Wait, didn’t Derbyshire marry outside his race?
I guess just the fact that he’s white makes him racist though </sarcasm>
I COULDN’T get past “radio free new jersey”—what that all about?
BTW, the truth that no one is talking about is that there are three prescribed outcomes to every black male care of the liberal media: athlete, rapper, or drug dealer.
My brother-in-law is works in the car industry so, according to the media, he’s automatically an Uncle Tom.
Do a thought experiment. Transport 10,000 residents of Harlem, picked at random, to a remote island in the Pacific and leave them there, with the means to survive for about a year and allow them to take about 100 pound of personal effects, but they will be isolated from the outside world. Pick another 10,000 from North Dakota and place them on a similar but separate island.
Come back in a generation, 25 years, and note the demographics and economy. On one island, most of the original settlers will have died off, the population will be distributed towards the young, with lots of children, few of whom survive into adulthood. Literacy among the young will be non-existant, healthcare not even rudimentary, religion reduced to superstition, government will be run by one or more competing strongman tryrants.
On the other, population will be stable, schools, a clinic, elections and governance will have been established. At least two religious communities will exist in harmony, Catholics and Protestants. Religion will be smoothly integrated into education with few objections.
Sadly, America is progressing from the second island to the first.
The Fields Medal, officially known as International Medal for Outstanding Discoveries in Mathematics, is a prize awarded to two, three, or four mathematicians not over 40 years of age at each International Congress of the International Mathematical Union (IMU), a meeting that takes place every four years.
I learned something new this morning.
Question and, I hope, an honest one: Why does John Derbyshire feel that this issue has to be aired yet again? It's interesting but, why? And why now?
He really isn’t saying anything that Herrnstein and Murray haven’t already said. He’s being provocative by couching it as advice to his children in dealing with black America, in juxaposition to advice blacks give their children in dealing with white America.
I read John’s piece when it came out. At the time I wondered if he was aware of what he was getting into. He’s an immigrant and has confessed before that he’s somewhat tone-deaf to the American obsession with race.
But I would like to challenge anyone to read his article and point out any fact that is untrue, or any inference drawn from those facts that is not a logical conclusion.
I note that John does not state that blacks are inferior. He merely describes various characteristics that others then assume add up to inferiority. Primarily with regard to measured intelligence.
This is quite interesting, I think. If liberals insist, as they do, that the difference between measured intelligence between the average white person and the average black person not be mentioned, isn’t because they think it has real world consequences? Aren’t they implicitly agreeing that a person of lower intelligence is inferior to a person of higher intelligence and should therefore be assigned to a lower position by law? That if the lower intelligence of black people was to be irrefutably proven, it would indeed be logical to reinstate Jim Crow, or possibly black slavery?
My point is what this unrecognized opinion of theirs says about their attitude towards all others who are “intellectually inferior.” By logical inference, they are proclaiming themselves to be superior beings, and those of lower measured intelligence to be truly inferior, and deserving of nothing but contempt and hatred.
This attitude has nothing to do with race, other than that they refuse to apply it to people with high melanin skin content. OTOH, they feel perfectly free to apply it to those who are melanin-challenged. Thus the great contempt shown towards bitter-clingers and the people of Walmart. IOW, the discrimination and prejudice towards blacks liberals are afraid will be justified if lower average black intelligence can be irrefutably demonstrated is exactly the prejudice they themselves feel towards those of “lower intelligence,” especially those with white skin. Or, more accurately, towards those they believe to be of lower intelligence.
Personally, I think intelligence, especially of the type liberals adore, which consists largely of verbal virtuosity, is greatly over-rated. All men are created equal, and endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights. This is not because they are all equally intelligent or verbally adept. It is because God made them equal.
If that were more widely accepted in people’s hearts, I think we could all be a little more relaxed about the possibility that God distributed certain mental characteristics unevenly between ethnic groups.
Well, with the Travon Martin case in the spotlight, we seem to have two popular pieces of advice that parents and teachers are giving to their kids:
“Kill Whitey!”
and on the other side:
“Stay out of the hood!”
Which of these two pieces of advice is the more racist and destructive?
Self destructive, I would add, as well as destructive of others, by encouraging the commission of violent crimes.
The real racism is from the left. Derbyshire makes valid observations which are far more modest than any that you’d get out of a black studies, women studies, or queer studies class.
If you do a google search on shootings at amusement parks. Google will be racist. Here locally the only time such a thing happened was during a BET sponsored hip hop event at King’s Dominion but while that is an isolated incident you don’t have to go far and I could go down the line from black friday tramplings to Wal-mart/McDonalds fights.
The real problem people are having with Derbyshire is that he dares make comments based on observations. They are uncomfortable observations but the definition of racism should not be what makes a liberal uncomfortable.
The link to John Derbyshire’s original article is here:
http://takimag.com/article/the_talk_nonblack_version_john_derbyshire#axzz1rJPlABLB
==
Among the comments made, here is Mr. Derbyshire’s advice to his kids:
(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.
==
I highly recommend Mr. Derbyshire’s book “We Are Doomed! — Reclaiming Conservative Pessimism”.
Hello everyone. I feel I have to share here.This article disgusts me. It disgusts me because it is racist and bigoted and insinuates that black people somehow hold less value than other human beings. It disgusts me because it insinuates that I must be afraid of people because of the color of their skin. It disgusts me because...much of it is true. It makes me feel horrible that I have to live my life with the knowledge that I carry prejudice with me. It makes me feel horrible that I feel I must do so to protect myself and my family.
There are certainly things that are unfair and probably untrue in the article. There are mitigating factors, unmentioned variables, intellectually dishonest generalizations without a doubt. Yet, at the most basic level I cannot disagree. You see, I was brought up in liberal California in a multicultural environment, taught to value others equally (well, in actuality I was constantly encouraged to value other ethnic groups more than my own). I was TOLD (not taught) to look past labels and refrain from blanket generalizations. I grew up without a shred of racial prejudice, as pretty much every single friend I had was of a different race or ethnicity. I read about racism in books and never heard a white person use the "N" word until I saw the movie Mississippi Burning. I didn't UNDERSTAND racial prejudice. It was a completely foreign concept to me.
My best friend was black. When we were 15 he started to hang around people that looked more like him and less like me. Once in chemistry class I was being harassed by a group of 8 or so black students (throwing things at me, verbally insulting me, knocking my books to the floor). He was there. He didn't do it, but he was there. Well, one of them went too far and slapped the back of my head. I turned around and knocked him out with one punch (he was a lot smaller than I was). A small riot broke out, but I was escorted from the room and sent to the office. When I was walking home that day from school, an even larger group of black kids confronted me ans surrounded me. At their urging, my "best friend" - the boy who two months earlier had launched rockets with me in the abandoned field across from the park, the boy who had encouraged me to talk to my first girlfriend, who had spent countless hours with me shooting hoops in my front yard, who had played GI-Joe with me - walked up to me and punched me as hard as he could in my throat. As I lay on the ground gasping for air he and his friends took turns kicking me in the head, ribs, neck, back. They also spit on me and called me every racially charged epithet they could think of.
Since that time I have had a different perspective. That race does matter. It shouldn't, but it does. The only person to ever steal from me was black. The only person to pull a gun on me was black. The only person to assault my 5'1'', 105 lb. wife was black (she had the nerve to park in "her" parking spot). The only person to try and carjack my mother was black. As a waiter in college, I learned that black customers were far more likely to be abusive, rude and disorderly and would almost never leave a tip. As a young adult I learned that any common dispute with a black person could immediately turn into a physical confrontation even if no such confrontation was warranted. As a businessman I have learned that black customers are far more likely to cause disputes, complain about service and not pay their bills. As a husband of a teacher I have learned that black parents are far more likely to be incarcerated, less likely to care about their children's education, more likely to become physically confrontational with teachers and administrators. As a neighbor I have learned that black individuals are less likely to take care of their house, their pets and their children. As a citizen and taxpayer I have learned that blacks are far more likely to demand something for nothing and less likely to feel shame at relying on the system.
These aren't things that were instilled in me from others. This is my life experience. I don't want to be this way, and I actively try to give everyone a fair shake. I actively have to fight my first instincts and be fair to everyone. I do have black friends and none of them fit any of the above stereotypes. The thing that is crazy is that they have a lot of the same fears I do. I have children and, while I won't have "the talk," I will certainly prepare them to survive in the real world. They are still young and I don't know how I will teach them some of my life's lessons without making them blanket racists, but I will do my best. I can tell you I would rather have them be alive than naive and dead.
Does that make me a bad person?
John has just been fired by National Review.
In his partial defense, he has been fighting cancer and has written in recent weeks of his reactions to chemotherapy.
I suspect his judgment as to what to write was somewhat impaired by the drugs. Obviously what he wrote is what he believes, but I think in normal mental state he would be smart enough to know what happens to heretics who speak out too openly against the central dogmas of their time.
This is true whether you believe those dogmas to themselves be true or not.
2012 racism = 1600’s witchcraft
Liberalism completely controls the dialogue and government in the country. You will speak proper thought or else...