It's About Liberty: A Conservative Forum

Topics => Media Bias/Media War => Topic started by: Pandora on April 07, 2012, 02:48:40 PM

Title: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: Pandora on April 07, 2012, 02:48:40 PM
John Derbyshire, a contributor at National Review, has published a piece at Taki's Magazine (http://takimag.com/article/the_talk_nonblack_version_john_derbyshire/print#axzz1rJjCKqSU) that has created a furor among his "conservative" NR colleagues, and drawn condemnation from other sources, because of its "racism".

Derbyshire, an aetheist, writes in the ironic style of Mark Steyn, documenting and often decrying the decline of the West, but has offered no direction in response until now, in a piece that instructs his children on safe behavior in the face of possible Black aggression.

There are calls for Derbyshire's ouster from National Review NOW, which baffles Lawrence Auster (http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/022108.html):

Quote
... I have argued that given Derbyshire’s aggressive atheism, materialism, and nihilism, and his liberal views on many specific subjects (though not, of course, on immigration), his presence at the supposed flagship magazine of American conservatism was inappropropriate to say the least. In this I was following William F. Buckley’s dictum that a committed atheist who seeks to destroy religion and regards religious people as mentally defective is, by definition, not a conservative. But Derbyshire was kept on at NR, allowed by NR’s eternal-boy editors to keep on undermining conservatism and its Christian basis from within. But now that Derbyshire has said something true about race,—and said it, not in his usual jocular anecdotal personalistic unserious way which has always protected him in the past, but said it seriously, as a set of general propositions that parents should teach their children—it appears that the chestless wonders at NR want to fire him.

If they do fire him, it will mean that NR had no problem with a contributor who violated fundamental tenets of conservatism, but that they do have a problem with a contributor who violates fundamental tenets of liberalism. Which would confirm what I’ve been saying about that ruined hulk of a once-important magazine for the last ten or 15 years.


I've not posted Derbyshire's "offense" here because it contains many links within to fortify its points.  It is definitely worth reading, in view of the events of last year's violence and aggression by "urban youth" and what I fully expect to escalate in the coming months. 

Auster's piece is worthy as well, as a window into the hypocrisy and unwillingness to SEE that runs as rampant in the "conservative community" as it does in the Left.
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: Pandora on April 07, 2012, 03:07:10 PM
Hmmmmm.  Is NRO's Robert Weissberg next? (http://www.nationalreview.com/phi-beta-cons/295264/academic-crimethink-robert-weissberg)

Or is his piece non-specific enough to escape the "Crimethink" violation?
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: charlesoakwood on April 07, 2012, 07:20:09 PM

If they want to social-engineer this thing correctly they will follow
the Tuskegee model of affirmative action, that is if they really
want a positive outcome.  Of course, we know they don't want
a positive outcome, their Party would lose power and make it
necessary for a complete transformation before again being
competitive.


Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: Pandora on April 07, 2012, 08:25:10 PM

If they want to social-engineer this thing correctly they will follow
the Tuskegee model of affirmative action, that is if they really
want a positive outcome.  Of course, we know they don't want
a positive outcome, their Party would lose power and make it
necessary for a complete transformation before again being
competitive.


The "conservative" media?
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: charlesoakwood on April 07, 2012, 08:38:30 PM

Social engineers.

 ::speechless:: I've been reading Michelle's thesis and sentence structure's gone to the dawgs.
                                                                                                                                                ::unknowncomic::
                       
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: IronDioPriest on April 07, 2012, 09:02:16 PM
Gotta love the bold truth of number 11:

(Links to supporting studies in original)

Quote
(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.”

Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: charlesoakwood on April 07, 2012, 09:36:38 PM

Until after the era of the Great Society there were no packs of
blacks roaming the streets committing crimes upon society,
they knew better and thought better of themselves.  A lower
IQ number does cause one to be more easily swayed by the
crowd but it doesn't cause the crowd or the perspective that
created it. 

It would be an act of intelligence to create an environment
where it is known that this activity is not permitted.  It wouldn't
be politically advantageous though. 

Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: Alphabet Soup on April 07, 2012, 10:57:57 PM

Until after the era of the Great Society there were no packs of
blacks roaming the streets committing crimes upon society,
they knew better and thought better of themselves.  A lower
IQ number does cause one to be more easily swayed by the
crowd but it doesn't cause the crowd or the perspective that
created it.  

It would be an act of intelligence to create an environment
where it is known that this activity is not permitted.  It wouldn't
be politically advantageous though.  



Not altogether true Charles. In 1962 my family and I were living in New Orleans. Notably, it was the year that the city desegregated the public schools. I was too young to be out after dark but I had two older brothers who weren't. What my folks didn't know when we rented the house we stayed in was that we were situated less than a mile from darktown. There was more than one occasion when my brothers were chased relentlessly for block after block by....packs of blacks roaming the streets committing crimes.

In very short order my parents took us out of public school and enrolled us in one of the private schools that had been hurriedly put together in local churches. I still remember being on the bus and pulling up next to another bus carrying a bunch of blacks and being spit on.

Fortunately my dad got his transfer and we moved the hell out of that city.

I think your basic point is still valid however.

edit: altard-proofed
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: charlesoakwood on April 07, 2012, 11:35:37 PM

The politicization of morality is not a new phenomenon, (http://theothermccain.com/2012/04/07/profiles-in-narcissism-charles-johnson-blinded-by-his-own-self-righteousness/)
but it has gained a new vehemence in recent decades as the traditional sources of moral authority — the church, the family, the local community, etc. — have declined in influence, and as bourgeois virtues (sobriety, chastity, industry, thrift, etc.) have been undermined by the counter-culture.
...

the AIDS crisis of the 1980s spiraled out of control in part because liberals were unwilling to shut down the gay bathouses that profited by facilitating the anonymous promiscuity which spread the pandemic. (David Horowitz and Peter Collier include an amazing chapter on this in their 1989 book, Destructive Generation: Second Thoughts About the Sixties.) The AIDS issue became a moral crusade for liberals, who saw themselves defending the “rights” of an unpopular minority in a battle against oppression, as if the “right” to commercialized sodomy trumped legitimate public health concerns.
...

So in the wee hours this morning, when I noticed people on Twitter giving Dave Weigel grief over something written by John Derbyshire, my reaction was, “What the hell is this about?”

After investigating, I wrote a post:

[blockquote]  While it is impossible to imagine any scenario in which Lowry won’t be forced to fire Derbyshire now, I’m actually more fascinated by the Left’s attempt to bully Weigel for failing to denounce Derbyshire in strong enough terms.[/blockquote]

This is a familiar ritual, The Denunciation Derby, in which liberals demand that everyone compete for the Sweepstakes Prize offered for whoever can express the most indignant outrage against the target
...
Meanwhile, Lowry has fired Derbyshire, describing the offending column as “so outlandish it constitutes a kind of letter of resignation.”

Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: Pandora on April 07, 2012, 11:54:15 PM
So, the faux conservative has fired the aethist anti-conservative for FINALLY writing truthfully about the state of the Black race issue in this country?

A pox on all their houses for refusing to SEE and acclaim the Truth.

Derbyshire knew what he was doing; it was a letter of resignation.  With a BANG.  Now, whimper asswipes.
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: charlesoakwood on April 08, 2012, 12:25:24 AM

A man of constancy and spine, they couldn't take it.

        ...prolly wind up at The American Spectator (http://spectator.org/)

Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: Pandora on April 08, 2012, 12:30:25 AM

A man of constancy and spine, they couldn't take it.

        ...prolly wind up at The American Spectator (http://spectator.org/)



Constancy?  Perhaps.  Spine?  Not really.  Read Auster's definition of Derbyshire again, in my first post.  The right liberals at NRO had no problem with his undermining of conservatism until he crossed the liberal line of race realism.  For right liberals, that's the unforgivable no-no.
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: charlesoakwood on April 08, 2012, 12:55:15 AM

Ok, I went back and the closest I could find of definition was, "I have argued that given Derbyshire’s aggressive atheism, materialism, and nihilism, and his liberal views on many specific subjects..."

My knowledge of him is that he wrote what he believed and he stuck to it, he stood up for it,
he wasn't interested in reaching across anybody's isle.  It takes a spine to do that.

I am sick to my stomach at Republican paucity and it seems that every day they are given
one more example and one more test. And they fail.  They are all so infected with getalong
if they don't wake up they will succumb.  We must help them overcome this failure of heart.
They are in a cocoon (hey Don) and don't see what their inactivity is doing to this nation.
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: Pandora on April 08, 2012, 01:03:10 AM

Ok, I went back and the closest I could find of definition was, "I have argued that given Derbyshire’s aggressive atheism, materialism, and nihilism, and his liberal views on many specific subjects..."

My knowledge of him is that he wrote what he believed and he stuck to it, he stood up for it,
he wasn't interested in reaching across anybody's isle.  It takes a spine to do that.

I am sick to my stomach at Republican paucity and it seems that every day they are given
one more example and one more test. And they fail.  They are all so infected with getalong
if they don't wake up they will succumb.  We must help them overcome this failure of heart.
They are in a cocoon (hey Don) and don't see what their inactivity is doing to this nation.

Quote
...Derbyshire’s aggressive atheism, materialism, and nihilism, and his liberal views on many specific subjects..."

Auster's analysis is bang-on target.  You'd had to have read Derbyshire at NRO for some time in order to get that, and it is understandable if you've spent your time elsewhere.  He is one of the reasons, just one, I quit NRO.

Quote
My knowledge of him is that he wrote what he believed and he stuck to it, he stood up for it,
he wasn't interested in reaching across anybody's isle.  It takes a spine to do that.

It takes no concession to admit he wrote it.  That he sticks to it is something of which I have no ken at this time; where is his defense written?

Not even the point, CO.  His is one quavering voice in the wilderness right now.
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: Pandora on April 08, 2012, 01:36:54 AM
Rick Moran (http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/04/should_john_derbyshire_be_fired_for_being_an_insensitive_lout.html), another "right"liberal-talking know-nothing:

Quote
Derbyshire's musings are fodder for those who always want to see racism in the way that whites percieve blacks in America. In fact, perception trumps reality in the black community when it comes to attitudes by whites toward blacks. Part of this is certainly due to the life experience of black Americans who deal with prejudice and bigotry on a daily basis in their contacts with whites

Really?  REALLY?

Quote
But there is also too much a tendency to generalize and stereotype - not surprising because those qualities are part of being human and are hard to resist for anyone of any race.

This is unfair. But it is also the way things are. And there is a fine line between genuine "political correctness" that should be resisted and empathy and sensitivity that stills our thoughts and makes us bite our tongue rather than give voice to our fears, our doubts, and our own flawed perceptions of how blacks view whites. Part of getting along is simply keeping your mouth shut out of respect for the notion that no matter how you say something, it is likely to be misconstrued and therefore, be considered insensitive. "Intent" means little when your words will either be deliberately or innocently twisted to conform to someone's worldview.

Derbyshire goes too far. His qualified, common sense advice on staying safe notwithstanding, there is an ugly undertone to his writing that is, if not racist, then certainly ignorant and shallow. Don't play good Samaritan if a black is "in distress" on the highway? What if the unfortunate needs assistance that would save his life? What kind of lessons is he teaching his children? And while only the most rabid racialist would say something negative about Derbyshire's warning to his kids to avoid heavily black neighborhoods, what is his problem with attending events where there are a lot of blacks, or his advice not to live in a municipality run by black politicians? This is utter nonsense and shows an ignorance profoundly disturbing to the sensibilities of fair minded people.

This is exactly what I'm talking about.  Another Eloi preaching to the Elois.

Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: charlesoakwood on April 08, 2012, 02:16:51 AM

These people don't make sense, they put words together in some
order that makes them feel good.  Their logic makes me dizzy.
American Thinker will publish anyone, it seems.  Darwin will take
care of these people (drunkards and apologists) in his own way. 

Who is this Rick Moran?  Has he ever been cited at IAL before?
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: Sectionhand on April 08, 2012, 04:31:26 AM
All Darbyshire did was vocalize what everyone knows to be the truth ... at least anyone with half a brain !
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: IronDioPriest on April 08, 2012, 11:28:10 AM
This is how thoroughly the Leftist narrative on race has polluted reasoning of society as a whole. One cannot even raise an observation of truth that runs counter to it without suffering a rebuke from a vast majority.

The vast majority of people will never admit the truth, let alone discuss it on the merits. Mobs of Blacks will roam the streets, randomly attacking, robbing, beating, and even killing Whites just because they're White, and no one will be permitted to discuss it with honesty without facing consequences.

Thus, it will take men and women without fear of consequences to bring the truth into the light.
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: Alphabet Soup on April 08, 2012, 12:03:44 PM

These people don't make sense, they put words together in some
order that makes them feel good.  Their logic makes me dizzy.
American Thinker will publish anyone, it seems.  Darwin will take
care of these people (drunkards and apologists) in his own way. 

Who is this Rick Moran?  Has he ever been cited at IAL before?


I thought he was someone I worked with once upon a time (he wasn't) and did some searching for his background. This told me everything I need to know about him and his, er, orientation:

Quote
Advocate of the Year
Working Mother Magazine

    * March 2008

Recognized for my work in inclusion and diversity. This award is given by Working Mother annually. I am the executive sponsor for the LGBT employee resource group at Cisco. I was able to build a cross ERG program around "No Name Calling Week" from GLSEN.org. This was the first time the groups had worked together on a project.
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: Pandora on April 08, 2012, 01:48:06 PM
I don't know that you've got the correct Rick Moran there, 'Soup. 

The Moran cited above writes for American Thinker, edits for PJ Media, and on his blog, I found this (http://rightwingnuthouse.com/about/):

Quote
RIGHTWING NUTHOUSE is administered by Rick Moran, a 52 year old libertine from Algonquin, IL.

A freelance writer with more than 15 years experience in grass roots political action, Moran has worked for a number of business trade associations running programs that teach local businessmen how to become active in the political process. Among the trade associations he has worked for at both the national and local level are The Associated Builders and Contractors (ABC) , the American Subcontractors Association (ASA), and the Painting and Decorating Foundation (PDF).

He has been involved in more than 20 political campaigns as both a volunteer and paid staffer, having sat on a dozen or more steering committees as well as acted as speechwriter for a number of local candidates.

Born in Libertyville, IL Moran grew up in Mount Prospect, IL and attended Drake University where he graduated in 1976 with a Bachelor of Fine Arts Degree. He has 9 brothers and sisters, all of whom are much more liberal than he is which makes for interesting family reunions.

His brother Terry hosts the ABC news show Nightline while his brother Greg is a reporter for the San Diego Union.

Then again, who knows.
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: Alphabet Soup on April 08, 2012, 09:55:03 PM
Quote
I don't know that you've got the correct Rick Moran there, 'Soup.

True enough on second look. And different from the Moron, er, Moran that I knew as well.  :o
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: Pandora on April 08, 2012, 10:24:24 PM
Quote
I don't know that you've got the correct Rick Moran there, 'Soup.

True enough on second look. And different from the Moron, er, Moran that I knew as well.  :o

Nevertheless, still a maroon.

The "conservative" pundits falling all over their pure selves in calling Derb a racist, while I've been thinking what he'd written since last summer. 

Feh.  Meh.  And sneh.
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: Glock32 on April 08, 2012, 10:56:12 PM
I seem to recall seeing Rick Moran's name mixed up in that whole GOProud-CPAC controversy a year or two ago. More of that whole "fiscal conservative" stuff, the exponents of which seem unable to grasp that their economics and budgets are meaningless in a world devoid of moral substance.
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: trapeze on April 10, 2012, 02:05:23 AM
My thoughts on this issue:

I put off writing about this until I had had sufficient time to read about it (and at this point there is more than a little to read) and think about it. I mean this as no criticism toward those who have already commented...I am admittedly slow on this issue for various reasons that I will not go into.

I think that the best way (for me) to look at this is to go to the source material and comment on it point by point.

Quote
(1) Among your fellow citizens are forty million who identify as black, and whom I shall refer to as black*. The cumbersome (and MLK-noncompliant) term “African-American” seems to be in decline, thank goodness. “Colored” and “Negro” are archaisms. What you must call “the ‘N’ word” is used freely among blacks but is taboo to nonblacks.

*and for my own purposes I will use the word, "white" or maybe, "non-black."

This is something that has irritated me for most of my life...that is, the whole "identity" issue and "what shall we call ourselves?" thingy. This notion buys into the very liberal concept of dividing ourselves into groups and categories...race, religion, sex, country of ancestral origin, etc. I remember at one time the PC term was "Afro-Americans" which I thought was particularly absurd since it was more or less based on the name of a hair style. Lincoln quoted from the gospel of Mark that, "a house divided against itself cannot stand," and those words are no less true today (about dividing us along the above mentioned lines) than they were then.

Getting into the whole PC nature of the "bad" words... I am personally offended that we can tolerate blacks using the word "nigger" while non-blacks  self-censor ourselves to the ridiculous "N-word" which everyone knows to represent "nigger" as if that somehow makes it acceptable. If a word is taboo for some then it should be taboo for all. And if allowable for some then allowable for all. And if "colored" and "negro" are not acceptable then why can we still use them in a purely academic discussion while we are simultaneously forbidden from spelling out "nigger" in a similar type of discussion? Obviously, "nigger" is no more acceptable than any other racial epithet (kike, spic, wop, hebe, etc.) when used in a derogatory, defamatory or insulting way...but, we will never get over any of this crap as long as mere words are given such power over some of us while not a problem at all for others.

We should be reviled at any attempt to divide or subdivide us. We are Americans. End of story.

Quote
(2) American blacks are descended from West African populations, with some white and aboriginal-American admixture. The overall average of non-African admixture is 20-25 percent. The admixture distribution is nonlinear, though: “It seems that around 10 percent of the African American population is more than half European in ancestry.”

I file this under, "Who cares?" This makes absolutely no impact on me at all...no more than my own particular and distant European heritage does. I am first and foremost a child of God and after that an American citizen. If anyone is confused by this concept then they are beyond hope and I certainly won't trouble myself attempting to explain it further.

Quote
(3) Your own ancestry is mixed north-European and northeast-Asian, but blacks will take you to be white.

My reaction to this point is similar to the previous one. The lone distinction is the issue of how I or others may be perceived. Yes, it is important to realize that some people (in this case blacks but certainly not limited to blacks...it is said by some that the most racist people on Earth are the Chinese) will judge me by the color of my skin instead of the content of my character. Although it would be smug to say that that is their problem but the truth is that, because of their inherent racism, it's my problem, too. This is largely an "awareness" issue. Be aware of how others might pigeonhole you and be prepared for the circumstances that that might entail.

Quote
(4) The default principle in everyday personal encounters is, that as a fellow citizen, with the same rights and obligations as yourself, any individual black is entitled to the same courtesies you would extend to a nonblack citizen. That is basic good manners and good citizenship. In some unusual circumstances, however—e.g., paragraph (10h) below—this default principle should be overridden by considerations of personal safety.

I suppose that the above point is as close as one might expect an atheist to quote scripture...it is, more or less, "the golden rule," with an exception thrown in for "unusual circumstances." Like when one might expect to get one's head bashed in. I would certainly broaden it to include everyone of every race, ethnicity, religion, etc. For instance, I would certainly extend respect and good manners to a muslim except in cases of "unusual circumstances" such as those times when I had good reason to believe that they might be trying to give me the "full infidel" treatment. Then they can get screwed. "Turning the other cheek" is certainly a command of Christ by I sincerely doubt that he meant it to be a "suicide pact" or to extrapolate it to the point where it could result in risk to life and limb. So this point is a universal truth (Do unto others...) with a common sense exception for self preservation.

Quote
(5) As with any population of such a size, there is great variation among blacks in every human trait (except, obviously, the trait of identifying oneself as black). They come fat, thin, tall, short, dumb, smart, introverted, extroverted, honest, crooked, athletic, sedentary, fastidious, sloppy, amiable, and obnoxious. There are black geniuses and black morons. There are black saints and black psychopaths. In a population of forty million, you will find almost any human type. Only at the far, far extremes of certain traits are there absences. There are, for example, no black Fields Medal winners. While this is civilizationally consequential, it will not likely ever be important to you personally. Most people live and die without ever meeting (or wishing to meet) a Fields Medal winner.

Well, right off the get go the author gets it wrong. There is (at least by my observation over the years) a very definite tendency for some blacks to identify themselves and others on some kind of a weird sliding scale of "blackness." This is, by my definition, stupid and, yes, I will say it, racist. Again, by my observation, this sliding scale of "blackness" is almost always used to marginalize those blacks with whom the "categorizer" disagrees with...usually in terms of politics. I can point to just about any black conservative (Clarence Thomas, Thomas Sowell, etc.) as classic examples of "not being black enough" as judged by "authentic" blacks. Pure rubbish and absolutely self serving and racist.

Most of the rest of this point is true. Except that there are obvious exceptions. Blacks have a distinct and statistical advantage in certain areas of athletics. Is this racist? Of course not. Men have a distinct and statistical advantage over women in athletics. Physiological differences are what they are and race (or sex) are beside the point. Deal with it.

As to the gratuitous shot at blacks for not yet having the distinction of earning a Fields Medal, well, more about that later.

Quote
(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.

The implication (by way of the link) is that blacks are statistically more aggressive (violent) and prone to criminal activity than whites (or asians). I won't dispute the statistics and math in the linked article because I am not a statistician or mathematician. But I will cast a few of my doubts upon the implied conclusion: that this is a difference caused by race alone. I believe that not a small amount of the behavior described is the result of cultural rather than racial factors. The black culture of today is substantially different than it was 100 years ago. Or 500 years ago. The black culture of today is the end result of several decades of social engineering by liberal politicians and theoreticians. Mostly the result of good intentions gone bad...though not always (Margaret Sanger comes immediately to mind). So now we find ourselves where we are with libs and Democrats enforcing a tacit "plantation" system for blacks. Although...they are now pushing their welfare dependency model on an ever expanding base of non-blacks.

So while there is truth in the implication one must at least acknowledge the complicity in liberals, Democrats and various welfare institutions for having brought us to this sorry state of affairs...a culture that encourages dependency, sloth and violence by way of "the soft bigotry of low expectations." So, no, while I don't disagree with the numbers and I certainly don't make excuses for bad behavior, I most definitely see where the problem originates. It's the culture.

Quote
(7) Of most importance to your personal safety are the very different means for antisocial behavior, which you will see reflected in, for instance, school disciplinary measures, political corruption, and criminal convictions.

This is, again, a matter of culture. I will say, though, that the link regarding political corruption is gratuitous...an anomaly...you can't tell me that black politicians are more prone to corruption than any other race (or sex) of men. Political power tends toward the absolute and absolute power can quite easily seduce and corrupt one absolutely. Blacks have no corner on political corruption. Or sin in general.

Quote
(8) These differences are magnified by the hostility many blacks feel toward whites. Thus, while black-on-black behavior is more antisocial in the average than is white-on-white behavior, average black-on-white behavior is a degree more antisocial yet.

Finally, a pure truth. Sort of. It's true today. But a few decades back it was whites who were the undisputed champs at inter-racial violence. That was true then, and this is true today. Same sh*t, different day.

Quote
(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.

Another truth. But again, sort of. What the author is (generally) describing is "mob psychology" with a racial bent. There is nothing here that is uniquely black other than the penchant to attack whites. European soccer hooliganism is almost totally devoid of a race based motivation. A few start trouble and those who are easily led fall in line. Riots happen (and have happened) everywhere. So while there is most definitely truth in the author's point (especially today) it is by no means a uniquely black phenomenon.

Quote
(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.

The above bullet points are pretty much common sense and accepted conventional wisdom. Sad, but true. One need look no further than the words of the infamous race baiter and poverty pimp, Jesse Jackson to see the truth in these items. He was famously quoted as saying that he was apprehensive at hearing footsteps behind him on a street at night but was relieved to turn and see that it was a white person.

Quote
(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.”

I find this statement to be somewhat gratuitous. Intelligence tests tend to be, by their very nature, subjective...that is, who designed the test? I cannot believe that the brain of a black man is physiologically different from another race in any significant way any more than I can believe that blood is different. It isn't. What is different is the cultures. There is most definitely a difference in cultures where asians consistently outperform whites who consistently outperform hispanics who consistently outperform blacks. The author implies that this is a physiological issue and I find that to be an extremely dubious conclusion regardless of the IQ test results that he points to.

Quote
(12) There is a magnifying effect here, too, caused by affirmative action. In a pure meritocracy there would be very low proportions of blacks in cognitively demanding jobs. Because of affirmative action, the proportions are higher. In government work, they are very high. Thus, in those encounters with strangers that involve cognitive engagement, ceteris paribus the black stranger will be less intelligent than the white. In such encounters, therefore—for example, at a government office—you will, on average, be dealt with more competently by a white than by a black. If that hostility-based magnifying effect (paragraph 8) is also in play, you will be dealt with more politely, too. “The DMV lady“ is a statistical truth, not a myth.

This is true but it is true because we (as a society) have allowed it to become this way. Again, I lay the blame at liberal Democrat social engineering. Affirmative action and the other arms of the social welfare state have most definitely resulted in "the soft bigotry of low expectations." My belief is that people, given a challenge, will rise to the occasion. Blacks have been screwed over for years by the Democrat social engineers. It sucks but it's true.

Quote
(13) In that pool of forty million, there are nonetheless many intelligent and well-socialized blacks. (I’ll use IWSB as an ad hoc abbreviation.) You should consciously seek opportunities to make friends with IWSBs. In addition to the ordinary pleasures of friendship, you will gain an amulet against potentially career-destroying accusations of prejudice.

(14) Be aware, however, that there is an issue of supply and demand here. Demand comes from organizations and businesses keen to display racial propriety by employing IWSBs, especially in positions at the interface with the general public—corporate sales reps, TV news presenters, press officers for government agencies, etc.—with corresponding depletion in less visible positions. There is also strong private demand from middle- and upper-class whites for personal bonds with IWSBs, for reasons given in the previous paragraph and also (next paragraph) as status markers.

(15) Unfortunately the demand is greater than the supply, so IWSBs are something of a luxury good, like antique furniture or corporate jets: boasted of by upper-class whites and wealthy organizations, coveted by the less prosperous. To be an IWSB in present-day US society is a height of felicity rarely before attained by any group of human beings in history. Try to curb your envy: it will be taken as prejudice (see paragraph 13).

I find the final three points to be highly offensive. I would no more use a black person in this way than I would anyone else (to further my own ends).

Now here is where his article ends. I would, however, add a few more points of my own.

A) Do not discuss race in mixed company. Not ever. There is nothing to be gained and potentially a great deal to be lost by needlessly bringing up the subject of race in a group of people that you do not know. This especially includes online social media. Am I being a racist or a chickensh*t to advise such a course? No. I think of it as something akin to "discretion being the better part of valor." I similarly don't discuss politics or religion in mixed company. Lincoln said, "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt." The problem with shooting one's mouth off about subjects such as these is that everyone has an opinion and chances are it won't be yours. Why risk alienating a potential (or worse, an existing) client and losing a business situation? Or being socially shunned? Not worth it. Keep mouth closed.

B) Be aware that, as a non-black, in today's world, if there is ever a conflict with a black chances are that you are going to lose. I am not talking about a physical conflict. As an example, imagine being a non-black employer and going before an EEOC review in a conflict with a black employee. Chances are you will lose regardless of the facts. Sad but true.

C) Be aware that some blacks are ALWAYS looking for ANY reason to find and take offense at ANY comment or action by a non-black. I have had this happen on numerous occasions where the seemingly most innocuous comment is suddenly pounced upon for the purpose of putting you in your place. It's stupid but it happens.

I am certain that there are other points that I would list if I could think of them but those are the ones that immediately come to mind.

That said, we are all created in the image of God. We are all God's children. We have all fallen short of the glory of God and are incapable of overcoming the consequences of our sinful behavior in our own strength. These artificial divisions, of which race is only one, are a tool of Satan in an attempt to defeat us and they should be thought of in this way. None of the prescriptions of man (I'm talking to you, libs) will ever succeed in overcoming what is essentially a problem rooted in the sin nature of humanity. Seek the answer elsewhere.

So, try and exercise wisdom in your dealings with others no matter what the color of their skin might be. In a perfect world none of this crap would be necessary.
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: Libertas on April 10, 2012, 07:14:38 AM
Everything out to begin and end with the statement you made early on Trap - "We are Americans. End of story."  But, unfortunately there are those who through greed or malice, think they can profit from not ending the story.

And, to confirm your points A,B, & C - I have personally experienced them myself.  Being I am who I am, I am not easily cornered, so I emergered unscathed, but I emerged more circumspect and prepared as a result.

 ;)

Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: trapeze on April 10, 2012, 08:34:56 AM
In a variation of the sliding scale of "blackness," the profoundly evil Jeremiah Wright claims that "Clarence Thomas is worshipping some other God."

LINK (http://www.theblaze.com/stories/rev-wright-unleashes-new-racially-charged-sermons-justice-clarence-thomas-is-worshipping-some-other-god/)

Hardly surprising that he would make such a statement.
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: IronDioPriest on April 10, 2012, 09:29:25 AM
That's a good and thoughtful roundup Trap. I would say that in a couple areas where you noted that Derbyshire was attributing a characteristic to race, I perceived instead that he was just making a general observation about behavior, race being the obvious observable commonality. In other words, I don't think he was saying "Blacks do X because they're Black", but rather, "Blacks do X."

A small distinction, but relevant, I think - the former being more indicative of racist intent than the latter.
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: charlesoakwood on April 10, 2012, 10:55:57 AM

...

My thoughts on this issue:


That said, we are all created in the image of God. We are all God's children. We have all fallen short of the glory of God and are incapable of overcoming the consequences of our sinful behavior in our own strength. These artificial divisions, of which race is only one, are a tool of Satan in an attempt to defeat us and they should be thought of in this way. None of the prescriptions of man (I'm talking to you, libs) will ever succeed in overcoming what is essentially a problem rooted in the sin nature of humanity. Seek the answer elsewhere.

So, try and exercise wisdom in your dealings with others no matter what the color of their skin might be. In a perfect world none of this crap would be necessary.

The whole piece is an excellent deconstruction, better said than any, it should be published.
Do you have a diary at RedState?


Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: Pandora on April 10, 2012, 11:12:37 AM
Quote
Quote
(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.”

Quote
I find this statement to be somewhat gratuitous. Intelligence tests tend to be, by their very nature, subjective...that is, who designed the test? I cannot believe that the brain of a black man is physiologically different from another race in any significant way any more than I can believe that blood is different. It isn't. What is different is the cultures. There is most definitely a difference in cultures where asians consistently outperform whites who consistently outperform hispanics who consistently outperform blacks. The author implies that this is a physiological issue and I find that to be an extremely dubious conclusion regardless of the IQ test results that he points to.

Perhaps what you say about the subjectiveness of IQ tests is so, but it is quite obvious that there are physiological differences resulting in superior athletic performance.  According to "conventional mores" is this not to be admitted or discussed either because it's racist?
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: IronDioPriest on April 10, 2012, 11:34:02 AM
You know what? As the father of a Chinese born daughter who has not been in China since she was 11 months old, and who has been thoroughly and completely raised as an American child, I'm here to offer my anecdotal observation that she is inherently more academically intelligent than my other kids, albeit marginally.

She spoke earlier - even though she never heard English until she was 11 months old. She learned to read earlier, and easier. Her concentration is superior. Her memory is superior - almost photographic. Her fine motor skills are superior.

That could be just how and who she is. But for her, at least, the "Asians are smarter" stereotype fits, and gives me cause to consider rejecting the cultural argument as the sole cause of the disparities between races.

After all, we freely acknowledge physical differences. The brain IS a part of the physical body. Obviously, the gene pools that comprise any given racial demographic contain physical similarities even within the diversities. I do not find it too much of a stretch to wonder if the physical differences between the races also manifest in the brain. Looking at my daughter brings that question even more into focus.

Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: trapeze on April 10, 2012, 11:40:59 AM

...

My thoughts on this issue:


That said, we are all created in the image of God. We are all God's children. We have all fallen short of the glory of God and are incapable of overcoming the consequences of our sinful behavior in our own strength. These artificial divisions, of which race is only one, are a tool of Satan in an attempt to defeat us and they should be thought of in this way. None of the prescriptions of man (I'm talking to you, libs) will ever succeed in overcoming what is essentially a problem rooted in the sin nature of humanity. Seek the answer elsewhere.

So, try and exercise wisdom in your dealings with others no matter what the color of their skin might be. In a perfect world none of this crap would be necessary.

The whole piece is an excellent deconstruction, better said than any, it should be published.
Do you have a diary at RedState?




I have an account at RedState for the purpose of commenting but have never published a diary. I don't see RedState or any other site allowing this to be published, if for no other reason, because of the frank discussion of the "bad words." No one really wants to discuss this stuff. Not truthfully.

Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: charlesoakwood on April 10, 2012, 11:41:18 AM

Smart people tend to marry smart people and they tend to have smart children.
If you have a culture that puts a premium on intelligence there will be a self
perpetuating becoming trait.  Same with the Jews.

Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: Pandora on April 10, 2012, 11:47:12 AM
You know what? As the father of a Chinese born daughter who has not been in China since she was 11 months old, and who has been thoroughly and completely raised as an American child, I'm here to offer my anecdotal observation that she is inherently more academically intelligent than my other kids, albeit marginally.

She spoke earlier - even though she never heard English until she was 11 months old. She learned to read earlier, and easier. Her concentration is superior. Her memory is superior - almost photographic. Her fine motor skills are superior.

That could be just how and who she is. But for her, at least, the "Asians are smarter" stereotype fits, and gives me cause to consider rejecting the cultural argument as the sole cause of the disparities between races.

After all, we freely acknowledge physical differences. The brain IS a part of the physical body. Obviously, the gene pools that comprise any given racial demographic contain physical similarities even within the diversities. I do not find it too much of a stretch to wonder if the physical differences between the races also manifest in the brain. Looking at my daughter brings that question even more into focus.

I didn't read The Bell Curve, I read a few pieces discussing some of the points made in it.  I found the intelligence distribution of men vs women interesting, in that there are more genuises and "morons" found within the male population than the female, although I don't recall if race was included in that.

This is not to say there aren't some equally or more intelligent woman, or dumber, just fewer of each compared to men.

If one can stipulate to these variations between men/women, I don't see why it's a stretch to see it between/among races as well.

Properly done studies are needed, but I doubt they'll ever be allowed -- the authors of The Bell Curve took a beating as a lesson in what not to do -- because the "unreliability" of those that do exist are needed to pooh-pooh the issue.
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: charlesoakwood on April 10, 2012, 11:57:17 AM

Give them the opportunity to show their colors.  If not them PJM or your choice.
Shop it, people should have the opportunity to publish it, people should have
the opportunity to read it.  I don't think Rich Lowry has the capacity to conceive
or express what you have.
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: IronDioPriest on April 10, 2012, 12:02:17 PM
Derbyshire doubles down: (http://www.theblaze.com/stories/the-pc-left-is-just-hysterically-deranged-john-derbyshire-speaks-out-after-leaving-national-review/)

Quote
"I'm more at ease in a room full of Chinese people than I would be in a room full of black American rap artists."

For better or worse, he's decided to stand his ground and make his point.
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: charlesoakwood on April 10, 2012, 12:07:54 PM

Wonder what his preference would be if the choice were
between the Chinese Tong or black rap artists?
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: Libertas on April 10, 2012, 12:08:02 PM
I cannot disagree with that thought.  The one is likely to be charming and have good food about, the other might just stomp the piss out of you just because you're white and deserve it.
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: Libertas on April 10, 2012, 12:09:01 PM

Wonder what his preference would be if the choice were the Chinese Tong or black rap artists?


Triads or New Black Panthers?

Hello, Triads! 
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: Alphabet Soup on April 10, 2012, 12:35:33 PM
Quote
A) Do not discuss race in mixed company. Not ever.

How about if you've been drinking?

Seriously, that was well done trap. I didn't scrutinize the original article anywhere as closely as you did ( I mostly wanted to see what the fuss was about). So I missed several things that you addressed - nicely I might add.

Not being at all afraid to talk about race - and not just black/white scenarios, I tried substituting other ethnicity's for "black" in the bulleted points to see how accurate they remained.

Quote
(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.

There's been so many jokes written around this "You ain't from around here, are ya?!" trespasser syndrome theme. I first encountered this in the south. Even after several years I was treated as an outsider. In the years since I've seen it repeated a thousand different times and a thousand different ways. Ironically, it is in cities where people tend to be much more transient and much more stand-offish that I don't encounter the bias in the same way or to the same degree.

(10b) Stay out of heavily black neighborhoods.

I've lived in heavily black neighborhoods and been left alone. And I've been in white neighborhoods and had my stuff messed with constantly. I find the comment to be so generic as to be meaningless.

(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).

I can remember a time when this wasn't the case, but recently I find this true. I also find it true in a cloud of Latinos - especially 20-somethings. But big-whoop - I generally don't go where I don't feel welcome.  I can't say that I feel especially welcome in a heavily Vietnamese or Chinese crowd but I generally don't sense being threatened by open hostility, either.

(10d) Do not attend events likely to draw a lot of blacks.

See (10c) - but also mainly cultural subtext. I would never go anywhere to see hip-hop even if it was lilly-white. I've been to church functions where the congregation was predominately black and felt entirely at ease.

(10e) If you are at some public event at which the number of blacks suddenly swells, leave as quickly as possible.

When I was young and stupid I took some acid at a rock festival. I freaked out at the crowd and have fought claustrophobia ever since. I do not tolerate crowds very well regardless of their ethnicity. If the ranks swell I'm outta there!

(10f) Do not settle in a district or municipality run by black politicians.

Not enough data to offer an opinion. A more appropriate advisory would be "Do not settle in a district or municipality run by liberal politicians".

(10g) Before voting for a black politician, scrutinize his/her character much more carefully than you would a white.

Locally I know some black politicians who are honorable men, but this recommendation to scrutinize character applies evenly across the board

(10h) Do not act the Good Samaritan to blacks in apparent distress, e.g., on the highway.

Baloney. A reasonable person must do a risk assessment that takes in many more variables than simply black=risk. He's welcome to his opinion but this one is simplistic to the point of being stupid.

(10i) If accosted by a strange black in the street, smile and say something polite but keep moving.

Yea, I suppose you could do that. (snicker). If I am "accosted" by anyone on the street I give them a look that very unambiguously says "If you value your life get the "F" away from me NOW!" I don't have a special version for blacks.

YMMV
 
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: trapeze on April 10, 2012, 01:46:23 PM
Another point that I would like to make:

What makes Derbyshire's article controversial?

There is no universal consensus on it. On one side you have the NRO editors (and others) who have been overcome by revulsion and abhorrence that this person was ever associated with them. And on the other side you have people who are saying, "Wait a minute...there are some truths here. Perhaps uncomfortable truths but truths, nonetheless." I would wager that the split on these points of view is closer to 50/50 than most people would believe.

I believe that the controversy (largely hidden due to self censorship...NRO did not allow comments on the page announcing Derbyshire's termination) has much to do with the articles linked at the beginning of Derbyshire's piece. These would be the "talk" articles in which black parents were quoted and described regarding the warnings they gave their children about how to conduct themselves with white people in general and the police in particular.

Specifically, these articles implied a double standard that black parents have a legitimate need to discuss these things with their children and (by omission) that non-black parents do not. Therein lies the thing that makes this issue controversial. After decades of social conditioning (shame) in schools and the media, most non-blacks are more than a little irritated that they are still being perceived as "the problem" in race relations.

Non-blacks have, in their minds, bent over backwards to atone for the sins of the past. The myriad accommodations (real and perceived) are everywhere from MLK deification to never-ending-affirmative-action, from black awareness month to wildly over-the-top racial hypersensitivity. I could go on and on and on. You could, too.

But it's not enough. And it's never enough.

So when this article comes out which rubs everyone's collective noses in this discrepancy, this disparity, well...people line up and choose sides. The sides aren't racism versus anti-racism. The sides in this case are "more of the same PC liberal accommodations" versus "had enough of the hypocrisy."

Some of us wish to be adults and discuss these things while others choose to remain virtual infants unable to crawl, let alone walk, toward a solution.

Derbyshire's article, as I have noted above, is far from perfect and in many ways is completely wrong. But it was a legitimate attempt at moving the ball down the field and should have been treated as such rather than being put on the receiving end of the usual liberal PC "racism" fusillade.

Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: trapeze on April 10, 2012, 03:34:51 PM

The whole piece is an excellent deconstruction, better said than any, it should be published.
Do you have a diary at RedState?




Thank you for your kind words. It means a lot.
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: trapeze on April 10, 2012, 03:46:45 PM
Dennis Prager: (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/04/10/still_the_least_racist_country_in_the_world_113784.html) America Is Still The Least Racist Nation In The World.

Quote
The left-wing drumbeat about America as racist is a combination of politics and black memory.

The political aspect is this: The Democrats and the left recognize that if blacks cease viewing themselves as victims of racism, the Democratic Party can no longer offer itself as black America's savior. And if only one out of three black Americans ceases to regard to himself as a victim of racism, and votes accordingly, it will be very difficult for Democrats to win any national election.

The other issue is black memory. Apparently, most blacks either cannot or refuse to believe that the vast majority of whites are no longer racist. Most Americans were hopeful that the election of a black president -- thereby making America the first white society in history to choose a black leader -- would finally put to rest the myth of a racist America. More than three years later it seems not to have accomplished a thing. I now suspect that if the president, the vice-president, the entire cabinet, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and all nine justices on the Supreme Court were black, it would have no impact on blacks who believe America is a racist society -- or on the left-wing depiction of America as racist.

One can only conclude that the smearing of America's good name is one of the things at which the left has been most proficient.

This is what I was attempting to point out in my follow up.

It's not enough.

It will never be enough.

These truths must be recognized. They must be shoved in everyone's face until they are recognized.

Slavery is over.

Civil rights abuses (against blacks) are over.

Deal with it.
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: IronDioPriest on April 10, 2012, 03:48:00 PM

The whole piece is an excellent deconstruction, better said than any, it should be published.
Do you have a diary at RedState?




Thank you for your kind words. It means a lot.
I agree with Charles - although I would add that in light of the indiscriminate way in which Leon Wolf has been banning people who try to engage in discussing this topic from any point of view but his, a new diary attempting to do anything but roundly heap derision on Derbyshire risks earning a banning.

But again I do agree with Charles. Your analysis of the situation is on par with the best I've seen on the web Trap, and raises some points not raised effectively elsewhere that I've seen.
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: trapeze on April 10, 2012, 04:19:47 PM
I agree with Charles - although I would add that in light of the indiscriminate way in which Leon Wolf has been banning people who try to engage in discussing this topic from any point of view but his, a new diary attempting to do anything but roundly heap derision on Derbyshire risks earning a banning.

But again I do agree with Charles. Your analysis of the situation is on par with the best I've seen on the web Trap, and raises some points not raised effectively elsewhere that I've seen.

And, again, thank you for the compliment.

I agree that there is no point in attempting to publish elsewhere what I have written here. But that's why I like what we have created here...a place for people to speak their minds free from the fear of PC intimidation.

I suppose it could be tweeted but it won't be by me since that is one of those social media things that I refuse to participate in. Personally, I would prefer that people come here to read our work rather than us being forced to publish in other venues.

More than a few of the contributors here are worthy of broader distribution.

EDIT: I suppose I could post it to the "Member's Diaries" category here, though.
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: Glock32 on April 10, 2012, 04:26:40 PM
Oh, there's most definitely a "nature" aspect to all this. It's like this, little old Europe all cold and wet sent out people who colonized the entire planet. Sub-Saharan Africa in a broad swath of tropical climate with year round growing seasons and sitting atop enormous mineral wealth is, in contrast, appreciably no different than it was 1000 years ago, once you peel away all the trappings of the foreigners. Why is that? And is it any coincidence that places like Haiti have turned out much the same?

You can find idiots and geniuses in any human population. Where each population's "center of mass" lies is what tells the story. That was the main thrust of The Bell Curve anyway.  The thing is, I think anyone with eyes, ears, and a functioning brain stem instinctively knows this to be true, and that is why people like the NRO editors are lashing out. It's all so much conspicuous polishing of their Reasonableness for all to see.
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: trapeze on April 10, 2012, 04:42:34 PM
Actually, I think the editors of NRO (and others) are reacting the way that they are because they want to continue to be on the DC cocktail circuit. It is a matter of their pride and shame...both too big a component in the souls of these people. They lack the nerve and boldness that brought their predecessors into the light.

This is one of those times when the new media (that includes us) must step in and cover stories and issues that others refuse to cover.

EDIT: Just for fun...anecdotal proof that there is no shortage of extremely stupid non-blacks. (http://www.buzzfeed.com/networkdeskpeon/15-people-who-didnt-know-the-titanic-actually-53wv) I get the feeling that they don't read NRO, though.
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: LadyVirginia on April 10, 2012, 06:30:27 PM
EDIT: I suppose I could post it to the "Member's Diaries" category here, though.

please do
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: trapeze on April 10, 2012, 09:30:46 PM
Okay, my final entry on this thread (because there isn't much else to say).

I am providing a link to an NRO piece (http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/295717/very-long-post-about-john-derbyshire-daniel-foster) on Derbyshire that includes comments.

So...if you want to let off some steam at the NRO people now you can.
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: charlesoakwood on April 10, 2012, 10:35:11 PM

It appears NRO is infested with navel gazing fools.
They are charter members at the Country Club,
aren't they?
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: Glock32 on April 10, 2012, 10:38:15 PM

It appears NRO is infested with navel gazing fools.
They are charter members at the Country Club,
aren't they?


Further confirmation of the saying "None is so blind as he who refuses to see"
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: Pandora on April 11, 2012, 03:28:52 AM

It appears NRO is infested with navel gazing fools.
They are charter members at the Country Club,
aren't they?


Further confirmation of the saying "None is so blind as he who refuses to see"

I must say that is so.

I've recounted here my experience with a gang of Black girls in High School, having been whipped like a rag-doll around the cafeteria.  Perhaps what I omitted was that all that following summer after graduation, I had to watch where I went in town and with whom.  A bunch of the same girls tried to drag me out of the backseat of my boyfriend's car, with another couple in attendance, while parked at a convenience store.

This was 1971.  Have "things" gotten better?  I don't think so, I will not put up with being called a racist for saying so, and I don't believe Derbyshire was wrong about thing one.
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: Libertas on April 11, 2012, 07:18:21 AM
Dennis Prager: (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/04/10/still_the_least_racist_country_in_the_world_113784.html) America Is Still The Least Racist Nation In The World.

Quote
The left-wing drumbeat about America as racist is a combination of politics and black memory.

The political aspect is this: The Democrats and the left recognize that if blacks cease viewing themselves as victims of racism, the Democratic Party can no longer offer itself as black America's savior. And if only one out of three black Americans ceases to regard to himself as a victim of racism, and votes accordingly, it will be very difficult for Democrats to win any national election.

The other issue is black memory. Apparently, most blacks either cannot or refuse to believe that the vast majority of whites are no longer racist. Most Americans were hopeful that the election of a black president -- thereby making America the first white society in history to choose a black leader -- would finally put to rest the myth of a racist America. More than three years later it seems not to have accomplished a thing. I now suspect that if the president, the vice-president, the entire cabinet, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and all nine justices on the Supreme Court were black, it would have no impact on blacks who believe America is a racist society -- or on the left-wing depiction of America as racist.

One can only conclude that the smearing of America's good name is one of the things at which the left has been most proficient.

This is what I was attempting to point out in my follow up.

It's not enough.

It will never be enough.

These truths must be recognized. They must be shoved in everyone's face until they are recognized.

Slavery is over.

Civil rights abuses (against blacks) are over.

Deal with it.


The above really sums it up Trap! 

For years it has been the erroneous acceptance as conventional wisdom that whites must bend over backwards to prove their sincerity in righting the wrongs done to blacks in days gone by.  But the white guilt trip only works on liberals, the same liberals who out the other side of their mouth are fond to condemn those who pass the guilt of their ancestors (or associates!) onto their descendants (or friends!) when it suits their purposes, the same people who fail to comprehend the understanding of King's desire to see a colorblind society.  But it is the black community and the racists elements in its institutions (CBC for example) and self-proclaimed leaders (like The Justice Bros, Farrakhan, Shabazz, etc) who are uninterested in a colorblind society because such a society would shut down their extortion rackets and cripple their influence in the "community" and in politics.  Until this "community" as a whole shows an interest in cleaning up their own house, I have little interest in caring about what happens to this "community" as a whole. 

I continue to take people one at a time and they sink or swim on their own merit and character, regardless of damn color!
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: Weisshaupt on April 11, 2012, 09:04:01 AM
But it is the black community and the racists elements in its institutions (CBC for example) and self-proclaimed leaders (like The Justice Bros, Farrakhan, Shabazz, etc) who are uninterested in a colorblind society because such a society would shut down their extortion rackets and cripple their influence in the "community" and in politics.

I had a test question about this:
11)  If someone invented a machine that would remove racism from society, which of the following would happen:

a)    The NAACP, Jesse Jackson and other Civil Rights groups would celebrate, have a party, and disband because they were no longer needed

b)   The test scores of Asians would drop to be in line with those of whites

c)    Civil  Rights groups would attempt to maintain their  power by  citing  statistical disparities caused by other non-discrimination related factors to prove  the machine did not work, and claim more entitlement programs were needed.

d)   More equality

Liberals didn't like it :>)


Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: Libertas on April 11, 2012, 10:46:05 AM
Yup, you can bet your bottom dollar the morons would jump to "c" faster than you can say "plantation"!
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: Sally Brown on April 11, 2012, 11:49:04 AM
Actually, I think the editors of NRO (and others) are reacting the way that they are because they want to continue to be on the DC cocktail circuit. It is a matter of their pride and shame...both too big a component in the souls of these people. They lack the nerve and boldness that brought their predecessors into the light.

This is one of those times when the new media (that includes us) must step in and cover stories and issues that others refuse to cover.

EDIT: Just for fun...anecdotal proof that there is no shortage of extremely stupid non-blacks. (http://www.buzzfeed.com/networkdeskpeon/15-people-who-didnt-know-the-titanic-actually-53wv) I get the feeling that they don't read NRO, though.

They are not only terrified of losing their place on the DC cocktail circuit and appearing to be unsophisticated but they don't want to lose their Establishment Republican subsidized paycheck.
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: charlesoakwood on April 11, 2012, 12:09:12 PM

You,... you are saying they are beneficent of Country Club affirmative action?   
                                                                                                                     ::falldownshocked::

Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: Libertas on April 11, 2012, 12:11:55 PM
Actually, I think Sally might be quite right on that point!
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: charlesoakwood on April 11, 2012, 12:25:29 PM

Actually, I think Sally might                                                   
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-nJWDzqJXIiw/TbUz3TnXKBI/AAAAAAAABPQ/fubGgrbGxMM/s1600/pirate.jpg)

be quite right on that point!
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: Libertas on April 11, 2012, 02:13:36 PM
Why is the rum gone?!

 ::speechless::
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: trapeze on April 11, 2012, 11:42:32 PM
Okay, my final, final, final post (no kidding, I really mean it this time) on this thread...

Found an article on the DC (http://dailycaller.com/2012/04/11/john-derbyshire-national-review-race-whipped-controversial-anti-black-column-just-common-sense/) where they got a reaction from Derbyshire about being terminated by NRO. And there is a running comment section after the article.

Hint: Wouldn't hurt if a few of our members went their and left bread crumbs back to our forum.
Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: Libertas on April 12, 2012, 06:59:33 AM
I think the concept of the Thought Police State is well rooted now and it really doesn't matter what little initial appends a politicians name or is on file in party offices...it doesn't matter ones religion or class status...

Depressing...

Title: Re: "The Talk" - NonBlack Version
Post by: charlesoakwood on April 12, 2012, 08:58:12 AM

They are rewriting who and what we are before our very eyes.