Telling it like it is

[Riddlewire]

I'd really like to copy/paste the entirety of this link, because it's really good. But the natural tendency is to just hit the 'back' button when you open a thread and see a huge post. So I'll just paste a bit of it.

A couple of days ago, conservative columnist John Derbyshire posted an article called "The Talk: Nonblack Version" for which he has been crucified by the right-wing blogosphere. I had heard Derbyshire's name before, but I didn't know anything about him. He's an occasional contributor to Republican blog National Review. He probably won't be for much longer. In this article, he describes a talk that white parents should have with their children about negroes. The language is very factual and practical, written very much in the style of a legal document. But we all know how truth is seen by the tolerance crowd. Here's a sample:

(6) As you go through life, however, you will experience an ever larger number of encounters with black Americans. Assuming your encounters are random—for example, not restricted only to black convicted murderers or to black investment bankers—the Law of Large Numbers will inevitably kick in. You will observe that the means—the averages—of many traits are very different for black and white Americans, as has been confirmed by methodical inquiries in the human sciences.
...
(9) A small cohort of blacks—in my experience, around five percent—is ferociously hostile to whites and will go to great lengths to inconvenience or harm us. A much larger cohort of blacks—around half—will go along passively if the five percent take leadership in some event. They will do this out of racial solidarity, the natural willingness of most human beings to be led, and a vague feeling that whites have it coming.

...
(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.

...
​

​

You don’t have to follow my version of the talk point for point; but if you are white or Asian and have kids, you owe it to them to give them some version of the talk. It will save them a lot of time and trouble spent figuring things out for themselves. It may save their lives.

Undoubtedly, his use of the word "swamped" amplified the rage of the anti-racists towards him. Section (10h) probably angered them, too.

I've saved a copy of his "Talk" and I intend to share it with my own children some day (without the IWSB part, since it takes only the slightest perceived insult to turn them into monsters).

​

 

[Europe]

He was already fired yesterday.

 

[Colonel_Reb]

A neo-con/zionist shill publication like National Review would fire John Derbyshire for his truthful and common sense talk. What a shame and another example of the insane double standards that exist in the USA when it comes to race. These double standards will sink us as a people if allowed to continue.

 

[Deus Vult]

... the rage of the anti-racists towards him.

What is most disturbing is the "rage" ( faux or genuine) of the self-professed conservatives toward Derb and his column. You can expect the left to be the left. Mr. Derbyshire was savaged by his own (lesser) colleagues at NR.

What passes for a 'movement conservative' these days is pathetic!! Hannitized ignoramuses who pine for some "color blind" unreality that will never exist. Buckley was bad enough... But the crop of denatured girly boys who work for National Review these days make Buckley look like Braveheart!

 

[foobar75]

It's a brilliant article and making some waves on the blogosphere right now. As usual, the author is being attacked without a single one of this points being refuted or challenged, since virtually everything he says is factually correct. While I disagree with small portions of it (for instance, I think the percentage of black people who hate Whites is more than 5%, and the point about making black friends with so-called good blacks is nonsense), but otherwise, this article is spot on.

It's a must read for all White people and every parent should discuss it with their children. I have also saved a copy and would gladly share it with my kids in the future if I become a parent one day.

Ironically, the people who would most benefit from some of the advice is blacks themselves, since black-on-black crime is the #1 cause of harm for their well-being.

I wonder if an article like this (and a few other similar ones) coming out is starting to represent some sort of a turning point, a tide change if you will. I sure hope so.

 

[Don Wassall]

This is somewhat off-topic, but I watched "Bait Car" on Tru TV for the first time tonight. I am totally opposed to entrapment, which has become a huge industry in the U.S. in recent years, part of the entertainment/military/prison/police state complex designed to ensnare as many working class Whites as possible in the "judicial" system in the laughingly called "land of the free."

This series, at least the re-runs I watched tonight, took place in Atlanta. A vehicle was left, door open, keys in the ignition and the engine running, in various high crime areas. It was only a matter of minutes (in one case a few seconds) before a Negro would steal the car, even though many were aware of the series and knew it might be a "bait car." But their impulsiveness ruled the day and they stole it anyway. Every criminal was black (an extreme rarity in and of itself for a TV show) and there had to be subtitles used for all of the criminals, as each spoke indecipherable ghetto ebonics. Everything on this show completely reinforces what Derbyshire's commonsense article stated.

For "conservatives" to unanimously turn on Derbyshire only reinforces that "conservatives" are the most vile enemies of all patriotic Americans, something some of us have known for decades but sadly most "Middle Americans," DWF types, and "Christians" still haven't figured out the utterly simplistic "liberal-conservative" Democrat-Republican charade. America = Idiocracy.

 

[whiteathlete33]

This is somewhat off-topic, but I watched "Bait Car" on Tru TV for the first time tonight. I am totally opposed to entrapment, which has become a huge industry in the U.S. in recent years, part of the entertainment/military/prison/police state complex designed to ensnare as many working class Whites as possible in the "judicial" system in the laughingly called "land of the free."

This series, at least the re-runs I watched tonight, took place in Atlanta. A vehicle was left, door open, keys in the ignition and the engine running, in various high crime areas. It was only a matter of minutes (in one case a few seconds) before a Negro would steal the car, even though many were aware of the series and knew it might be a "bait car." But their impulsiveness ruled the day and they stole it anyway. Every criminal was black (an extreme rarity in and of itself for a TV show) and there had to be subtitles used for all of the criminals, as each spoke indecipherable ghetto ebonics. Everything on this show completely reinforces what Derbyshire's commonsense article stated.

For "conservatives" to unanimously turn on Derbyshire only reinforces that "conservatives" are the most vile enemies of all patriotic Americans, something some of us have known for decades but sadly most "Middle Americans," DWF types, and "Christians" still haven't figured out the utterly simplistic "liberal-conservative" Democrat-Republican charade. America = Idiocracy.

I've heard of that show. I was a big fan of the show Cops and watched quite a few episodes in past years. Some episodes were basically the same as Bait Car. They'd leave a tractor trailer parked in a black neighborhood and within minutes blacks would be breaking in for the goodies. The blacks were so foolish it was laughable.

 

[Don Wassall]

I'm not quite sure why, but I've been watching a fair amount of the Tru Network since discovering it a few weeks ago. It's basically a TV version of The National Enquirer, filled with shows about various kinds of American idiots and criminals, the "caught on tape" stuff and it appears just about everything that takes place on a daily basis in the land of the free is now "caught on tape" in one form or another.

There's a couple of Vegas shows, one focusing on the cops at work on the Strip, and the other showing arrested people being booked at the county detention center. Pure freak show stuff, like the rest of the shows on Tru. (BTW, the Vegas cops are as militarized in their mindset and procedures as in the rest of the country. They shoot and kill suspects on a regular basis. Tourists wanting to party heavily need to stay inside, as if they get "out of line" outside on the Strip they just may find themselves being tackled by some hopped-up cops.)

 

[DixieDestroyer]

Don, back when we still had the TalmudVision, I had a rare "guilty pleasure" of watching similar "caught on tape" shows. I also liked to watch docu-series like "Gangland" & ones on various prisons (Supermax, etc.). Those type of programs give a look into both criminal elements & law enforcement (legit & totalitarian).

 

[screamingeagle]

Looks like we won't have an honest discussion about race. I bet Eric Holder is upset about this.

 

[Riddlewire]

Looks like we won't have an honest discussion about race. I bet Eric Holder is upset about this.

Exactly.
Derbyshire's "Talk" is the white side of that discussion that black Democrats always say they want to have. They use this vague threat as a sledgehammer to bludgeon all arguments that wimpy white Republicans might make in favor of real racial fairness (i.e. ending quotas and entitlements). Of course, the negroes want to talk about race even less than whites do, because their side always comes out the loser by every means of measurement. They get too much and they deserve absolutely none of it. Any honest debate would reveal that to all Americans.

 

[referendum]

I remember when Derbyshire earlier came out in favor of Ron Paul thinking he was a more original thinker than most at NR. Amazing he lasted as long as he did.

 

[FootballDad]

Here's an interesting take on the firing ("summary execution") of John Derbyshire from Mark Steyn. Although he tiptoes around the margins and makes pandering remarks, it's still obvious that he doesn't agree with the firing, as it just further stifles open dialogue. A snippet:

The Left is pretty clear about its objectives on everything from climate change to immigration to gay marriage: Rather than win the debate, they’d just as soon shut it down. They’ve had great success in shrinking the bounds of public discourse, and rendering whole areas of public policy all but undiscussable. In such a climate, my default position is that I’d rather put up with whatever racist/sexist/homophobic/Islamophobic/whateverphobic excess everybody’s got the vapors about this week than accept ever tighter constraints on “acceptableâ€￾ opinion. The latter kills everything, not least the writing skills of the ideologically conformist

 

[Tired old White]

John Derbyshire

I have no problem with people who think Mr. Derbyshire's article is wrong so long as they attempt to refute his reasoning and logic. They do not even try to do this it must mean they know that hey that they will be forced to admit that he is absolutely correct. So they call him names and insist that he be fired to shut him up. The last refuge of the coward.

 

[Paleocon]

It is like the Joe Sobran scenario all over again.

"Nobody really disagreed with me. That, in fact, was the problem. Nothing creates more awkwardness than saying things people can't afford to admit they agree with. Disagreement is manageable. It's agreement that wreaks havoc. If people disagree, they'll debate you. If they secretly agree with something, but are furious with you for saying it, then they'll try to shut you up by any means necessary. As Tom Stoppard puts it, 'I agree with every word you say, but I will fight to the death against your right to say it.'"

-- Joe Sobran

http://web.archive.org/web/20080602094748/http://www.mecfilms.com/universe/articles/fired.htm

 

[Riddlewire]

Thanks for that link Paleocon.
I was unaware of that situation.

I think it suggests that there actually has never been such a thing as a "conservative" media entity in the United States. Not ever. Not even in the wilds of the internet, except for small blogs and websites like this one, which don't even appear as a blip on the radar compared to the Drudges of the world.

 

[Paleocon]

Thanks for that link Paleocon.
I was unaware of that situation.

I think it suggests that there actually has never been such a thing as a "conservative" media entity in the United States. Not ever. Not even in the wilds of the internet, except for small blogs and websites like this one, which don't even appear as a blip on the radar compared to the Drudges of the world.

It was well before my time, but I would think that National Review was pretty conservative back when Russell Kirk and Joe Sobran (and others) were heavily involved. I'm not sure how early on Buckley started grovelling to Podhoretz though.

 

[Don Wassall]

National Review was always strongly pro-Semitic. And though a couple of quotes from the 1950s are sometimes cited to show that it was "anti-black," the magazine was always quite careful on racial issues.

NR founder William F. Buckley is the person most responsible for the useless, racially neutered, pro-big government "conservative movement" of the past 60 years. Buckley had CIA connections, and as far back as 1952 wrote this: "[W]e have got to accept Big Government for the duration -- for neither an offensive nor a defensive war can be waged...except through the instrumentality of a totalitarian bureaucracy within our shores." And for good measure he added, [conservatives] must all support "large armies and air forces, atomic energy, central intelligence, war production boards and the attendant centralization of power in Washington -- even with Truman at the reins of it all."

"Heretics" like Sobran, Derbyshire, Sam Francis and many others have been purged from the "conservative movement" through the years. "Conservatives" are the mortal enemies of all racially conscious White Americans.

 

[Paleocon]

National Review was always strongly pro-Semitic. And though a couple of quotes from the 1950s are sometimes cited to show that it was "anti-black," the magazine was always quite careful on racial issues.

NR founder William F. Buckley is the person most responsible for the useless, racially neutered, pro-big government "conservative movement" of the past 60 years. Buckley had CIA connections, and as far back as 1952 wrote this: "[W]e have got to accept Big Government for the duration -- for neither an offensive nor a defensive war can be waged...except through the instrumentality of a totalitarian bureaucracy within our shores." And for good measure he added, [conservatives] must all support "large armies and air forces, atomic energy, central intelligence, war production boards and the attendant centralization of power in Washington -- even with Truman at the reins of it all."

"Heretics" like Sobran, Derbyshire, Sam Francis and many others have been purged from the "conservative movement" through the years. "Conservatives" are the mortal enemies of all racially conscious White Americans.

I'm guessing in 1952 Buckley's statement passed muster because of the anti-Communist/anti-Soviet sentiments of the conservative movement. However, the subsequent plight of the conservative movement suggests that Buckley was always a snake. The odd thing is that mainstream conservatives really neither approve or disapprove of the purges carried out by the neocons; they don't even know anything happened. It is a sort of childlike naivety combined with an impenetrable lack of curiosity.

I once posted Russell Kirk's assessment of the neoconservatives on a mainstream "conservative" forum. The only response was some half-wit pointing out that Kirk praised the "lacking the vision thing" comment made by Bush I. I'm still not sure why that stood out. The essay contained a critique of Democratic Capitalism as an ideology and the remark that got Kirk accused of anti-Semitism, but I couldn't even get a discussion going.

 

[DixieDestroyer]

I call mugs like Buckley & Sobran "phocons"....phoney "conservatives"...fake as a $3 bill.

 

[Paleocon]

I call mugs like Buckley & Sobran "phocons"....phoney "conservatives"...fake as a $3 bill.

Buckley obviously, but Sobran?

 

[Don Wassall]

I think Dixie was thinking of a different writer. Joe Sobran was a courageous and honest man who lost his livelihood because his conscience wouldn't allow him to tow the neo-con party line at National Review.

BTW, National Review has done it again, this time firing a Jewish writer, Robert Weissberg, for the crime of speaking at an American Renaissance conference. The article is linked at: http://www.anunews.net/

 

[DixieDestroyer]

I think Dixie was thinking of a different writer. Joe Sobran was a courageous and honest man who lost his livelihood because his conscience wouldn't allow him to tow the neo-con party line at National Review. /

Good catch there Paleocon & Don. I was thinking of Joe Scarborough actually...my oversight gentlemen.