“Does it please Thee, O God, to deliver into the hands of these beasts the defenseless children whom I have nourished with Thy Love?” - St. Clare of Assisi

Featured Posts


Creative Minority Reader

Utilitarian Asshat Gets Fired For Utilitarian Asshattery

Matthew knows that for years my least favorite writer at National Review Online has been John Derbyshire. He was my least favorite not just because of his outspoken atheism, but because of his smug utilitarianism. What I and many others found in his writing was that he often spoke of people as things or in terms of statistics. In a world without God, that is what we are reduced to, statistics. I have always been frustrated by Derb because I found his worldview to be completely un-Conservative and out of place at a magazine founded by William F. Buckley.

So it was that Matthew called me and told me that Derb had just gotten the boot at NRO. Why? You have to see for your self. And boy did I.

Rich Lowry in his post announcing the canning referring to a piece Derb had written at another site said "Derb has long danced around the line on these issues, but this column is so outlandish it constitutes a kind of letter of resignation. It’s a free country, and Derb can write whatever he wants, wherever he wants. Just not in the pages of NR or NRO, or as someone associated with NR any longer."

What issues? At first you will say to yourself "He got fired for this?" but keep reading. You'll know. For those of you without the time, a few snippets.

(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.
...
(11) The mean intelligence of blacks is much lower than for whites. The least intelligent ten percent of whites have IQs below 81; forty percent of blacks have IQs that low. Only one black in six is more intelligent than the average white; five whites out of six are more intelligent than the average black. These differences show in every test of general cognitive ability that anyone, of any race or nationality, has yet been able to devise. They are reflected in countless everyday situations. “Life is an IQ test.”
In reading it, I could not help but think that this is exactly what I never liked about Derb's writing. The tendency to reduce people to statistics. In my view this is the direct result of a Godless world view. If people have no intrinsic value as individual persons endowed by their creator with certain unalienables, then they are merely statistics or worse.

While I am sure that Derb reviles the work of Stalin, Hitler, Mao et al, but it is this same line of thinking that leads to their solutions to these statistical problems.

It is noteworthy that Derb took so much time to link up "supporting" evidence for his, I don't know even what to call it. I would say screed, but the detailed links show that this was no Mel Gibson like screed, but something much more deeply held, more cold and calculating. And it is so much the worse for it.

I am glad Derb got fired for it. But I can't help wonder if he even understands what is wrong.

Your Ad Here

60 comments:

Steve "scotju" Dalton said...

Derbyshire didn't say anything wrong. Black violence toward other blacks and whites is now a major problem in the USA. In Peoria, Il., where I live, black on black violence gets someone shot or killed at least once a month. We have also had black mob violence too in Peoria. A firefight between two black gangs took place at a skating rink only a mile and a half from my house. And I live eight miles out in the country, but I'm still in the city limits. That firefight lead to the retaliation death of an eight year old black boy by one of the gangs.
You also moan and whine about Derbyshire seeing people as things and statistics. Paddy, do you want you and your children to wind up as a crime statistic or a thing on a coroners table? Derbyshrine was giving good advice on how to avoid becoming one. I never heard of him until I read his article on TakiMag. But guess what, I was already following most of his advice. When I go to Peoria to visit my wife's family or on business, I no longer take the most direct route in. Why? It goes through a neighbourhood with a high number of blacks.
You can call Derbyshire "cold, calculating" but you and your kids chances of ending up as a crime statistic are so much greater, because unlike you, he does understand what's wrong.

Andy said...

I'd never heard of Derbyshire before this essay of his, but what he writes here makes sense to me and my personal experiences. I don't see the "asshatery" in this particular piece.

Many on the right have lambasted this piece as wrong/bad/worthy of exclusion from conservative politics, but I've not yet found a refutation of his points, only name calling.

What about this essay is incorrect? He very clearly calls for treating all individuals with dignity and respect, but advises certain specific ways to avoid danger to life and limb by avoiding certain situations.

When it comes to life & death issues of safety vs. hurting someone's feelings, I'll teach my children to be safe, thank you very much.

Anonymous said...

One of your best headlines!

Paul, just this guy, you know? said...

A friend of mine was mugged and severely beaten in Houston after he stopped along a highway to help several blacks who apparently had car trouble.

One of the victims of the Wisconsin State Fair violence last year said that he didn't roll up his car windows when he saw a black mob coming his way because he didn't want to appear racist; a black man reached into his car and punched him in the face.

I've seen a lot of criticism of this piece, but I have yet to see a good fisking, showing point by point how Derbyshire was wrong. For myself, sad to say, I can't identify any points on which his essay is untrue.

It looks to me like advice to live by, especially when it comes to protecting myself and my family. Do you live differently, Pat?

Katharine said...

Have you ever been caught up in a mob of black youth? Scary stuff. I follow most of the points in the article just from experience.

Patrick Archbold said...

So.....When Derb wrote

"(11) The mean intelligence of blacks is much lower than for whites. The least intelligent ten percent of whites have IQs below 81; forty percent of blacks have IQs that low. Only one black in six is more intelligent than the average white; five whites out of six are more intelligent than the average black. These differences show in every test of general cognitive ability that anyone, of any race or nationality, has yet been able to devise. They are reflected in countless everyday situations. “Life is an IQ test.”

Are you guys saying you support this statement?

Anonymous said...

Number 11 is not showing in the original post, only shows when you click on comments.

Anonymous said...

Interesting comments on this one. It does show that race is still an issue in America even after our first Black President.

It is a great country when you can say/write anything you want but your job isn't necessarily secure if you exersise it. That truely is a free market.(this is not a snark).

Rover.

Andy said...

Well, Patrick, he seems to cite sources that seem legit. If they are accurate, they're accurate. Statistics are statistics. The key thing is, intelligence doesn't equate to one's worth as a human, and atheist though he may be, Derbyshire doesn't seem to say otherwise in this piece.

Is the brain magically exempt from genetics Intelligence is, at least in part, another trait like hair color, skin color, height, etc... If these other traits are determined by genetics, is it bizarre to think that intelligence is also, at least in part, especially when the statistics seem to bear that out?

Many of these same sorts of studies also show that Asians consistently, as a group average, outscore people of European descent on intelligence tests and academic performance. Them's the stats. That doesn't make me (an American of European ancestry) worth any less in the eyes of God, or make me feel bad about myself any more so than the fact that I have freckles or flat feet.

Andy said...

d'oh! First sentence of second paragraph is missing a question mark. It should read "Is the brain magically exempt from genetics?"

Thursday said...

Substitute "people from communities where 80% of the children grow up without their fathers present" for the word "black" everywhere in the article, including number 11, and then tell me where the controversy is.

Even without this substitution, number 11 is either accurate or it is not. If it is not accurate, then dispute the facts. If it is accurate, why hide the facts? It is no act of charity to anyone to ignore the reality of his or her situation. It is likewise no act of virtue to force anyone (by law or by shaming)to ignore reality.

Patrick Archbold said...

Andy
So when Derb says you should not help a black person in distress on the side of the road because of "statistics," that doesn't seem wrong to you?

Robin E. said...

While his writing is sometimes clever and amusing, I have for years had the same complaint about him, but this....I never would have imagined him writing something like this.

Brings to mind something another NR writer (can't recall who at the moment) once said about how godless utilitarianism and racism are still alive and well amongst the upper tiers of the conservative movement, and how creeped out he was to discover how some of them speak at private get-togethers.

The ones amongst us are outing themselves today....

Steve "scotju" Dalton said...

Pat, if Derbyshire is so wrong about the mean intelligence of blacks, why do they do so poorly in school? Why is the drop out rate higher than Whites or Asians?
Also, here's another thing to consider. Why are all the nations and countries dominated by blacks in the West (such as Haiti) and all of the sub-Saharan African countries so poor? These countries have incrediable natural resorces, yet they are at the bottom of the totem pole ecomonically, spiritually, and morally. And this is in spite of years of aid from more advanced nations. The sad part about this situlation is when all this nations were colonies of the various European Contries, they were quite well off. When the Europeans left, all of these countries became hellholes within a few years. If Derbyshire is so wrong about intelligence, why can't these folks hold anything together? Why are they so plagued with violence. Why do they repeat the same dysfunctional, self-destructive behaviours year after year, decade after decade, generation after generation? Why do they follow race pimps like Jackson and Sharpton who pander to their worst base desires and emotions, instead of listening to wise leaders like Jesse Lee Peterson and David Manning? Sounds to me like there's a serious lack of brain power in the black community all around the world!

Patrick Archbold said...

Wow.

sd said...

From the CCC:


1935 The equality of men rests essentially on their dignity as persons and the rights that flow from it: Every form of social or cultural discrimination in fundamental personal rights on the grounds of sex, race, color, social conditions, language, or religion must be curbed and eradicated as incompatible with God's design.


The Church condemns racism. Period. "The Derb" may well be a perfectly nice man in his private life, and he currently suffers (from cancer) and deserves our prayers. But his writings have historically been as un-Catholic as anything you'll find on the political right. And the notorious piece that led to the current fracas is no exception.

Laura said...

For all the "defense of statistics" going on around here no one has provided anything but personal experience, which is not very generalizable.
"The ones amongst us are outing themselves today...." very true

Steve "scotju" Dalton said...

Pat, your arguements are emotional, not rational. They are not based on reality. I, and the other realistic commentators, like Andy, base our statements on the way things are in the real world. No amount of the warm fuzzies you have in your heart and mind are going to mean a damm thing when you or your loved ones confront a violent black. Only the precautions mentioned by Derbyshire or the type of action taken by a George Zimmerman will save you.

sd said...

Steve "scotju" Dalton:

Wow indeed. Your comment is filled with the bitterest, nastiest, most un-Catholic racist thought I've run across in a good long while.

You wrote:

"If Derbyshire is so wrong about intelligence, why can't these folks hold anything together?"


So in the early middle ages, when white northern Europe was a mostly uncivilized backwater characterized by unstable political institutions, rampant warfare, widespread famine, extremely low literacy levels and barely post-stone age technological development, whereas Ethiopia and several other east African areas had stable, prosperous societies with advanced patterns of trade, centers of learning and other markers of civilizational development, I suppose "genetics" was different? Keep in mind that northern Europe couldn't "get its act together" for centuries before the combination of conquest by the Roman legions and evangalization by Christian missionaries led to a change in culture. Yet the genes in Mr. Derbyshire's cells are the same genes that were in the cells of the savages who raped and pillaged and sacrificed human beings to the various tribal harvest gods of the British Isles for hundreds of years.


Of course, Europe eventually Christianized and with the coming of the Faith came universities, respect for the rule of law and the inherent dignity of man, not to mention cross-ethnic dialog that facilitated the trade that led to the development of advanced economies. That plus the good fortune of having an exceptionally high ratio of coastline and navigable rivers to land area spurred the remarkably rapid development of advanced societies in Europe. Meanwhile development in Sub-Saharan Africa was delayed due to geographic bad luck (an extremely low ratio of coastline and navigable rivers to land area, a tropical climate that allowed malaria and other diseases to run rampant, etc.) and subsequent conquest of Middle-Eastern and European slave traders who killed and exported adult males in vast numbers. Kind of hard to crawl out of a hole like that. And keep in mind that colonial rule was pulled out of Africa just a few decades ago. Do you know what life in the Italian peninsula was like a few decades after the Roman imperial state collapsed? Not exactly a model of reason, safety and order.

But of course these days the white people of Europe (who Mr. Derbyshire assure us have such high IQs) are abandoning the Faith in Christ (and in its wake, faith in reason itself) with alarming speed while the black people of Africa are embracing the Church at stunning rates. If you could travel through time 500 years forward you shouldn't be surprised to see Africa thriving but unfortunately still populated by a few cranky old racists who rant about how you can't be safe when "The Whites" are around in large numbers.

Therese said...

For when we were still without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly. For scarcely for a righteous man will one die; yet perhaps for a good man someone would even dare to die. But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us (Romans 5:6-8).

Let's remember who we are in Christ, not in the world. Jesus would never outcast a group of people because of statistics. We should treat each individual as if he/she is Christ himself. We follow Him, therefore, we love everyone. The same people that defiled Him and murdered Him in the most shameful ways are the same people He asked His Father to forgive. He loved them regardless of their "IQ" and did not avoid them.

Katy Anders said...

Wow... I had never read him, but treating people in accordance with statistics seems... sort of creepy.

I hope he learns to treat human beings as unique human beings.

Anonymous said...

Sentimentalism voiced in Multicult Indignation! It's bad enough to hear it from the left!

Above and beyond the moral assistance due to any distressed motorist on the side of the road (in an age of Highway Patrols, no less!) is our duty to discourage our own children from involving themselves in DEMONSTRABLY perilous scenarios.

Steve "scotju" Dalton said...

Sd, the natives in those colonies wanted the Europeans to get out. They wanted their 'freedom'. They wanted to be Africans with an African culture. They didn't want the 'white mans ways', they wanted 'negritude'. Well SD, how is that getting the white out working for them now?
As for the converison of a few Africans here and there, unless the Catholic missionaries make a great effort to upoot the practise of juju (also called voodoo) among the converts, their evangelization will be in vain in the long run. Juju practisioners are known to falsely convert to Christianity to hide their real religion. Both the Protestant and Catholic missionaries seem to be blissfully unaware of this, so I don't think it's any wonder why the freed colonies reverted to savagery so quickly after the Europeans left.

PeterK said...

I guess this fellow didn't get the Talk
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/video-of-white-man-being-stripped-and-beaten-outside-baltimore-courthouse-sparks-outrage-on-the-internet/

Anonymous said...

Wow. As a resident of a major urban area, I have to agree with all of Derb's advice. But I know it is not inherently a black issue, but one where families are destroyed, few resident fathers, few married couples. Happened in two generations, too. My parents could drive through and even drink in neighborhood I wouldn't last ten minutes in, because the stable black population (or mixed population) is gone.

Most of what he said is true about American Indian areas, too, and the same reasons contribute to the way those populations have imploded.

Remove morality, and remove stability.

romishgraffiti said...

The stats on IQ are not a right/wrong question, but a true/false question. If they are false, let's hear what makes them false. The rightness or the wrongness is in what you do with that information. If you started out with an assumption that human intellegence is the main measure of any human's worth, you are wrong. If you conclude that we shouldn't bother educating blacks at all, you are wrong. If you however say that we should fund public education available to everyone but stop funding when a person reaches the level they can't pass without nice-guy grade inflation...well...that's not wrong in and of itself. The consequences of adopting such a policy will be hard to face if the stats are indeed correct, but it beats charitable lying to ouselves, which isn't charity at all.

And I say all this as a fan of Cardinal Arinze, who I would love as a pope if I wasn't an ageist. :)

Scott W.

sd said...

Steve "scotju" Dalton:

"the natives in those colonies wanted the Europeans to get out. They wanted their 'freedom'. They wanted to be Africans with an African culture."

Yes, people don't tend to enjoy being governed by foreign occupying powers. c.f. the eastern seaboard of North America, circa 1776. But I digress.


"As for the converison of a few Africans here and there,"

By "a few" "here and there" you're presumably referring to the fact that Christianity is currently the single largest religious affiliation in sub-Saharan Africa, and that Christians account for somewhere between 40-50% of the population of Africa as a whole (with Muslims accounting for another ~45% and traditional native religions accounting for a tiny and dwindling proportion of the overall population)? Indeed, in many African countries the proportion of the population that is Christian is higher than it is in Europe overall. And as recent developments in the Anglican Communion demonstrate, the predominant theological mindset in African Anglican Christianity is much more aligned with the historic orthodox Christian faith than the predominant theological mindset in European and North American Anglican Christianity is. "Bishop" Gene Robinson after all has genes that look a lot like John Henry Newman's but ideas that well, don't.


"unless the Catholic missionaries make a great effort to upoot the practise of juju (also called voodoo) among the converts, their evangelization will be in vain in the long run."

The widespread growth of Christianity in Africa is less than 100 years old. How many years was it between the time that England and Ireland were evangelized and the time that the folk superstitions of the native pagan population were completely purged from day to day life in those particular locales?

"Juju practisioners are known to falsely convert to Christianity to hide their real religion. Both the Protestant and Catholic missionaries seem to be blissfully unaware of this"

Ah yes, the folks who live and work in Africa to spread the Faith are less aware of the realities of African religious life than Steve Dalton of Americaville, USA.

In any event, white missionaries from Europe and North America now account for a negligible proportion of the total efforts to propagate the Faith in Africa. Africans whose families have been orthodox Christians for multiple generations are doing a fine job of doing so themselves.

sd said...

Steve "scotju" Dalton:


"so I don't think it's any wonder why the freed colonies reverted to savagery so quickly after the Europeans left."


Most countries "revert to savagery" when an existing governmental structure is removed. When the Roman empire fell most of Europe (filled to the brim with all those "high IQ" white man genes) fell into lawlessness, famine, warfare, and illiteracy for hundreds of years.

Indeed, its been less than "four score and seven years" since European colonialism in Africa was dismantled. Yet precisely "four score and seven" years after British colonialism in North America was dismantled the "restless natives" of that particular savage backwater still practiced chattel slavery and were engaged in a brutal, blood-drenched civil war that left half a million people dead.

While Africa has indeed been plagued by strife and disfunction since the decades-long military occupation by Europeans ended, it appears to be turning the corner on almost every significant variable. The percentage of the population defined as "middle class" is 34%, up from 27% in 2000. Deaths in civil wars are less than 10K per year now, down from nearly 60K per year in 1990. There are about 3 million refugees in Africa now, down from about 6 million in 1990. Monetary inflation and gross government debt are down significantly in most African nations over the last few years. What warfare there is now is almost exclusively in the border regions between heavily Christian and heavily Muslim areas. Well - the border regions in Europe between Christianity and Islam weren't exactly peaceful and prosperous in the centuries between the first incursion of Islam into the continent and WWI when the Ottoman Empire finally fell.

Steve "scotju" Dalton said...

SD, about Juju: Isiash Oke, a former Juju priest, said in his book, "Blood Secrets", that the Juju practisioners have infiltrated all of the Muslim and Christian communities to a shocking degree in Africa. That's were I got my information about it. Also,our crrent pope allowed a Juju priest to give some heathenish incantation at Assai III. Do you really think we're winning with crap like that going on?

Rebecca Taylor said...

I find this discussion of genetics and intelligence maddening. It is the same idea that we are a sum of our genes that started the eugenics movement. It is just not that simple. Environment has a huge impact on what genes are expressed and how they are expressed.

A recent study of identical twins showed that genetic testing is not very predictive when it comes to disease. It is likely the same with personality traits and intelligence as well.

The Atlantic just did a story on the non-predictive aspect of genetic testing for disease and concluded:

"Remember gene expression the next time someone mentions an "innate musical talent," or a "natural-born swimmer," or "the math gene." As a general rule, traits and diseases are developmental, not gene-determined."

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/04/as-a-predictor-of-disease-genes-are-almost-completely-useless/255416/

Subvet said...

Derbyshire's rant about black intelligence really sticks in my craw, I really don't see why it was necessary to include it.

But based on personal experience I'd say everything else he wrote is sound advice. Didn't Jesse Jackson himself once say when he sees a crowd of young men walking towards him at night he's relieved if they're white and not black?

Paul, just this guy, you know? said...

"Are you guys saying you support this statement?"

It's not a question of what I support; the question is, is it true? Is the mean IQ of African Americans (not Africans in Africa, but African-descended Americans) not notably lower than the mean IQ of white Americans? Do you have a source that tells you that? Even the CCC?

"So when Derb says you should not help a black person in distress on the side of the road because of 'statistics,' that doesn't seem wrong to you?"

A friend of mine did exactly that, barely escaped with his life, and was weeks recovering from his wounds. I'm sure it would comfort my children to know that their father died doing his Christian duty, but I suspect they (especially my 7-month-old) would prefer to keep me around for awhile.

Which points of Derbyshire's advice would you disregard, Pat?

If you found a riot developing around you, as at the Wisconsin State Fair, would you stay, for fear of being a racist?

If three young black men tried to flag you down on a roadside, would you stop and get out, and then drive them somewhere more secluded, as my friend did?

Do you make it a point to visit black neighborhoods?

Do you keep your seat when black gang-bangers start gathering in the mall food-court, or do you collect your kids and head for the nearest exit?

Pope John Paul II taught us that true science and true religion can never conflict. Clearly, our Catholic faith, not shared by Derbyshire, calls us to some sort of response to the plight of these people. But I don't find in the Catechism any admonition to ignore reality, place my wife, children or myself in jeopardy, and seek out large gatherings of angry black strangers merely to prove that I am not racist.

Derbyshire's wife is oriental, and his children are mixed-race. You may think him a racist, but I see him as a person who wants to teach his children how to keep themselves safe.

And I see that as the first duty of a father.

eulogos said...

I believe Charles Murray put forth the statistics about IQ by race some years ago, in the Bell Curve. This refers to IQ as tested by current tests in this country. It is not impossible that this is genetic; it is not impossible that it is all cultural. Genetic or cultural, these are the facts on the ground. It should not be wrong to refer to them.
Having lived on the edge of a poor black neighborhood in Baltimore in the late 70's early 80's (and just across Broadway from Harlem in the late 60's) I understand exactly what the writer means. I have the feeling that even the person who fired the writer, and even the blogger deploring what he wrote, generally acts the same way.

In some circumstances one has the luxury of relating to people as individuals. I had a black boyfriend in college, where there were so few blacks that there was no black culture, just the culture of the school. My black brother in law is a sweet, good man who is also very bright, and his daughter, my neice is a real cutie. It is prejudice and racism when one cannot relate to people as individuals rather than as members of a race, in those situations where that is possible.

But in group situations like the ones described, Mr. Derbyshire has only laid out reasonable rules. Those who would deny this, I suspect, have a lack of experience. The difference between those children of mine raised in a black slum neighborhood and those raised in an almost totally white rural setting was immense, the latter easily repeating platitudes about everyone being the same, the former trying to explain what they had experienced when they were young.

The United States has a history, and the history of how black people first got here and how they were treated, for which none of us alive today are responsible, still has an effect on social realities. It can be argued that some of the actions taken with the best of intentions to try to ameliorate those social realities, had the opposite effect. (Welfare leading to more fatherless families, for instance. In my Baltimore neighborhood almost no black child had a father in the picture. There were grandmothers. )

I applaud Mr. Derbyshire for having the courage to put on paper what is not supposed to be said. I suspect that he will suffer for it. I think we have a feeling that if we don't say certain things, they might stop being true, and if we say them, they might get worse. One doesn't want to freeze these realities into eternal verities, or inflame hatred rather than mere prudence. There is a value to moderating how we express things. If there is any justice behind his firing, it lies there.

As for stopping to help a black person by the side of the road, I would say that it is generally dangerous to stop and help any stranger, yet we are enjoined to do so by Our Lord. One has to make a snap judgment of the safety of any particular situation for oneself in particular,(ex marine? little old lady? attractive young woman?) and it also matters how much one is needed by others. One can always call 911 and say that there is a stranded motorist who needs help. Of course if there has clearly been a crash and someone is in immediate danger, one would help, and I don't think anyone would worry about race at such a time.

Susan Peterson

eulogos said...

I just read the whole article and makes all the balancing points that I tried to make. I understand the need to exerpt, but in this case, the exerpting process was distorting of the whole.
Susan Peterson

Andy said...

As for the stopping on the road to help a stranger: it depends, pretty much like Susan said above. Would I, alone, stop to help three young black men flagging me down? No. Three young white men? I'd still probably not. While it's not necessarily likely that they'll do me harm, my responsibility to my family trumps my responsibility to a stranger. Little old lady, alone? Every time, regardless of race. People injured in a wreck? Of course, regardless of race.

I agree also with the commentator above who pointed out that intelligence is not proven entirely dependent on genetics, nor is it proven completely independent of genetics. But the stats are there that they vary by race. It is what it is. But I do not equate a person's worth with their intelligence, so I fail to see the "racism" in seeing these facts.

The relative economic status of former African colonies and Haiti is too complicated to attribute to race. Colonization, amalgamation into countries ignoring the tribal groups, etc.. are all a factor. I don't know of any comparable situation with a predominately European-descended population. The North American colonies were run differently, etc.

Yes, the CCC condemns treating people unfairly because of race or many other factors. But I didn't notice where Derbyshire advocated that black Americans be treated differently, but recommends that others alter their own behavior in certain pragmatic ways to avoid problems. How does it harm anyone else if I avoid public events likely to draw a large crowd of blacks? How are blacks harmed if I leave if a large number of them start congregating?

Everyone notices race, but whites aren't allowed to say so out loud, it seems.

Anonymous said...

What was conservative about Buckley?? We now know his magazine was a CIA front, his politics were NEO-conservative...big gov't warfare state, leftism masquerading as conservatism. His treatment of Joe Sobran reveals his allegiances.
As far as Derbyshires article, it is good advice. IQ statistics can be skewed, however, with questions out of the realm of the experience of some demographics. I used to have a much more "liberal" viewpoint of the poor put upon blacks. Then I got jobs in the real world working with them and learned that human nature is the same for all of us...and racism is not simply a white attribute.

Donald R. McClarey said...

I recall about eight years ago when I was stuck in a snow drift. The only people who stopped to help me was a black woman and her three sons who tried to dig me out. People who judge by the group and not the individual are nitwits.

Steve "scotju" Dalton said...

While Mr McCleary is trying to be idealistic, ideaism is not reality. In the real world, for our own safety, we must make judgements based on the group a person belongs to. That may seem unfair or bigoted to many people, but if the ethnic, racial, or national group has a reputation for certain types behaviour, especially dangerous ones, it's only wise to do so.

Thursday said...

Donald,

I enjoy your posts over at the American Catholic.

I must challenge you on your statement:

"People who judge by the group and not the individual are nitwits."

If that is true, then you and everyone you have ever met are nitwits. Everyone judges (to some extent or another) other people by the group or groups they belong to. Everyone, and I really mean everyone, engages in stereotyping. It is a basic human necessity. We have no choice but to make judgment calls about the people we encounter everyday and to make those calls based on limited information. The most basic judgment is whether that person poses a threat of imminent physical harm to me or those I care about. There are a myriad of other judgments we must make as well – is that person going to helpful to me or can I be helpful to him, etc. We also want to determine whether that person is a member of some group that we are part of, for example, do we share the same religion, interests, positions in life, etc. Since we cannot know everything about every person, we are forced to make judgments about them with limited information, relying on clues. With the exception of a few of our closest family members and friends we never get the opportunity to really know somebody as an individual. With everyone else, we wind up making educated guesses, playing the odds as best we can. And, yes, do to that we must often rely on cold, hard, cruel, dehumanizing statistics.

Most of this is obvious. An employer is interviewing two kids out of college for a job. One kid is from the group of graduates from Harvard and the other is from the group of graduates from Podunk Community College. In spite of all those trick interview questions they teach to HR personnel that supposedly ferret out the true character of the applicant, at the end of the day the employer will have to rely on hints and clues, including what groups the applicants belong to.

When it comes to groupings by race, i.e., by a limited set of certain genetic characteristics, the best evidence that I am aware of tells me that it is, in and of itself, trivial. Race is often, however, a strong clue as to the culture a person belongs to – and cultures matter. Cultures carry with them strong tendencies to habits of thought and action, to standards, values, virtues and vices. The dominant culture among a large percentage of African Americans in this country is in serious breakdown. In those situations where one has to make a quick decision based on limited information, it is prudent to take this into account and foolish not to.

Thursday said...

Continued:

In summary, stereotyping is not only morally allowable, it is impossible to avoid. Our moral obligation is to stereotype rationally and prudently, to make our judgments about people as individually tailored as possible as the situation allows – and, at times, to prudently take certain risks against the odds when charity demands. To avoid all stereotyping would be an immoral abdication of reason. To avoid stereotyping to the extent of placing ourselves and those in our care in unnecessary danger would likewise be immoral.

Donald, I am pretty sure you would agree with what I just wrote. The problem, and it is a big problem, is in making the kind of generalized platitude you made in your comment. It is part of the same problem with Patrick’s whole post. There are things to criticize about Derbyshire’s article. But Patrick’s failure to make that criticism thoughtful and specific, beyond a mere bemoaning of statistics, and your trafficking in platitudes, winds up, by default, making the clear statement that anyone who says anything not nice about black people (no matter how accurate) is, per se, a racist and deserving to have his career destroyed. Patrick and you, unwittingly perhaps, have joined the thought police force that is active in suppressing any kind of open and frank discussion on the issue of race. As long as this suppression is in full force, we will never effectively address racial issues in this country.

Patrick Archbold, I am calling you on this one. I say your post is much more harmful to dealing with the issue of race than Derbyshire’s article. It is also more unjust. It is patently wrong to celebrate Derbyshire’s firing as you do. Most of his article is spot-on accurate. His failures, by and large, are failures of omission. Your omissions are greater. He would have his children avoid black people in certain situations. You would have the career destroyed of anyone who spoke openly but not perfectly about race. Shouldn’t you be the one getting fired?

Blackrep said...

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
George Orwell

Donald R. McClarey said...

"ideaism is not reality."

No Steve, the event I stated happened. Judging individuals based on race or creed, rather than on their actions, simply is not dealing with reality.

Steve "scotju" Dalton said...

Mr McClarey, I'm not disputing that the event happened; what I'm disargeeing with is your naive ideaism that you can only judge people as individuals, not by the group they belong to. In the real world, as Thursday and other folks here have pointed out, we can not do this. To ignore certain unpleasant facts about a group might be dangerous to your health and life. And your statement that we can't judge a person by his creed is not dealing with reality. Don, we Catholics have been doing that since day one! We pass judgement on groups of people wheather or not they are Christians by our understanding of our creeds. We boldly say Jews, Muslims, and other groups can not be heirs to eternal life unless they believe what's in the creeds. I have to shake my head that a person with so much education and who's an intellectual would be so naive. Then again, George Orwell, who was quoted by Blackrep said this about them: some ideas are so absurb that only an intellectual could believe them.

Anonymous said...

I think this states the case rather well:

http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/2012/04/09/johnny-they-hardly-knew-ye/

JOB

Steve said...

This is a page from the Human Biodiversity playbook. If you haven't read anything about it, I suggest you look into it. This a real stream of conservative thought, and I can only imagine that it will grow.

There is an online publication called Alternative Right which covers these topics extensively.

There is a focus on statistics, IQ in particular, and how it figures in cultural issues. For example, years ago when I first discovered AR and was trying to figure out what it was about, I read something there about the low average IQ of the Mexican race, and how following multiple generations of living in the U.S., Mexican-descended Americans became more promiscuous, more prone to crime, etc., as they were severed from the Catholic culture of Mexico which worked as a countervailing force against these tendencies.

Is any of this true? I don't know, because I don't vet statistics. Is there value in making these correlations if they are true? Possibly, in a Freakonomics sort of way. There is a logic in assuming that low intelligence amongst a certain group combined with limited cultural restrictions would lead to certain types of behavior that aren't exactly civilization-building. But that never really seems to reveal the entire picture, and there is a sense I have whenever reading writings on these topics, that this way lies madness.

Cultural and racial aggregate data seems to show certain tendencies, particularly when those two vectors are combined. That's the basis behind a lot of Pat Buchanan's arguments, I think, which are not entirely unwarranted or without historical precedent - Belloc's analysis in Europe and the Faith of the slow takeover of Roman garrisons by barbarian peoples comes to mind.

It seems that because racial sensitivity has all the trappings of a virtue these days, we have to be very careful about how we approach these things. If we allow ourselves to be too outraged by them, we appear naive. If we put too much stock into them, we appear racist. But prudence is found, I think, somewhere in the middle.

Just don't talk about it publicly if you want to stay out of trouble.

Thursday said...

I think we can get some clarity on this subject by looking at a specific example of a group of people considered by many to be the most vile and evil of racists – so vile and evil that Mr. Archbold would gladly strip them of their livelihoods and impoverish their families and Mr. McClarey would consider them extremely out of touch with reality. These evil racists are New York cabbies.

It is well known that cab drivers in New York often pass up African Americans who are hailing a cab. One day the actor Danny Glover couldn’t get a taxi and got up in arms and New York City passed a law attempting to outlaw this practice.

Let’s think about these cabbies for a minute. Why do you suppose they refuse to pick up black people? Is it a skin color thing? I don’t think so. The vast majority of the cabs I have ever ridden in New York (and I’ve ridden my share) have been driven by “people of color,” predominantly fresh-off-the-boat Pakistanis, Afghanis, Indians, and others from those regions, as well as a few Hispanics and even fewer East Asians (and of those, a very small number of “white Asians” and “white Hispanics.”) – i.e., people whose skin is often as dark or darker than the average African American’s. Is it an ethnic thing? While it may simply be my ignorance, I am not aware of any traditional animus that people of the Middle East and South Asia have against Africans. So what is it? Statistics. Yes, those evil statistics. The cabbies all know that their odds of getting stiffed for the fare, mugged or killed are a lot higher if they pick up a black person. In the couple of seconds they have to assess the potential fare, they have no opportunity to do an in-depth interview or life review to fully assess the individual personality and character of the person. They have to make a quick decision based on the limited information they have at hand. Giving someone the ‘benefit of the doubt” could well prove fatal.

There’s another fact one should note. Taxi fares in New York are cheap relative to the local cost of living compared to most major cities in the world. Which is to say that New York cabbies are comparatively poor; so poor that, by and large, only recent immigrants will take the job. The cabbies do not have the luxury to refuse fares capriciously. Nevertheless, they pass up potential income that they can hardly afford to lose. Are we to presume they are acting on irrational prejudices? That they are out of touch with reality? No. I submit they are acting prudently, using their reason and exercising their God-given right to get back home safe and sound to their families with income, life and limb intact.

Thursday said...

Let me tell you a story about some of these “racist” cabbies. Not long after New York City passed its law targeting these cabbies there was a string of muggings of cab drivers. If memory serves me well, at least one and probably more of the cabbies were killed and a number were injured. In any event, the first victim survived and was able to give a description to the police, who published a sketch of the attacker in all the City papers, showing a fairly ordinary-looking African American man. After several of these attacks over several weeks, they finally caught the perp. It turned out that the original police sketch was dead-on. You could not have done any better if you had had a photo the attacker.

This puzzled me at first. How was it that this man could get away with attacking several cab drivers over several weeks when, after the very first attack, every cabbie in the City knew exactly what he looked like? The answer was not far away – Danny Glover’s law. New York City took this law very seriously, deploying under-cover policemen throughout the City hailing cabs (taking them away from trivial pursuits such as busting up drug operations, organized crime and gang banging) and imposing very large fines for any infraction – by very large I mean at least a couple of month’s rent for a poor person in New York. After the first mugging, the cabbies faced a real devil’s dilemma: when they saw someone hailing them who looked like the attacker, they had to choose between the risk of getting mugged and even killed or the risk of getting hit with (for them) a catastrophic fine. Several of them chose badly and paid dearly.

Let’s not forget the power dynamics here. You could bet your last dime that if African American cabbies were refusing rides to poor Pakistani immigrants there would have never been any such law. One group has clout at City Hall and the other does not.

The moral of the story is this. There can be real, negative consequences when professional race-baiters and na├»ve do-gooders attempt to stamp out “racism” with ill-conceived laws or, as is more popular these days, anti-Prop 8/Media Matters-style attacks on people’s livelihoods. Not the least of these consequences is a poisoned atmosphere that makes any fruitful conversation all but impossible.

Mr. Archbold, I am still calling you out. You have some ‘splainin’ to do. It appears, on the surface at least, you may have let your prejudice against an atheist get the better of you.

Steve "scotju" Dalton said...

Thursday, your remarks are on target. You, like Andy, pay attention to reality, and don't allow false pc sentimentality to hinder your insights. And Thursday, Andy, you, and myself are not racists, we are race realists.

Pablo the Mexican said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Steve "scotju" Dalton said...

Pablo, I will certainly pray for this young man. I hope you can find some faithful Black Catholics he can associate with so he won't fall into the clutches of the Hoodie boys.

Mary De Voe said...

my two cents:Abraham Lincoln gave every freed slave forty acres and a mule, if they wanted it. Both my maternal and paternal grandparents came from Poland where they had no slaves. The language of victimhood is ingrained in the language of the black people and may be heard often. In the City of Philadelphia as it is said, “Don’t stop for the red traffic lights at night.”
Mumia Abu-Jamal, aka Wesley Cook, as all Black Panthers, declared himself a sovereign nation of one individual with diplomatic immunity and thereby severed himself from citizenship in America. When William Cook, a brother, was stopped by traffic patrolman Daniel Faulkner, in the city of Philadelphia, Abu-Jamal assessed the police stop as an act of war against his and his brother’s sovereign diplomatic immunity and executed the peace keeping officer by a bullet first to Faulkner’s back then four more shots to the fallen police officer as he lay on the pavement, including one to his face. Faulkner had got off one shot and Abu-Jamal was captured.
Daniel Faulkner is a sovereign person, a sovereign nation of one individual who was attacked and killed for keeping the peace. As a peace-keeping officer, Daniel Faulkner represented the sovereign City of Philadelphia, in the sovereignty of the United States. It is one sovereign nation (Wesley Cook) disrespecting another sovereign nation (Daniel Faulkner) through an act of war and aggression against Daniel Faulkner and his sovereignty and diplomatic immunity. This case must be tried under the articles of war and aggression and perhaps even treason as this Abu-Jamal took advantage of this country and citizenship.
Today, Mumia Abu Jamal, is in prison trying his case through appeals to Superior Court and has many supporters. Abu Jamal’s case must go to be tried by the war tribunal and Jamal as an enemy combatant, by his own choosing.
At my last two jobs, I had black bosses who used the vicitmhood language. My best friends at both jobs were African American women, many, kind, gentle and intelligent. They too, used the victimhood language, because that is how they grew up in the South, yet Christianity made all the difference and common sense was their companion. Here in Maryland, I have black lady friends and again Christianity makes all the difference. "Christianity makes us human" (Fulton J. Sheen). Speaking of groupings, tell me who your friends are and I will tell you who you are. If atheism had not taken away our civil rights, John Derbyshire might still have a job.

Anonymous said...

Undemiably, there is a correlation between criminal conduct and race. As there is with class, gender, etc. Statistics are worthless, if they mask scapegoating individuals in tne name of communities, and communities without reference to the underlying problems. My argument is not with white people who do not drive through black neighborhoods, but it is about such 'common sense' arguments masking abdication of christian responsibility.

It is to no one's benefit to deny statistics that are true, but such truths, if they do not move us to have a particular love of the black community, are Satanic. For, im sure Satan, like Lot and Abraham, was faced with human indecency. But the other angels chose to love God more for his mercy, the same mercy we are called to image.

May His mercy be upon us for the sorry state of our society.

Anonymous said...

I think if you're going to post these stats of another's, enjoying his firing, you should at least investigate whether those stats are true or not. They are shocking to me. Much of MSM news is shocking to me also, and I've learned not to believe.

Are the stats true - is the first amendment then gone officially?

Free speech, but can't offend? What's that? Keep your Catholic thoughts away from me!

Steve "scotju" Dalton said...

Mary DeVoe, Abe Lincoln didn't give the freemen 40 acres and a mule. That was just a line the Radical Republicans feed the Blacks to get them to vote for them.
Your statement about the blacks always speaking the langauge of victimhood is so true. The majority of them will always talk victimhood, because their corrupt leaders encourage it, so they can push for more entitlements, set-asides, welfare payments etc. The victimhood mentality will never end until the productive members of society bring it to a screeching halt or the government finds itself out of money to pay for these freebies.

Nicole Stallworth said...

Patrick, I'm sorry so many of your commenters don't get it.

Great headline.

Steve "scotju" Dalton said...

Nicole, as one of your so-called "don't get it's", your comment shows you don't get it. I live in Peoria,Il, where Derbyshire's observations are all so true. I do not take the most direct route into Downtown Peoria anymore because it goes through the black zone. I do not go to the original mega-shopping mall anymore, because there are too many blacks kids who hang out there who are not shopping. No Nicky, I get it. Black is the color of crime, especially violent crime against their own kind and white folks. That's not prejudice, that's the headlines and titles of articles in my daily paper.

Steve "scotju" Dalton said...

BTW, Donald McClary's The American Catholic has a short article about Derbyshire's article and dismissial from National Review. Paul Zummo's piece shows he just as detached from reality as McClary is. McClary tries to demonize Derbyshire's opinion on race in the comboxes by yelling and screaming that he's and atheist and is somewhat Anti-Catholic. Well, I'm sorry he is both, but what does that have to do with his opinions on blacks? White people of all kinds of religious and secular opinions have come to the same conclusion about black misconduct and how to deal with it. I wonder why? Must be something they saw or hear, I guess. http://the-american-catholic.com/2012/04/10/the-derbyshire-kerfuffle

Svar said...

The Federal Crime stats speak for themselves. Pat Buchanan and Steve Sailer are both Catholics and they've written about this extensively.

Here's an article by Thomas Fleming on the firing: http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/2012/04/09/johnny-they-hardly-knew-ye/

Now, I'm no fan of Derb since he's a smug atheist, but what he said is true.

Tony said...

Are you guys saying you support this statement?

Pat, are you criticizing the science, or the fact that this guy stated it? I don't really know if the science is correct. So I can't comment on the truth or falsehood of the statement.

I'm sure this is verifiable. Do you have any studies to the contrary?

Tony said...

I'm sure that first century Jewish people in Palestine were wonderful as individuals, but we have to remember that a mob of them, whipped up by their selected leaders, caused our Lord to lose his life in the cross.

Post a Comment