National Review fires John Derbyshire
The National Review has fired longtime columnist John Derbyshire following an article he wrote for an online magazine that was widely viewed as racist in nature.
"[Derbyshire's] latest provocation, in a webzine, lurches from the politically incorrect to the nasty and indefensible," National Review editor Rich Lowry wrote in a statement posted late Saturday night. "We never would have published it, but the main reason that people noticed it is that it is by a National Review writer. Derb is effectively using our name to get more oxygen for views with which we’d never associate ourselves otherwise. So there has to be a parting of the ways."
In the highly controversial column, written for Taki's Magazine on Thursday, Derbyshire suggests white and Asian parents talk to their children about what makes black people different and the threats posed to their safety by black people. Five percent of black people are "ferociously hostile" to whites, according to Derbyshire, and most are willing to be hostile. Derbyshire advises parents to tell their children not to live or stay long in predominantly black communities.
"You don’t have to follow my version of the talk point for point; but if you are white or Asian and have kids, you owe it to them to give them some version of the talk," Derbyshire concludes. "It will save them a lot of time and trouble spent figuring things out for themselves. It may save their lives."
"Derb has long danced around the line on these issues, but this column is so outlandish it constitutes a kind of letter of resignation," Lowry wrote. "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."
The outpouring of criticism was quick, with The Atlantic's Ta-Nehesi Coates calling Derbyshire a racist, and Forbes calling for Derbyshire to be fired.
Lowry's full statement is as follows:
"Anyone who has read Derb in our pages knows he’s a deeply literate, funny, and incisive writer. I direct anyone who doubts his talents to his delightful first novel, “Seeing Calvin Coolidge in a Dream,” or any one of his “Straggler” columns in the books section of NR. Derb is also maddening, outrageous, cranky, and provocative. His latest provocation, in a webzine, lurches from the politically incorrect to the nasty and indefensible. We never would have published it, but the main reason that people noticed it is that it is by a National Review writer. Derb is effectively using our name to get more oxygen for views with which we’d never associate ourselves otherwise. So there has to be a parting of the ways. 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"
But yeah, the backlash is going to be drenched in "fucking liberal media bias political correctness sensitive feminized culture" fuckwittery.
Still. Good riddance, cuckoo-cachoo. Reading the comments about the original article over on HuffPo sent me into a fucking rage.
So I stopped reading them, for the benefit of humans everywhere. too much rage-making lurks in the stuff people will post on news stories.
omg bb why would you hurt yourself like that. I hope you're okay. :(
I literally cannot read most news article comments. They can just send me into a depressive episode at times, they're so foul and often, outright evil.
Edited at 2012-04-08 06:43 pm (UTC)
The horrible, terrible new standards for fuel efficiency forced the poor man to send his car to Mexico to be cut in half and lengthened to an acceptable size, and to have the appropriate thermostats, etc. installed. Otherwise, how could he enjoy an acceptable level of luxury while his chauffeur drove him past all the homeless people conservative policies were beginning to dump on the street?
Edited at 2012-04-08 03:05 am (UTC)
Please. I bet there are so many people at NR who share these views and have no idea why people are so outraged at this. I mean, if he was able to continuously write racist and misogynistic pieces in previous years and not get fired for it, it's obvious that he wouldn't have been fired for this if the general public wasn't aware of it.
Let's be real -- they're not whining about "political correctness"; they're whining about not getting to say stupid shit with impunity. The prospect of saying something without people kissing your ass for it, or without going unchallenged? MAN, THAT'S TOO HARRRD.
Anyone who uses that phrase is just beyond saving imo.
Minus points for (however indirectly) telling people to buy his book.
So..you didn't mind being associated with his views until you got a hatful of criticism? Well done indeed.
So... there's a chance that it wasn't actually racist, it's just ~in the eye of the beholder~ or somesuch? Yeah, no.
And I can only assume that by Asian they mean "light-skinned Asians", and not brown Asians, so that if they mix it doesn't turn their nice, white kids any funny colors, I'm sure.
Edited at 2012-04-08 02:53 pm (UTC)
If that's the case, shouldn't someone be on the hook other than the original author, or is it a case of "Oh we'll run this - it will get lots of feedback, our ad revenue will go up - and then we'll fire you. "?
Edited at 2012-04-08 11:26 pm (UTC)