therefore, not to give good advice on choosing the best schools for your kids, but to promote his racist view of the world as being somehow “scientific.”

He’s a typical bully, with his belligerence rising in direct proportion to his insecurity.

notropis on April 9, 2012 at 11:01 PM

I’ve got no problem talking openly about race and religion, but honestly, the article was over the top (yes, I read all of it). Based on a perusal of other articles, though, it seems par for the course for this particular magazine.

ChicagoJewishGuy on April 9, 2012 at 11:19 PM

I never knew the guy existed until I saw his name on a blog run by a black conservative.

Basically, what he did was a classic application of Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals. You require your opponent (in this case, blacks as a group) to live by a perceived ideal members of their group have espoused. Then, you chose sins of individuals of the group and you assign those sins to the group as a whole. You continue this activity until you have characterized the group as being utterly depraved. You have then successfully dehumanized them.

There’s a guy on this blog who said something interesting. Here’s the money quote:

Because it’s the mirror-image of what I’ve believed and continue to believe about white conservatives, namely that a small cohort of whites (~20%) is ferociously hostile to blacks and will go to great lengths to inconvenience or harm us. A much larger cohort of whites – around half – have passively gone along with the 20% who have taken leadership in the predominantly white conservative movement.

It’s why you’ve had the marginal has-beens and neer-do-well Gingrich’s and Santorums skidmarking the political commons with their bush league dog-whistling, leaving Romney to pretend he’s something other than a socially moderate 1%’er.

As for the rest, ESR’s nerd-gimp racial realism demonstrates beyond any doubt the limitations of autistic-spectrum code-monkeys with severely underdeveloped mirror-neuron systems and the attenuated social and interpersonal exposures available to the same. Better by far that strong, confident warriors retain the vanguard of group interpersonal relations.

If you ignore the egregious hyphenation, I think what emerges is the black version of Derbyshire.

unclesmrgol on April 10, 2012 at 1:22 AM

A few years back I had a run-in with Derbyshire about a Corner post he wrote insisting that if a school had higher than a certain percentage (25%, I think) of black students, he wouldn’t send his kids there (don’t bother looking through the archives at the Corner, he cravenly re-wrote his post, without ever bothering to admit that he’d changed it). He said that almost unfailingly, these schools had lower test scores, higher crime, etc.

notropis on April 9, 2012 at 11:01 PM

He’s absolutely right, according to Mr. Obama, who carefully avoided sending his kids to the DC public schools for what appear to be obvious reasons having much to do with the parents of those DC public school students not being able to afford a spring break vacation in Mexico.

unclesmrgol on April 10, 2012 at 1:25 AM

I think what emerges is the black version of Derbyshire.

unclesmrgol on April 10, 2012 at 1:22 AM

+1 (100, 100000, whatever. Excellent points, all.)

notropis on April 10, 2012 at 1:28 AM

The reason that Whites warning their children about real dangers is “racist” while Black parents indoctrinating their children isn’t is that “racist” is a code word for “White”.

David Blue on April 9, 2012 at 10:30 PM

Sadly, Mr. Derbyshire gave the proof of that assertion. I could collect a whole set of anecdotes about adverse white interactions with blacks, and weave that into a fabric which makes one absolutely dispise whites, even were one white themselves.

That’s what Mr. Derbyshire did — a page right out of Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals. He gives a group of millions a face constructed of their worst members, and then equates that to the all.

We just had a white guy go around Tulsa randomly shooting black men out for walks. Why? Because his dad was killed by a black two years earlier. He chose some random guys as representatives for the guy who shot his father (you know, any of them will do), and shot them back, so to speak.

We all have had some form of adverse interaction with people of other races, and it’s very easy to do what Mr. Derbyshire did and perform a series of proofs by example.

I’d say to leave that kind of thinking to our adversaries — we are better than that.

unclesmrgol on April 10, 2012 at 1:36 AM

+1 (100, 100000, whatever. Excellent points, all.)

notropis on April 10, 2012 at 1:28 AM

I’m just rephrasing what Mr. Morrissey stated in his first paragraph. The other blog to which I refer is one I read all the time because the guy running it has a very wide range of interests, and has a conservative Christian software engineering viewpoint as well.

He’s also drawn the ire of Chauncey DeVega, who is Derbyshire on steroids, so he’s almost a must-read. He’s gone mano-a-mano with Chauncey, and I think beat him soundly. But I’m a conservative, so mileage does vary.

unclesmrgol on April 10, 2012 at 1:51 AM

I have to wonder if anyone clicked on the links at the beginning of Derb’s article to “the talk” with black sons. Virtually every one of those stories stated that young black men had to learn to walk and talk very carefully because they were automatically suspected due to white racism.

Does anyone really think this is a helpful message?

Young black men are suspected of poor or criminal behavior because many are guilty of it. The real message of such a talk should not be “we live in a racist society,” but “we live in a society where some who look like you have an earned reputation of criminal behavior, and you need to behave accordingly so it is clear that this is not true of you personally.”

To explain that people are just racist is to avoid the real issue. You can’t blame racism or religious bigotry if there is another perfectly reasonable explanation.

Imagine a city in the midwest of 50,000, with a sizable Amish community of 20,000 in the surrounding countryside. The young males all wear similar clothing of black coats and trousers, white shirts, and heavy shoes.

Now imagine — contrary to all we know of the Amish — that this community is suffering a crime wave, and that the large majority of the attacks are from young men who meet the Amish description. If the police start looking suspiciously at young Amish men in such a scenario, would anyone really put it down to religious bigotry? Wouldn’t it be more likely that the police suspect young Amish men because young Amish men fit the description of criminals in this scenario?

I pick on the Amish in this case because it’s ludicrous to imagine a crime wave of young Amish men. But in France right now, there is an ongoing crime wave of young Muslim men. In such a case, the police are not discriminating to be suspicious of young Muslim men, but simply practicing common sense. I can well imagine a mother of a young Muslim man admonishing him to behave carefully in such a case. If she tells him to behave because “society is bigoted,” then she’s wrong.

There Goes The Neighborhood on April 10, 2012 at 1:52 AM

He’s absolutely right, according to Mr. Obama, who carefully avoided sending his kids to the DC public schools

No, he’s absolutely wrong in saying that you should use race to decide these issues, even when other, more primary, metrics are available. I sincerely doubt that Barack Obama based his decision on where to send his daughters on minimizing the percentage of African-Americans in their school.

I teach math. I really don’t care if you stumble on the right answer, if you just happened to get there via faulty logic. Derbyshire claims to be a mathematician, yet his logic, when it’s discernible, is second-rate at best.

notropis on April 10, 2012 at 1:54 AM

Go for a walk through the lower NW side of Milwaukee after midnight and tell me about genetics. I’m not a geneticist nor a statistician, and I am not a racist. I don’t care what color you are and don’t have any investment in trying to feel smarter because of my melanin content. I am what I am.

You can wring your hands all night over what Derbyshire wrote, but if your only point is to argue the validity of IQ tests, I’ll concede the point. And no matter what color you are, I’ll bet you don’t want your kids downtown in a crowd of blacks.

Jaibones on April 9, 2012 at 10:35 PM

But Derbyshire says that they are the way they are, because they are black. I grew up in a European city with almost no blacks, but we avoided certain districts.

It isn’t only race, he says that women are intellectually inferior, as well. He is just deeply insecure, if he must constantly prove that he is more intelligent than others.

Gelsomina on April 10, 2012 at 2:37 AM

So what you’re saying is that you didn’t actually read the article?

eforhan on April 9, 2012 at 10:02 PM

I read it, and many of his other articles. Derbyshire uses his kind of intelligence as a benchmark for what intelligence should be.

Whenever I read one of his articles about the inferiority of blacks my first thought was “Miles Davis”. Davis wouldn’t have passed Derbyshire’s IQ tests, mainly because he wasn’t interested. But he was a genius.

Gelsomina on April 10, 2012 at 2:50 AM

No, he’s absolutely wrong in saying that you should use race to decide these issues, even when other, more primary, metrics are available.

In the article that got him fired he is quite clear that he is talking about situations in which you don’t have other, more primary metrics available, or you are in a situation that calls for quick judgments involving safety and so you have no time to spend weighing the significance of other metrics.

You claim he has said otherwise elsewhere. Too bad you cannot give us any verification of that other than your word, because, as I am sure you are aware, the word of an anonymous internet entity has no value in determining truth.

fadetogray on April 10, 2012 at 2:58 AM

“a small cohort of whites (~20%) is ferociously hostile to blacks and will go to great lengths to inconvenience or harm us. A much larger cohort of whites – around half – have passively gone along with the 20% who have taken leadership in the predominantly white conservative movement.”

If you ignore the egregious hyphenation, I think what emerges is the black version of Derbyshire.

unclesmrgol on April 10, 2012 at 1:22 AM

Incidents of white on black harmings are far less frequent than the incidents of black on white harmings, but the former are magnified 1000X in the media, and the crimes are known by different names: one is a “hate crime” and the other by implication of not being a hate crime is something more lovey dovey, so I can understand why you have come to believe that the two assertions are equally valid or equally invalid.

Buddahpundit on April 10, 2012 at 4:33 AM

Gelsomina on April 10, 2012 at 2:37 AM

Actually, male IQ tends to be slightly higher than female IQ. Carl Jung referred to female thinking as “pseudo-logic.” When you look at female voting patterns, they do not scream “genius at work” (you will never hear a man say he voted for a candidate because s/he is “dreamy”). I’m a woman, and none of this makes me insecure–I know there are differences within groups as well as between groups. IQ is not a character issue, nor is it a reflection of the value as a person.

DrMagnolias on April 10, 2012 at 8:26 AM

I don’t think I’ve every typed the letters LOL before, but Gawker (in preface to their interview with Derb) just referred to National Review as an “uber-conservative magazine.”

saint kansas on April 10, 2012 at 8:29 AM

I don’t think I’ve every typed the letters LOL before, but Gawker (in preface to their interview with Derb) just referred to National Review as an “uber-conservative magazine.”

saint kansas on April 10, 2012 at 8:29 AM

In at least one way dumping the Derb does move NRO further to the stereotypical “right”.

Don’t want to go too far off-topic, but he was probably the last rational voice at NRO who defended the science of evolution and dared to criticize and refute NRO’s forays into Intelligent Design promotion and publication of anti-”Darwinism” propaganda.

farsighted on April 10, 2012 at 9:29 AM

This entire thread is a disaster. Though being as my genetics are Scottish, Irish, German, English, French, African and Indian…All I can say is, I’m the smartest person here. Carry on.

Jesse on April 9, 2012 at 9:00 PM

I pointed out the flawed genetic argument way back in this thread. It doesn’t fit the narrative of comparing IQ scores so it’s ignored.

Dr Evil on April 10, 2012 at 9:35 AM

Gelsomina on April 10, 2012 at 2:37 AM

Actually, male IQ tends to be slightly higher than female IQ. Carl Jung referred to female thinking as “pseudo-logic.” When you look at female voting patterns, they do not scream “genius at work” (you will never hear a man say he voted for a candidate because s/he is “dreamy”). I’m a woman, and none of this makes me insecure–I know there are differences within groups as well as between groups. IQ is not a character issue, nor is it a reflection of the value as a person.

DrMagnolias on April 10, 2012 at 8:26 AM

It’s entirely possible that the IQ test model is created for the group that benefits from the test? White Males? It’s their world the rest of us just get to live in it LOL!

As far as women voting “feelings” some of that is social conditioning…it’s not a feminine trait to think like a man. Live Science, even had some article ?finding? that women who apply logic and reason to their thinking, showed to have an increase in testosterone. The Live Science message: Ladies please stop thinking for yourself it makes you appear butch. I don’t know if the author of the article was a man GRIN. Perpetuating stereotypes exists for a reason, to reinforce social pecking order.

Dr Evil on April 10, 2012 at 9:44 AM

Article:
Testosterone Makes Women More Opinionated in Groups

Jennifer Welsh, LiveScience Staff WriterDate: 31 January 2012 Time: 06:25 PM ET

It was a woman who wrote the article. This would be along the same argument that genetics effect intelligence, and the expression of intelligence. In this case hormonal activity. That’s all an IQ test is, an expression of intelligence. Who is the test skewed toward? The dominant group? White Males? Stands to reason they would do well on a test, that’s targeting them, because they would be dominant in the social hierarchy.

Dr Evil on April 10, 2012 at 9:51 AM

That’s all an IQ test is, an expression of intelligence. Who is the test skewed toward? The dominant group? White Males? Stands to reason they would do well on a test, that’s targeting them, because they would be dominant in the social hierarchy.

Dr Evil on April 10, 2012 at 9:51 AM

Ah, that explains it. And East Asians, both male and female, must be even more dominant than white males since they average scores even higher than white males.

You have designed your premises to fit your bias.

fadetogray on April 10, 2012 at 10:22 AM

I pointed out the flawed genetic argument way back in this thread. It doesn’t fit the narrative of comparing IQ scores so it’s ignored.

Dr Evil on April 10, 2012 at 9:35 AM

It’s entirely possible that the IQ test model is created for the group that benefits from the test? White Males? It’s their world the rest of us just get to live in it LOL!

Dr Evil on April 10, 2012 at 9:44 AM

Wait. You can’t have this both ways. You can’t say that it’s wrong (racist?) to point out blacks have lower average IQs due to genetics or culture and then turn around and say whites do well because the tests are geared toward Caucasians (whether genetics or culture).

eforhan on April 10, 2012 at 10:26 AM

Dr Evil on April 10, 2012 at 9:44 AM

See:

fadetogray on April 10, 2012 at 10:22 AM

And of course, there are the Ashkenazi Jews as a group (of course, considering The Jews control everything, I guess that would explain that). :)

My point really is that there are differences within and between groups, in intelligence just as much as other areas that people seem to find more palatable. Some groups are higher, some are lower, and none of it means a thing when it comes to human value. I simply don’t understand getting into a lather about such things.

DrMagnolias on April 10, 2012 at 10:32 AM

Yeah, Derbyshire’s a bitter racist troglodyte, but every single one of you with any common sense at all, black or white, perform the same or a similar calculus when presented with the situations he described.

Let me ask all you holier-than-Derbyshire hypocrites this question: If your life depended on the outcome of a foot race between two equally healthy and athletic-appearing strangers – one black and one white – with no further information, which one would you chose as your champion?

Yeah, I thought so…racist!

Knott Buyinit on April 10, 2012 at 10:44 AM

fadetogray on April 10, 2012 at 10:22 AM

eforhan on April 10, 2012 at 10:26 AM

DrMagnolias on April 10, 2012 at 10:32 AM

Obviously the IQ test model should just be accepted, and not questioned. Just like when you read something on the internet, you shouldn’t question it, you should just assume it’s true and factual/

And of course, there are the Ashkenazi Jews as a group (of course, considering The Jews control everything, I guess that would explain that). :)

What is “the foundation” of Eurocentric education?

Here is an example of Male IQ superiority, Larry Summers a fat old white male lost his position as President at Harvard, because he stated that women were inferior to men when it came to math. Okay let’s take his word for it. Barack Obama makes Larry Summers his top economic adviser. Who thinks that Larry Summers math superiority has helped the American economy? The smartest guys in the room – telling us all they are the smartest guys in the room. But let’s not question the math, let’s just take their word for it.

Dr Evil on April 10, 2012 at 10:52 AM

Dr Evil on April 10, 2012 at 10:52 AM

I don’t mind disagreement, but I’m not a big fan of sarcasm, which almost always can be interpreted as condescension. Larry Summers is rather like Derbyshire in his mistakenly thinking that people could discuss these matters rationally. In any event, I don’t believe anyone on this board has said that a high IQ equates with fabulous decision-making–I know I haven’t.

DrMagnolias on April 10, 2012 at 11:02 AM

I don’t mind disagreement DrMagnolias on April 10, 2012 at 11:02 AM

Well that’s mighty white of you not minding something. Ask me if I care what you mind?

You don’t like sarcasm, and I don’t like racism, not blatant or nuanced.

Dr Evil on April 10, 2012 at 11:09 AM

Incidents of white on black harmings are far less frequent than the incidents of black on white harmings, but the former are magnified 1000X in the media, and the crimes are known by different names: one is a “hate crime” and the other by implication of not being a hate crime is something more lovey dovey, so I can understand why you have come to believe that the two assertions are equally valid or equally invalid.

Buddahpundit on April 10, 2012 at 4:33 AM

One of my co-workers made the same assertion last week. He said that in one week, there would be more black-on-white incidents than white-on-black ones. He was right all the way up to Friday, when some guy in Tulsa more than evened the score, so to speak.

I suspect that there are things outside race which motivate the behavior we are discussing — the closeness of the city, the income levels of the perpetrators. That stuff shows itself in more mundane ways — blacks are far more apt to drown in a pool than whites — for swimming skills — which are often made by paid lessons — is not a high priority when one is scraping by.

I have big problems with hate crimes laws. We already have motive/intent-based levels of murder and assault, and it seems to me that hate crime enhancements are a form of double-jeopardy, or, to put it another way, penalizes certain motives more than others.

If I killed a black man for his race, I would get more prison time than if I killed him for his possessions — but the black man would be equally dead, and his loved ones equally harmed, and my deprivation of his rights equally — equal.

As for “the talk” — it’s one thing to warn your children that their actions reflect on — and are interpreted in the light of — actions by people who look like you. After all, we have tons of neo-nazis posting stuff over at the LA Times — and a whole bunch of people like the dude I quoted above. Their intentions and their feelings are part of the calculus, and if you want to survive, you better know the equation.

My version of “the talk” to my kids was as follows — as we walk around downtown LA a lot:
a) Always be aware of your surroundings — and endeavor to keep your private space private.
b) Keep your hands out of your pockets. You don’t have a firearm, and you don’t want to be unable to react to danger because you’re tangled up in your clothes
c) Dress down. Don’t wear jewelry.
d) Keep up with your martial arts. You never know when you might not need them.

My kids used to be oblivious even with the exhortations not to be — until some guy tried to molest my 9 year old daughter in the book store (a place you’d normally consider safe). I think she understands.

e) Don’t look like a target. Walk confidently, with purpose.

unclesmrgol on April 10, 2012 at 11:09 AM

Yeah, I thought so…racist!

Knott Buyinit on April 10, 2012 at 10:44 AM

Actually, I’d shoot the guy who put me in that situation first — curing the problem.

Then I would thank the two athletic looking strangers, and send them on their way.

Thank heavens we aren’t in the era of Hunger Games — yet.

unclesmrgol on April 10, 2012 at 11:11 AM

Here is an example of Male IQ superiority, Larry Summers a fat old white male lost his position as President at Harvard, because he stated that women were inferior…

Dr Evil on April 10, 2012 at 10:52 AM

You don’t like sarcasm, and I don’t like racism, not blatant or nuanced.

Dr Evil on April 10, 2012 at 11:09 AM

A self-loather, I take it.

unclesmrgol on April 10, 2012 at 11:13 AM

A self-loather, I take it.

unclesmrgol on April 10, 2012 at 11:13 AM

Hardly I am a woman.

Dr Evil on April 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM

Here is an example of Male IQ superiority, Larry Summers a fat old white male lost his position as President at Harvard, because he stated that women were inferior…

Dr Evil on April 10, 2012 at 10:52 AM

Actually, what he said was that women and men were different and excelled at different things and that studies, history, common sense and experience had shown that and why push women into fields where they have not historically excelled. Then some wack job, women’s studies, bitter, homely woman threw a melodramatic, hissy fit and the same culture that guys like summers helped create devoured their own. This is a common occurrence (see mental midget and chronic propagandist juan williams)and brings entertainment and joy to us true conservatives.

peacenprosperity on April 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM

Hardly I am a woman.

Dr Evil on April 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM

So in addition to being a racist, you are also a sexist and an ageist. Got it.

unclesmrgol on April 10, 2012 at 11:41 AM

Hardly I am a woman.

Dr Evil on April 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM

Not to mention a person who believes that thinness is the way to self-esteem.

unclesmrgol on April 10, 2012 at 11:43 AM

I don’t know of any support for the claim that “many millions” of nonblack Americans “seriously dislike black people.” – Hinderaker, Powerline Blog

He’s out of touch as are his pals at PL. That ship sailed long ago.
NRO under Lowry’s “leadership” just reinforces why I cancelled my subscription after WFB, Jr. departed this world.
Why not intellectually revisit the “Jensen/Shockley Debate” or have they, and you, never read it?
*sigh*
Another great debate succumbs to blind anti-intellectualism.
Way ta go, Lowry, NRO, you’re now officially politically correct.
~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on April 10, 2012 at 11:56 AM

Actually, male IQ tends to be slightly higher than female IQ. Carl Jung referred to female thinking as “pseudo-logic.” When you look at female voting patterns, they do not scream “genius at work” (you will never hear a man say he voted for a candidate because s/he is “dreamy”). I’m a woman, and none of this makes me insecure–I know there are differences within groups as well as between groups. IQ is not a character issue, nor is it a reflection of the value as a person.

DrMagnolias on April 10, 2012 at 8:26 AM

What you are saying is that women don’t vote as you’d like them to vote, therefore they are stupid. That’s what Derbyshire says, as well.

As for the IQ test – I don’t think that is says anything about intelligence. It’s just a materialistic attempt of measuring something that cannot be measured. It was invented at a time when people thought that everything can be measured.

IQ is the abbreviation for the German word Intelligenzquotient. The way of measuring the IQ is the way a German measured the intelligence of male white boys at the beginning of the 20th century. It’s materialistic and follows in the footsteps of Sir Francis Galton, who brought us eugenics.

Gelsomina on April 10, 2012 at 12:30 PM

It’s entirely possible that the IQ test model is created for the group that benefits from the test? White Males? It’s their world the rest of us just get to live in it LOL!

Dr Evil on April 10, 2012 at 9:44 AM

As I said a short time ago, it was developed as a test to measure the intelligence of white male boys in Germany at the beginning of the 20th century.

It was created for the only group that counted at the time and place it was invented.

Gelsomina on April 10, 2012 at 12:35 PM

Ah, that explains it. And East Asians, both male and female, must be even more dominant than white males since they average scores even higher than white males.

You have designed your premises to fit your bias.

fadetogray on April 10, 2012 at 10:22 AM

East Asians just fit the criteria that were invented as a measure for intelligence.

If an African had come up with the IQ test, instead of a German, then white men and East Asians would fail miserably.

The IQ test says nothing about intelligence, but everything about the people who invented it. They meant well, but their world was very small.

Gelsomina on April 10, 2012 at 12:41 PM

If a black guy had written what Derbyshire wrote, everyone here would be applauding the bravery the writer had shown. But since a white guy wrote it, he’s racist.

huckleberryfriend on April 10, 2012 at 12:45 PM

NRO under Lowry’s “leadership” just reinforces why I cancelled my subscription after WFB, Jr. departed this world.

Karl Magnus on April 10, 2012 at 11:56 AM

Reminds me of another knee-jerk “leadership” position Rich “Sharpton is Right” Lowry recently took.

farsighted on April 10, 2012 at 12:52 PM

As I said a short time ago, it was developed as a test to measure the intelligence of white male boys in Germany at the beginning of the 20th century.

It was created for the only group that counted at the time and place it was invented.

Gelsomina on April 10, 2012 at 12:35 PM

LOL, you don’t know much about modern IQ testing. It is solid science, my firm uses it all the time. It has no cultural bias whatsoever.

The most common IQ test in use today was originally developed by a Romanian Jew, David Wechsler.

Norwegian on April 10, 2012 at 12:52 PM

Dr Evil on April 10, 2012 at 11:09 AM

I had hoped to have a civil discussion with you. Apparently we cannot.

Gelsomina on April 10, 2012 at 12:30 PM

No, I am saying if women don’t vote as I’d like them to vote, they are wrong. :)

DrMagnolias on April 10, 2012 at 1:24 PM

I pointed out the flawed genetic argument way back in this thread. It doesn’t fit the narrative of comparing IQ scores so it’s ignored.

Dr Evil on April 10, 2012 at 9:35 AM

I did indeed see your post and it is what gave me the push to make mine. If IQ is any indication where race is concerned on this forum, we are so screwed. Alas no one will really get that IQ is based on culture, not race. Stupidity is colorblind.

As for those thinking that think there is more interracial crime then not, here is an inconvenient chart for you all. Shocking to believe that Whites kill more Whites and Blacks kill more Blacks right?

Jesse on April 10, 2012 at 3:22 PM

If a black guy had written what Derbyshire wrote, everyone here would be applauding the bravery the writer had shown. But since a white guy wrote it, he’s racist.

huckleberryfriend on April 10, 2012 at 12:45 PM

Here is, no doubt, the inspiration behind derbyshire’s article. This was in time magazine a couple of weeks ago. Try to go back and find the issue that followed and the disgusting letters to the editor. Idiotic white liberals expressing there solidarity with the moron writer and their guilt over living in such a horrible country.

peacenprosperity on April 10, 2012 at 3:26 PM

If a black guy had written what Derbyshire wrote, everyone here would be applauding the bravery the writer had shown. But since a white guy wrote it, he’s racist.

huckleberryfriend on April 10, 2012 at 12:45 PM

Exactly.

The Black version of “the talk”? Brave truth-telling! Nobody was thinking of criticizing let alone punishing anyone for giving that version of the talk.

The non-Black version of “the talk” including Asians and (gasp!) Whites? “Inherently racist” “breathtakingly offensive” “unhinged hostility” “screed”! Fire his pale ass!

The double standard is obvious.

“Racist” = White.

“Anti-racist” = in favor of double standards against Whites.

David Blue on April 10, 2012 at 3:57 PM

I’ve had this idea for a while, so tell me what you think. What if we took all the racists that are looking for this imaginary race war to happen and put them all on an island and let them kill each other off. The one race that survives gets prizes if not nuked. We could call it “The Amazing Racist” or “Race Survivor”. Just so long as we can get rid of them so they can leave the rest of us normals alone.

Jesse on April 10, 2012 at 4:05 PM

Good link, peacenprosperity!

At first glance I thought you had to have duplicated one of the five (!) links to versions of “the talk” that John Derbyshire gave. But no. And the Touré at Time on surely was the inspiration for Derb at Taki’s Mag. Except that Derbyshire was factual and truthful, as opposed to the Black version which was emotional and manipulative.

A Black man says something in a high profile forum (Time): no problem. A White man gives his milder, more factual version of the same thing in a nearly unknown forum – and “respectable conservatives” demand that as far as possible his income from writing should be cut off.

It’s a double standard.

They say they are against racism. What they are is in favor of double standards against Whites.

David Blue on April 10, 2012 at 5:18 PM

East Asians just fit the criteria that were invented as a measure for intelligence.

If an African had come up with the IQ test, instead of a German, then white men and East Asians would fail miserably.

The IQ test says nothing about intelligence, but everything about the people who invented it. They meant well, but their world was very small.

Gelsomina on April 10, 2012 at 12:41 PM

Aaahhh. I get it! We were duped once again by the crafty east Asians, who disguised themselves as western Europeans and created an east-Asian rigged IQ test. Bastards.

s/

You are a major dope.

Jaibones on April 10, 2012 at 6:37 PM

There is a very frank and explicitly non-PC discussion of this topic going on at this link.

trapeze on April 10, 2012 at 7:01 PM

Aaahhh. I get it! We were duped once again by the crafty east Asians, who disguised themselves as western Europeans and created an east-Asian rigged IQ test. Bastards.

s/

You are a major dope.

Jaibones on April 10, 2012 at 6:37 PM

Eurocenteric education SEE British Empire and Asia.

Dr Evil on April 15, 2012 at 5:47 PM

An empire involves the extension of a state’s sovereignty over external territories. For example, first the Spanish Empire and then the British Empire were called “the empires on which the sun never sets”, because of their territories and possessions around the globe. This article provides a list of the largest empires in world history.

Indians score very high on math and science test – India used to be part of the British Empire. A British education would be Eurocentric.

Britain’s imperial century (1815–1914)

Alongside the formal control it exerted over its own colonies, Britain’s dominant position in world trade meant that it effectively controlled the economies of many countries, such as China, Argentina and Siam, which has been characterised by some historians as “informal empire”.

Dr Evil on April 15, 2012 at 6:02 PM

1984: Britain signs over Hong Kong to China
The British colony of Hong Kong is to be returned to China in 1997 after an historic agreement was signed in Peking today.

Sam Cooke – Wonderful World

Don’t know much about history (or apparently recent historical events)
Don’t know much biology
Don’t know much about a science book
Don’t know much about the french I took

But I do know that I love you
And I know that if you love me too
What a wonderful world this would be

Don’t know much about geography

Dr Evil on April 15, 2012 at 7:50 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4