The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information

Topics Filter?
2000 Election 2016 Election Academia Affirmative Action Africa Alt Right American Media American Military Black Crime Blacks Britain China Conservative Movement Creationism Diversity Donald Trump Economics England European Right Feminism Foreign Policy History Homosexuality Human Biodiversity Humor Ideology Illegal Immigration Immigration IQ Iraq War Ireland Islam Mathematics Miscellaneous Political Correctness Race/Crime Race/Ethnicity Racism Religion Republicans Review Russia Science Terrorism The Straggler 2004 Election 2006 Election 2008 Election 2012 Election 2018 Election 2020 Election 9/11 Abortion Abraham Lincoln Afghanistan Africans Al Gore Al Sharpton Aldous Huxley Amazon American Left American Presidents American Renaissance Amnesty Amy Chua Ancient DNA Anglo-Saxons Anglosphere Ann Coulter Anti-Semitism Anti-white Animus Antifa Antiracism Antonin Scalia Arts/Letters Asia Asian Americans Asian Quotas Asians Australia Australian Aboriginals Austria Barack Obama Bill Clinton Black Lives Matter Boris Johnson Brain Brexit British Politics Cambodia Canada Cancer Capitalism Catalonia Catholic Church Censorship Central Asia Charles Murray Charlottesville Chelsea Clinton Chinese Chinese Evolution Christianity CIA Civil Rights Civil War Communism Confederacy Congress Consciousness Conservatism Constantinople Constitutional Theory Corruption Crime Crusades Cultural Marxism DACA Dalai Lama Dallas Shooting Deep State Democracy Democratic Party Demographics Demography Discrimination Dreamers East Asians Ebola Education Eisenhower El Salvador Elections Elian Gonzalez Emmanuel Macron Energy Enoch Powell Environmentalism Espionage EU Eugenics Europe European Union Eurozone Evolution Evolution Of Language Evolutionary Biology Fake News Ferguson Shooting Fertility Rates Finland France Gay Marriage Gays/Lesbians Gaza Flotilla Gender Equality George W. Bush George Zimmerman Germany Global Warming Globalism Google Government Debt Government Spending Greece Gun Control Guns H-1B H1-B Visas Haiti Hamilton: An American Musical Harvard Hate Hoaxes Hbd Hillary Clinton Hispanic Crime Hispanics Hitler Hollywood Hong Kong Housing Human Evolution Human Genetics Human Genome Hungary Hunting Ice People Imperialism Indians Infection Intellectuals Intelligence Intelligent Design Iran Iraq Islamophobia Israel Israel Lobby Israel/Palestine Italy James B. Watson James Comey Japan Jared Taylor Jeff Sessions Jeremy Corbyn Jews Jimmy Carter Joe Biden John Derbyshire John McCain Judicial System Jussie Smollett Justice Kaiser Wilhelm Koreans Kurds Libertarianism Libya Love MacArthur Awards Maoism Marc Faber Margaret Thatcher Mark Steyn Martin Luther King Mass Shootings Massacre In Nice Memory Mencken Meritocracy Merkel Mexico Michael Bloomberg Middle East Mind Minorities Mulatto Elite Multiculturalism Muslims National Debt Nationalism NATO Nature Vs. Nurture Neandertal Admixture Nelson Mandela Neocons Neoconservatism New York City Nicholas Wade Nordics Norman Podhoretz North Korea Northern Ireland Nuclear Weapons Open Borders Orban Orlando Shooting Orwell Ottoman Empire Outsourcing Paris Attacks Pat Buchanan Paul Ryan Pete Buttgieg Peter Thiel Philosophy Poetry Population Population Growth Probability Public Schools Puerto Rico Quantum Mechanics Race Race And Iq Race Denialism Race/IQ Racial Profiling Racial Reality Razib Khan Republican Party Richard Lynn Robots Ron Paul Ron Unz Ronald Reagan Roy Moore Rudyard Kipling Saddam Hussein Sailer Strategy San Bernadino Massacre Scandinavia Science Fiction Science Fiction & Fantasy Scotland Senate Siberia Silicon Valley Singularity Slavery Slavery Reparations Soccer Social Welfare Programs Solzhenitsyn Somalia South Africa Space Program Spain Stabby Somali Statistics Stephen Wolfram Stereotypes Steve King Steve Sailer Supreme Court Syria Ta-Nehisi Coates Taiwan Taxes Tea Party Technology Television The Economist The New York Times Thomas Perez Tibet Tom Wolfe Tony Blair Torture Treason Turkey UKIP Unemployment Uruguay Vietnam Violence Vote Fraud WASPs White Nationalism White Nationalists White Privilege White Supremacy Wikipedia William Buckley Winston Churchill World Cup World Population World War I World War II Xhosa Yemen Zimbabwe
Nothing found
 TeasersJohn Derbyshire Blogview

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
🔊 Listen RSS

Race-denialism is all over the Western world—the notion that race itself is a sort of optical illusion; that different races can, after a bit of social engineering, be brought to present the same statistical profiles on all traits; that when they present different profiles the only possible explanation is malice on the part of white people; these are the great dogmas of our age [Antiracism, Our Flawed New Religion, by John McWhorter, Daily Beast, March 14,2017 ] carved on stone slabs and worshipfully preserved in the temples of our culture. Here’s a cute example: the epidemic of knife crime that has been plaguing Britain for several years past.

Guns are hard to get in Britain (although not that hard). So the more commonplace types of lethal interpersonal violence—notably underclass gang warfare—are stabbings with knives.

Where the soundtrack to a warm night in Chicago, Baltimore, or Detroit features gunshots, the corresponding audio for London, Birmingham, or Manchester is of metal blades penetrating human flesh.

This is quite a new thing. Yes, yes, I know about Jack the Ripper. Statistically, though—culturally—knife crime has not been a British thing.

Growing up working-class British in the years before mass immigration, I absorbed the idea that fighting with knives was sneaky and unmanly.

Knife crime was practised only by lurking weaselly types from the outer fringes of the civilized world. Englishmen fought with their fists, Irishmen with the stout blackthorn, the Welsh and Scottish … I forget, but it wasn’t knives.

In the mid-1960s, when I lived in London and got my first real encounters with multiculturalism, knife crime was associated with Cypriots.

I don’t know why this was so and have never tried to check the historical statistics. But it was an article of faith with Londoners back then that it was wise not to tick off a Cypriot (which mainly, in this context at that time, meant a Greek Cypriot) unless you wanted to feel a blade sliding between your ribs.

The native British seem to have maintained their prejudice against knife fighting down to the present day. But black and Muslim immigrants have taken up knives with enthusiasm. A high proportion of the names of knife-crime perps are Muslim; and on the rare occasions the media offer a picture of a perp, it is much more often than not a black guy.

Man found guilty of murdering passenger on Surrey train

Darren Pencille killed Lee Pomeroy in front of his son during row about aisle blocking

by Aamna Mohdin, Guardian, July 12, 2019

So Britain’s knife-crime epidemic is mainly a black and Muslim thing, one of the consequences of unrestrained mass Third World immigration.

To notice this is of course very strictly taboo. That’s the background to this latest story from the Sceptered Isle: Chicken Takeaway Boxes Warn Young People Of Knife Crime Danger, BBC, August 15, 2019.

What’s happened is this: the British government has a campaign going on to discourage young people from carrying knives. They’re promoting this campaign via public-service announcements on Twitter with #KnifeFree.

Well, a company that provides packaging for fast-food outlets has signed up to help with this campaign. The nature of their help: they have distributed boxes to fried chicken outlets—the boxes your take-out food comes packed in—carrying messages from the government campaign against knives.

Did you get that? To fried chicken outlets! Is that racist, or what?

It’s racist! Don’t take my word for it: here is an accredited authority, black Member of Parliament David Lammy, who bears an uncanny resemblance to the late Idi Amin of Uganda [Clip: the Idi Amin song]

Sorry, sorry, that just lurched into my mind there. Where was I? Oh yes, David Lammy. Tweet from him, tweet:

Since this news story comes from the sober, professional, magisterial BBC, you might think they’d offer some balancing numbers to prove that blacks are not especially prominent in the knife-crime statistics.

I mean, you might think that…if you’ve been in a deep coma for the past thirty years.

To be perfectly fair, the BBC story is not totally numbers-free. Four hundred words into the story we do get this, quote:

Recent figures showed most perpetrators of knife crime were over the age of 18.

That little nugget of irrelevant information came with a link to a BBC story from last month, headline: Ten Charts On The Rise Of Knife Crime In England And Wales.”

None of the ten charts deals with race or ethnicity. But the accompanying text between Chart Four and Chart Five does let slip the following factlet:

🔊 Listen RSS

Adapted from the latest Radio Derb, available exclusively on VDARE.com

Last week’s headliners were two mass shootings: one in El Paso, Texas last Saturday morning, followed in the small hours of Sunday morning by another in Dayton, Ohio. The El Paso shooter killed 22 people; the second killed nine. The El Paso guy is in custody; the Dayton one was killed by police.

Sincere condolences from Radio Derb to the wounded and bereaved. But this is a nation of a third of a billion people, though, and ghastly things will happen—some of them by human agency, some by natural catastrophes.

I guess my attitude is just fatalistic. Of the public reactions to these two events, the only one that really returned an echo from my bosom was the one by TV astronomer Neil deGrasse Tyson. Tweeted Tyson on Sunday:

Tyson’s tweet occasioned much screeching and pearl-clutching from goodthinking types. [Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson slammed for tweet about mass shooting data, by Nick Givas, Fox News, August 6, 2019] He responded with a half-hearted apology, which of course nobody accepted.[Neil deGrasse Tyson’s Tweet About Mass Shootings Was Bad. His Apology May Have Been Worse, by Justin Bariso, Inc.com, August 7, 2019]

I can’t claim much engagement with Tyson. I’ve never read one of his books or watched one of his TV programs.

That’s not from any antipathy; I know next to nothing about the guy. The only pop-science books I read are ones editors send me for review, and it just happens that no-one’s sent me one of Tyson’s books. I don’t watch much TV—some conservative commentary, currently Tucker Carlson, and now and then a sitcom that tickles my fancy.

So I’ve totally missed Tyson, without prejudice. (Except that, like everyone else not thoroughly brainwashed, I assume by reflex that any black person doing science on TV is an Affirmative-Action hire. Reflexes like that are among the evil consequence s of Affirmative Action, and I don’t think tell us anything important about either the subject or the object).

I’m with Tyson on this one, anyway. I’m a numbers guy, and plainly so is he. With news events like this all sorts of cognitive biases kick in. You could start your googling with the phrase “salience bias.”

That especially applies when politicians and their media stooges amp up the salience for all they’re worth.

Sorry, but I prefer the cooler numerical approach. Hey, Mr. Tyson: You ever in Long Island? I’ll buy you a drink. I’m an astronomy buff from way back; my high school had a 12-inch reflector.

And of course the politicians and pundits milked the killings for all they were worth. Since competitive politics right now is mostly among contenders for next year’s Democratic Presidential nomination, and pundits break about nine to one Democrat, most of the commentary blamed the events on President Trump and the 63 million deplorables who, in violation of all the laws of nature, voted for him in 2016.

Squeezing political points out of the El Paso and Dayton horrors wasn’t easy, though.

It looked at first as if it was going to be easy. Both the shooters were white, so the Main Stream Media could freely portray them as psychopathic monsters. Well, they are—or in the Dayton guy’s case, were—psychopathic monsters; but then, so are the black murderers who commit most of our mass shootings but get way less media coverage and generate very little interest among politicians.

And then, the El Paso killer had (allegedly) posted a manifesto online. It’s 2,400 words—which is fairly brief, as these things go. The manifesto of 2011 Norwegian mass killer Anders Breivik ran to half a million words.[ Breivik sent ‘manifesto’ to 250 UK contacts hours before Norway killings, by Matthew Taylor, Guardian, July 26, 2011]

There was enough in those 2,400 words, though, for the CultMarx mob to argue that the killer was inspired by President Trump–even though the killer himself, in the manifesto, explicitly told us he’d formed his ideas before Trump showed up.

The main point that got the CultMarx mob’s attention: the killer writing that:

This attack is a response to the Hispanic invasion of Texas … I am simply defending my country from cultural and ethnic replacement brought on by an invasion.

With a hundred thousand people a month coming in across our southern border without permission, terms like “invasion” and “ethnic replacement” don’t seem hyperbolic to me. And yes, some of Donald Trump’s past statements indicate similar lines of thinking; although in two and a half years as Chief Executive he hasn’t actually done much to defend our nation’s demographic stability.

Other notions expressed in the El Paso guy’s manifesto are un-Trumpian or actually anti-Trumpian; he grumbles about corporate greed and the degradation of the environment, for instance.

So the guy has a lot of different beefs he was working off, some of them approximately Trumpian. The way he worked them off was by murdering 22 random strangers in a Walmart store. That was insane; and yes, the guy is a psychopathic monster.

Crazy people get their inspiration the way the rest of us do, from listening, reading, and personal experience. What they then do with their inspiration tells you nothing about the content of the source material.

🔊 Listen RSS

Britain is in crisis! A mighty national challenge looms! The nation’s very sovereignty hangs in the balance!

The populace is divided and confused. The political leadership is—as it usually is—an uninspiring clique of dithering seat-warmers and time-servers, none of whom has ever had his peace disturbed by an original thought, seasoned—as it usually is—with a sprinkling of criminals and lunatics. Will no-one come forth to save the situation?

Yes! Up from out of the political ranks emerges one man willing to seize the moment. With origins in the monied upper class (along with with an American connection), educated at one of the premier old boys’ boarding schools, with a respectable track record in both legislative and executive office, our man knows his way around political high society.

He is, however, a somewhat dubious character, widely regarded by those who follow public affairs as at best, to borrow Christopher Hollis’s comment on Evelyn Waugh, “not quite a gentleman,” and at worst a self-promoting and reckless adventurer of no fixed principles.

Still, even his severest critics allow that he is something of a fascinator, an eloquent speaker with a well-stocked mind and a ready wit, author of several books and innumerable fragments of opinion journalism—a character of the type people form strong opinions about one way or another, but whom no-one can quite ignore.

The elevation of Boris Johnson to the post of Britain’s Prime Minister has brought the parallels with Winston Churchill to mind—to the minds of both pro-Johnson and anti-Johnson partisans.

Johnson himself has been doing his best to help us make the connection: one of his books is a biography of Churchill, published in 2014 for the fiftieth anniversary, the following year, of Churchill’s death. Did we really need another biography of Churchill by 2015? Probably not, but Boris Johnson gave us one anyway, in what one is bound to suspect was an act of, yes, self-promotion.

Under the circumstances it would not be surprising to see a new surge of interest in Churchill. Heck, the sesquicentennial of Churchill’s birth is only five years away. Book publishers are already flipping through their Rolodexes looking for historians, I feel sure.

Here is an early entry in the field: Churchill’s Headmaster: The “Sadist” Who Nearly Saved the British Empire, by Edward Dutton. It is an oddity in the vast bibliography of Churchilliana, concentrating on less than two years of the infant Churchill’s life, 1882-1884.

Churchill spent that time, aged not-quite-8 to 9½, as a pupil at St George’s school in Ascot, 25 miles west of London. This was a boarding school for boys with about 40 fee-paying pupils.

In Britain this kind of establishment is called a “prep school,” because it prepares its inmates for entry, usually at age 13, to the big old boys’ boarding schools—confusingly to Americans called “public” schools, though they are entirely private—like Eton, Harrow, and Winchester.

These public schools have been educating Britain’s high elites for four hundred years. Boris Johnson attended Eton, the twentieth Prime Minister to have done so. Churchill went to Harrow—after, of course, prep school: that year and a half at St George’s followed by three and a half at another place.

(George Orwell immortalized the prep-school experience in his 1947 essay Such, Such Were the Joys.” That was a different school, however, and thirty years on from Churchill at St George’s; and some of Orwell’s classmates accused him of having colored up his account for dramatic effect.)

Why concentrate on such a brief period of Churchill’s early life? Dutton has two aims. First, he wants to rehabilitate Churchill’s headmaster at St George’s, who has received a mostly-bad, sometimes very bad, press from Churchill’s innumerable biographers, and from Churchill himself. Second, he has a point to make about the development of Churchill’s personality and the consequences for twentieth-century British history.

The headmaster’s name was Herbert Sneyd-Kinnersley. Born 1848 into a good old (but not aristocratic) English family, he attended a public school (Rugby, Harry Flashman’s alma mater) followed by Cambridge University, where he got a law degree. After graduation he spent six years as a schoolmaster before starting his own school in 1877—the school that, via a name change in 1880, became St George’s.

The school had therefore been in business for five years when Churchill showed up. Sneyd-Kinnersley’s headmastership continued for two years after Churchill left. Sneyd-Kinnersley died suddenly from a heart attack in 1886, aged only 38.

The main charge against Sneyd-Kinnersley is the one given in the book’s title: that he was a sadist. Churchill himself wrote in his autobiographical work My Early Life:

I am sure no Eton boy, and certainly no Harrow boy in my day, ever received such a cruel flogging as this headmaster was accustomed to inflict on little boys who were in his care and power.

That is supported by other accounts from graduates of St George’s: writer Maurice Baring, sinologist Edmund Backhouse, diarist Harry Kessler, art critic Roger Fry, and others.

All note the frequency and ferocity with which Sneyd-Kinnersley beat misbehaving pupils on their bare buttocks with a bundle of birch twigs. This was a grisly business. Fry:

• Category: History • Tags: Boris Johnson, Britain, Winston Churchill 
🔊 Listen RSS

The World’s Most Important Map

Regular readers of VDARE will be familiar with what Steve Sailer calls The World’s Most Important Graph. That’s the one that shows the U.N. population projections, by region, through the end of this century.

If that’s The World’s Most Important Graph, I hereby nominate David Becker‘s “Global distribution of national IQs from psychometric measurements and international school assessment studies, supplemented by geographical averages” as The World’s Most Important Map.

The 21st century, like any other century, will deliver many surprises. I feel pretty sure, though, that if you want to keep the number of surprises to a minimum, a good strategy would be to put the two Most Importants together, TWMIG with TWMIM, and stare hard at them for a minute or so before breakfast every day.

The blessings of numeracy


Relevant to the previous: When I was dropped by National Review in April 2012, Mark Steyn was one of those who defended me. He expressed his support here. I am for ever grateful to Mark for that, and will buy him dinner any time he’s in town.

Mark’s defense came with qualifications, though. Precisely:

I didn’t agree with Derb on many things, from Ron Paul and talk radio to God and science. For his part, he reckoned I was a bit of a wimp on what he called “the Great Unmentionables.” He thought that neuroscientists and geneticists’ understanding of race trumped my touching belief in “culture.” I’m not so sure: Why is Haiti Haiti and Barbados Barbados? Why is India India and Pakistan Pakistan? Skin color and biological determinism don’t get you very far on that.

A friend emailed in the other day asking whether I had ever answered Mark’s challenge. Why is Haiti Haiti, Barbados Barbados, etc.? Isn’t it just … culture?

I summon once again my geneticist friend who, when someone comes at him with this kind of argument, jeers back: “Culture? Culture? What are the upstream variables?

The upstream variables—the determinants of culture—are history, geography, and population genetics. The three are engaged in a complex dance down through the generations and the centuries, this one influencing that one, that one this one, back and forth, do-si-do.

Obviously history contributes to culture. Language is one aspect of culture: a lot of Europeans speak languages derived from Latin because their territory was part of the Roman Empire.

Obviously geography contributes to culture. Customary dress styles are an aspect of culture: the customary dress styles of Polynesia would not work well in Siberia.

Obviously pop-gen contributes to culture. A society is shaped by customary social behaviors: behavior is determined in part by genetics.

If you ignore pop-gen you are ignoring a key participant in the dance. List N countries with majority population sub-Saharan African: 0.9 N of them will be poor, corrupt, crime-addled s***holes. Now list N countries with majority population northwest European—above the Hajnal Line: 0.9 N of them will be stable, prosperous, low-crime, low-corruption social democracies.

(I actually think the proportion in both cases is greater than 0.9. I’m trying to be nice.)

Sure there are anomalies. In the human world, there always are. Why is North Korea North Korea and South Korea South Korea? Occasionally history and geography kick in big-time. Pop-gen is the way to bet, though.

Again: I love Mark Steyn as a man and a brother. I’ll buy him a dinner any time; and if he ever needs to crash in Long Island, though I don’t know why he would, the door is open.

However, there is a great black yawning crevasse between people who know science, math, and statistics and people who don’t. You simply can’t talk across that gap—I know, I’ve spent decades trying.

The unfortunate thing is that many of the great, important truths about the world—including the human world—are on the sci-math-stats side of the crevasse.

Strip-mining the smart fraction

Professor Amy Wax’s July 15th address at the National Conservatism conference, which I covered at length in my July 26th Radio Derb podcast, touched on a point I have been making for at least thirteen years, a point that gets too little attention in the immigration debates.

Here’s what the lady said.

Lately, there has been talk of reforming the law to favor skilled immigrants, as do countries like Canada and Australia. Although unskilled immigration should be reduced, I believe, replacing the less educated with higher-skilled foreigners is not the answer either. By draining talent and energy from places that desperately need them, and especially people who are educated at public expense abroad, an overly generous immigration policy will inevitably damage the countries left behind.

Once again, I would ask, what important conservative voices are emphasizing this point? Who is willing to fault the short-term thinking and moral preening behind our immigration regime, which however generous, cannot lift up the Third World, but only a fraction of the people from it? Who will emphasize that failed countries must, they have no choice but to, improve themselves by reforming cultural practices that impede progress, that instead of moving here, their citizens should concentrate on emulating what makes us great?

What we are doing when we take in skilled immigrants is, we are strip-mining other countries of their smart fraction.

A country’s smart fraction is defined at that link as the proportion of the country’s population with an IQ 108 or more. Plainly countries with a higher mean IQ will have a bigger smart fraction. A nation with mean IQ 108 would have a smart fraction of precisely one-half, i.e. fifty percent. On the latest numbers I can find (David Becker’s table at the end of this post), Japan at 107, Taiwan and Singapore at 106, Hong Kong at 105, and China at 104 are pretty close.

The U.S.A., with a mean IQ 97, has a smart fraction around 23 percent. A nation at the world overall average IQ, which is 82 (U.A.E., Dominican Republic, Puerto Rico, Macedonia, Albania, Lebanon, Philippines), would have a smart fraction of four percent. Nations with mean IQ 60 (Mali, South Sudan, Ghana, Nicaragua, Djibouti, Gambia, Guatemala, Sierra Leone, Nepal) have a smart fraction of 0.07 percent.

• Category: Ideology • Tags: Blacks, China, Political Correctness 
🔊 Listen RSS

Adapted from the latest Radio Derb, available exclusively on VDARE.com

Amy Wax, a law professor at the University of Pennsylvania, in trouble again—in a way that points to the fundamental contradictions of Yoram Hazony’s recent National Conservatism conference a.k.a. The Gatekeeper’s Ball.

In March last year, Prof. Wax did a Bloggingheads interviews with black Economics Professor Glenn Loury of Brown University. In the course of their chat, which was all perfectly friendly and collegial, Prof. Wax mentioned that she couldn’t recall a case of a black student graduating in the top quarter of her class, and it was rare to see one in the top half.

That got her a Two Minutes Hate in the Twittersphere and a stern reprimand from her law school dean Ted Ruger [Email him]. Ruger’s reprimand would have been more convincing if he had produced some actual numbers from his files to refute Prof. Wax’s claim, but of course he refused to do so.

A year before that, Prof. Wax had published a joint op-ed, with another law professor, in the Philadelphia Inquirer, [Paying the price for breakdown of the country’s bourgeois culture, August 9, 2017] arguing for the promotion of bourgeois values: get married, stay married, obey the law, don’t swear in public, and so on.

That caused screaming, swooning, and clutching of pearls nationwide. “Redneck racist ideology,” one commenter called it.

So Prof. Wax has a track record of saying obviously true things that our ideological Establishment—Main Stream Media, schools, corporations, churches, politicians—would much rather not be said.

I was so impressed after last year’s Bloggingheads incident that I inducted Prof. Wax into the Honorable Company of Stone-Kickers.

Now she’s been at it again, kicking that durn stone.

The National Conservatism conference was held at the pricey Ritz-Carlton in Washington, D.C. Here at VDARE.com we have long used the phrase “National Conservatism” to define our own positions, so we had some reasonable expectation that the ideas we write about here might get an airing in a posh, high-profile venue.

Vain are the hopes of mortal men! The conference turned out to be just another rescue mission for neoconservatism. The big keynote address, given on Tuesday morning, was by John Bolton—what else do you need to know?

VDARE.com Editor Peter Brimelow was disinvited from attending, and American Renaissance’s Jared Taylor was refused a press pass. Your genial scribe would no doubt likewise have been denied had he been sufficiently alert and organized to apply for registration.

The brilliant and indefatigable blogger Zman did sneak in under the organizers’ radar. He produced some scathing, and often very funny, commentary which I urge you to read. He also, separately, posted a thoughtful summary here at VDARE.com.

Well, Amy Wax gave a talk at one of the breakout sessions on Monday afternoon. If you’re not a conference-goer and don’t know what a breakout session is, it’s when the main conference breaks up into smaller groups to discuss particular topics in side rooms.

Breakout sessions used to be called “workshops,” but perhaps that was ruled demeaning and hurtful to people who work in shops…don’t ask me, I’m clueless about political correctness. The opposite of a breakout session is a plenary session, where everyone sits together in the same grand auditorium. Got that?

The topic for this particular breakout session was immigration. That’s our main topic here at VDARE.com, so naturally this session excited our interest.

The title of Prof. Wax’s talk: “American Greatness and Immigration: The Case for Low and Slow.” Her remarks ignited yet another spasm of nationwide shrieking, fainting, and pearl-clutching.

This time, Penn Law Scholl Dean Ruger told the world that her remarks were at best “a bigoted theory of white cultural and ethnic supremacy” and at worst,—can you guess?—yes, “racist”. [Penn Law Dean Condemns Professor Amy Wax’s ‘Bigoted,’ ‘Racist’ Comments on Immigration, by Jenni Fink, Newsweek, July 25, 2019].

I guess you don’t get to be dean of a prestigious law school by demonstrating a capacity for independent thinking or original speaking.

Something called LALSA, the Latinx Law Students Association at U. Penn., started a petition for Prof. Wax to be relieved of her teaching duties.

That must have been some heavy-duty rabble-rousing fascist Neo-Nazi stuff that Prof. Wax spoke—oh, sorry; I mean “spouted“—at the National Conservatism Conference.

So what did she say?

Prof. Wax is not, so far as I can figure, a race realist. (I should make it clear that being a race realist is not an essential qualifying condition for election to the Honorable Company of Stone-Kickers.)

In my world-shaking bestseller We Are Doomed I said there are three theories of human nature enjoying widespread support at present: Religious, Culturist, Biologian. To summarize:

  • The religious view sees our species as gifted by God or the Gods with supernatural attributes, for example the moral sense.
🔊 Listen RSS

See also: Turkeys Vote For Christmas—GOP Votes To Import Leftist Indian Overclass (And Also Depress Tech Wages)

The House of Representatives recently passed H.R.1044, the Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act. It’s now in the Senate’s Judiciary committee and could be voted on by the full Senate by September. Javanka is said to favor it, so the chances that President Trump will veto it (as he should) are probably low.

The adjective “high-skilled” is misleading—intentionally so, of course. The immigrants being favored by this act are lower-middle-class drudge workers, mainly computer programmers, most from India and China. They know languages like JavaScript, which anyone with above-room-temperature IQ can learn in 24 hours, or PHP and C++, which I’ll allow are harder but which a few months in trade school will get you capable at.

I know whereof I speak. I spent much of my working life doing the kind of work—commercial computer programming—that these immigrants are being brought in to do. It is, indeed, not rocket science.

To paraphrase Lloyd Bentsen’s much-hyped exchange with Dan Quayle: I was a computer programmer. I know computer programming. The Indian programmers that the Treason Lobby wants to import are no Alan Turings—they’re just cheap.

The whole point of H.R.1044 is to provide cheap foreign labor to employers. You have no doubt heard the stories about big U.S. companies like Disney and Con Ed forcing employees to train their cheaper foreign replacements. H.R.1044 will swell the number of those replacements, further reducing the job opportunities for American college and trade-school graduates.

Demographically, it will also swell mightily the number of Indians settling in the U.S.A. They may not be Alan Turings, but they are skilled enough to augment America’s developing Immigrant Overclass.

Once upon a time we had a system of guest-worker visas to fill gaps in the workforce. When the visa expired, the guest worker went back to his home country. In fact, just to get the visa you had to show “non-immigrant intent”—you had to show the visa officer that you didn’t intend to stay in the U.S.A. permanently.

That’s ancient history now. The rules have been relaxed so that it’s easy to parlay a guest-worker visa into permanent residence—the Green Card—and thence to citizenship.

There are still currently, though, limits on the number of visas that any particular country can get in a given year. H.R.1044 eliminates those country caps. The incoming workforce, taking jobs that American college graduates should be taking, will be even more overwhelmingly Indian and Chinese.

The U.S. Senate is now mulling a bill of its own along the same lines. It’s not altogether clear how this will go. Republicans still hold the Senate; and even among Democrats the flyover portion of the country, the portion I sometimes call Inlandia, is better represented in the Senate than the other portion, Coastal-stan.

These floods of cheap foreign techie labor are great for Coastal-stan, but they tick off a lot of Inlandia voters—voters in states like Kentucky, whose senior Senator is…who is it?…let me check…oh, yes: Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.

So while the eagerness of Republicans to lick the boots of their big-business donors and shaft American workers should never be underestimated, the outcome here is not a foregone conclusion.

In the general matter of bringing in foreign labor, I limp up once more to offer my proposal that we submit the whole process to the Law of Supply and Demand. Visas for guest workers in any line of work should be issued only when there is a clear and persistent shortage of native-born workers, signalled by a dramatic and prolonged rise in the wages on offer to such workers.

Even then I’d want a decent time to let Americans take up the slack.

As I said, speaking as a person who has actually done computer-programming work, and hired and fired programmers, a few months in trade school will get any American with an IQ over 110 up to speed in PHP or C++. If wages for programmers are going through the roof, so will trade-school and Community College applications.

Only if that doesn’t fix the supply problem should we bring in foreign guest workers. And even then, I can’t see why we should offer them permanent residence. We have north of 300 million citizens; so on a normal distribution around seventy million of us have IQ north of 110.

Even if you discount for infants and seniors, there’s plenty of coding talent there for Mark Zuckerberg and Jeff Bezos—if the pay is right.

But, of course, they might vote Republican. And we can’t have that.

• Category: Economics • Tags: H1-B Visas, Immigration, Indians, Silicon Valley 
🔊 Listen RSS

Adapted from the latest Radio Derb, available exclusively on VDARE.com

Marc Thiessen had a recent op-ed column poking fun at all the stern pronouncements we’ve had from senior Democrats like Nancy Pelosi and Elizabeth Warren that “no-one is above the law.” [Democrats say no one is above the law — except on immigration, Washington Post, July 16, 2019] They are, of course, speaking in reference to supposed misdeeds by President Trump. Meanwhile, from the other side of their mouths, they are hyperventilating about how cruelly barbaric it is—”a crime against humanity” according to Kamala Harris, to enforce the people’s laws on immigration. [Kamala Harris: Immigration Raids Are ‘A Crime Against Humanity’, by Susan Jones, CNSNews, July 12, 2019].

The notion of fair laws impartially administered is one of the great glories of Anglo-Saxon civilization. As a reminder of how things go elsewhere, I refer you to an article written by President Xi Jinping of communist China, published over there February 19th:

We must never follow the path of Western “constitutionalism,” “separation of powers,” or “judicial independence.”

Xi: China Must Never Adopt Constitutionalism, Separation of Powers, or Judicial Independence, by Charlotte Gao, Diplomat.com, February 19, 2019

Mockery quotes there around those three terms

That’s what he said: I checked the original Chinese: 决不能走西方 “宪政”、 “三权鼎立”、 “司法独立” 的路子.

But now our own Ruling Class seems to agree with President Xi. Those lofty ideals of judicial independence and equality under the law are looking pretty ragged in the U.S.A. right now.

Equal justice under law? Illegal alien scofflaws enjoy the favor and protection of the most powerful people in the land. Violent anarchist gangs own the streets of Portland, Oregon, and no-one in authority wants to prosecute them.

Or consider the case of James Fields, the young man charged with driving into a crowd of Leftist protestors in Charlottesville two years ago. One person died and several were injured. Recently Fields was sentenced to life plus 419 years on state charges. [Man Sentenced to 2nd Life Term in Charlottesville Car Attack, AP, July 15, 2019] That comes on top of last month’s sentence of life imprisonment on federal “hate crime” charges.

To grasp the state of affairs in early 21st-century America, compare the case of John Harris White, which happened just down the road from me in Long Island, the only reason I remember it. Probably there are scores of similar cases nationwide.

John Harris White is black. So is his son Aaron. Back in August 2006, Aaron, then 19 years old, was thrown out of a party by other teens who thought, mistakenly he said, that he had threatened a girl.

Aaron went home, but some partygoers followed him in two cars. They made a scene in the street outside White’s house, and allegedly trespassed into his driveway. White came out with a handgun (unlicensed) and confronted the teens. Daniel Cicciaro, 17 years old at the time, and white, was being particularly obnoxious, so John Harris White—who, remember, is black—shot him in the face, killing him. [Cicciaro’s father breaks his silence, Newsday, December 25, 2010

White said the gun had gone off by accident. He was found guilty of second-degree manslaughter and unlawful possession of a weapon. In March 2008 he was sentenced to two to four years imprisonment—which is way less than the 15 years maximum for second-degree manslaughter. He was then freed on bail pending an appeal.

The appeal dragged on for over a year, but in July 2010 White was finally locked up. He served just five months, then outgoing Governor David Paterson commuted his sentence, leaving him a free man. [John White, convicted of killing Daniel Cicciaro, pardoned by Gov. David Paterson, by Corky Siemaszko NY Daily News, December 23, 2010]

Did I mention that Governor Paterson is black?

Quote from CBS News at the time of the governor’s commutation:

Paterson said the five months John Harris White has served was enough time for the emotion-fueled 2006 shooting death of Daniel Cicciaro, 17. Paterson said everybody connected with the case had suffered enough, and White was released Thursday.

Man Set Free in Teen’s Racially Charged Death, AP (CBS) December 23, 2010

Isn’t that touching? Five months enough jail time for shooting a disorderly white teenager in the face. Everybody has suffered enough! It was emotion-fueled!

But if, at least arguably panicked by a screaming mob, you drive into the mob and cause one to die, you get two life sentences plus 419 years.

Nothing emotion-fueled about that situation! No governor is going to commute your sentence, certainly not the current Governor-weasel of Virginia.

Plus, the feds will hit you with a shelf-full of “hate crimes” charges—a thing that for some reason John Harris White didn’t have to worry about.

The whole concept of “hate crime” is pretty clearly unconstitutional but, like President Xi Jinping, we no longer “follow the path of Western ‘constitutionalism.'”

🔊 Listen RSS

Earlier: Organized African Illegals Storm Pantheon In France, Two Days Before Bastille Day

The Panthéon is a grand 18th-century building in Paris where notable French people have been interred since the Revolution. Voltaire and Jean-Jacques Rousseau are there; so are mathematicians Lagrange and Condorcet, novelists Victor Hugo and Émile Zola, physicists Pierre and Marie Curie, and many other notables of French national culture.

It was therefore very shocking to see a mob of several hundred young men rioting in the Panthéon last Friday. These were all blacks, illegal aliens from West Africa, demanding legal residence in France. After several hours they were removed by police, with 37 arrests made.

Readers: watch the storming of the Panthéon below.

Then go to one of those Steve Sailer posts where Steve ponders what he calls “the world’s most important graph.

Then give me your odds on European civilization surviving this century.

• Category: Race/Ethnicity • Tags: Africa, Blacks, France, Immigration 
🔊 Listen RSS

Adapted from the latest Radio Derb, available exclusively on VDARE.com

Yoram Hazony, author of the book The Virtue of Nationalism (and sparring partner of VDARE.com Editor Peter Brimelow) felt obliged to go on Twitter the other day to note that, quote:

There’s a “dark and dangerous side” to nationalism. But there’s also a “dark and dangerous side” to internationalism. Why are we expected to constantly mention the first, but not the second? It’s like having the surgeon general’s warning on chewing tobacco, but not on cigarettes.

Of course Hazony is right. The commanding heights of our culture are in the hands of fanatical anti-national, anti-white ideologues who are interested in power; they are interested in conquest; they are interested in victory—total victory in the Cold Civil War.

For a look at what we have in store as the ideologues tighten their grip, glance across the Atlantic and consider the case of Tommy Robinson.

Tommy is an Englishman, 36 years old, from the town of Luton, thirty miles north of London. I remember Luton from my London days; it’s on the main road from London to my home town of Northampton, and I passed through it often. Back then, in the sixties and seventies, it was a nondescript light-industrial town, the population white working-class English and Irish.

Later in the last century, when Tommy Robinson was in his teens, Luton was afflicted with mass immigration of Muslims from Pakistan and Bangladesh. Today the town is close to one-third Muslim.

So it’s not very surprising that Tommy, in his twenties, became a nationalist. Tommy’s a working-class lad with not much education, and he’s a keen supporter of his town soccer team, so it’s also not surprising that he came in at the rough, street-fighting end of nationalism.

He’s cleaned up his act considerably the past few years, though, and focused his activism, sometimes a bit erratically, against the efforts by Britain’s political and cultural Establishment to suppress all criticism of multiculturalism, of Islam, of anti-white policies, of mass immigration, of the European Union.

For this the Establishment and their Goodwhite stooges have targeted Tommy as an Enemy of the People. This week he got a prison sentence on a patently trumped-up charge of contempt of court. You can read the details in excellent reporting by Jack Montgomery and James Delingpole at Breitbart.com, or Ezra Levant at The Rebel Media.

You can fault Tommy for all kinds of mis-steps. You can even suspect he’s a bit of a publicity hound.

I don’t care: speaking as a working-class English boy myself, I say his heart’s in the right place, and offer him my best wishes for surviving incarceration in a prison system run by homicidal Muslim gangs whom the British authorities are too cowardly to deal with.

Media personality Katie Hopkins, bless her, feels the same way I do. And then some: here she was telling us about going with Tommy to the courthouse for his sentencing.

Just for one moment in time I suddenly felt like Britain was alive again. Britain was surrounded … I was surrounded by people who thought like me, who missed the old country we used to know, who know right from wrong, who want to keep our daughters safe.

It felt like … I don’t know, I felt like I was surrounded by the thing I most want back, which is real British spirit. And that’s why I was so proud of for [sic] Tommy, even though he’s the sort of sacrificialone, as we walked through the streets, just seeing people desperately reaching out to hold his hand, to touch him, to tell him to keep going, people trying to put money in his hand so he can buy snacks if he goes to prison …

Just, all of the faces, just faces of people desperate to have something to believe in, in a country that they don’t really believe in any more …

He said to me—I was just talking to him just before he got sent down; and he really is, literally, sent down—he said: “You know, there’s twelve murder cases here today in this court. I’m the thirteenth case, and I will wait till the end of the day. I’ll be put in a van with twelve murderers and I’ll be taken to prison.”

And he’s still incredulous that this could happen in the U.K. today; and I think Tommy’s message—I want to reflect it fairly—is, this is a warning for America. It doesn’t stop with Tommy Robinson. It doesn’t stop with this Enemy of the State.

All right, it’s a little over-wrought. Lower the volume a bit on the Christian imagery there, Katie.

It touched my old English heart, though. And that warning to America at the end should touch yours. The nation-wreckers are arrogant and mighty, and they won’t stop with England.

I know I’ve told this story before, but it bears telling again. I can’t forget it, and I don’t want it forgotten.

Twenty years ago, my mother was bedridden and near death. It was one of the last times I was with her, perhaps the very last time—I’m not sure. She was drifting in and out of awareness, sometimes just saying things out loud—random things, clear and coherent but not connected to each other.

So I was sitting there by the bed and heard her say: “I don’t mind dying. At least I knew England when she was England.”

• Category: Ideology • Tags: Britain, Immigration, Political Correctness 
🔊 Listen RSS

See, earlier, by Patrick J. Buchanan: Trump’s Patriotism Vs. The New Anti-Americanism

I hope you enjoyed your July 4th as much as the Derbs enjoyed ours. You should in fact enjoy the Fourth each year now with special zest in the knowledge that it may not be a public holiday much longer. Our Cultural Revolution advances ever faster.

Nowadays the word “pride” dwells under a cloud of suspicion. Any time you hear about some organization or event with “pride” in its title, you can infer that it is a vehicle for the promotion of buggery. Steve Sailer has mused that when the younger generation today learns about the 1942 Gary Cooper movie Pride of the Yankees, their first reaction is probably: “Hey, I didn’t know Lou Gehrig was gay!”

For example, we recently had Pride Week in New York City, with the word “pride” used in just that sense. It climaxed on Sunday, June 30th, in a huge parade of proud Ls, Gs, Bs, Ts, and Qs down Fifth Avenue.

Thus primed, I think I may be forgiven for having misapprehended a headline I saw on the Drudge Report. American Pride Hits New Low. “Uh-oh,” I thought, “what have the homo lobbies been up to now?”

On investigation it turned out that the news report had nothing to do with eccentric sexual inclinations. That headline was actually taken from a new press release out of Gallup, the very respectable polling organization:

As Americans prepare to celebrate the Fourth of July holiday, their pride in the U.S. has hit its lowest point since Gallup’s first measurement in 2001. While 70 percent of U.S. adults overall say they are proud to be Americans, this includes fewer than half (45 percent) who are “extremely” proud, marking the second consecutive year that this reading is below the majority level. Democrats continue to lag far behind Republicans in expressing extreme pride in the U.S.

American Pride Hits New Low; Few Proud of Political System, by Megan Brenan, July 2, 2019

The eye-catching sentence is: “Democrats continue to lag far behind Republicans in expressing extreme pride in the U.S.”

The actual percentages expressing themselves “extremely proud to be American” are: Republicans 76, Democrats 22. That’s a heck of a gap: 54 percentage points. In 2001 it was ten points, 64 to 54.

Here’s my question for Democrats. The biggest issue in our politics right now arises from the fact that millions—tens of millions, likely hundred of millions—of foreigners want to come settle in America, with or without proper permission. Isn’t that an occasion for…”pride”?

Apparently not. This last week, we have seen a couple of major strides toward the abolition of Independence Day: .

The logic on this one was hard to follow. Is it the thirteen stars, representing the original thirteen colonies, in all of which (I think) slavery was legal at the time Ms. Ross offered her flag design? If it was, then the thirteen stripes must be equally offensive. That could be…what’s the cant word here?…oh yes: problematic, that could be problematic to a great many not-yet-fully-woke Americans, as our present national flag retains those same thirteen stripes.

The issue got further confused when diehard counter-revolutionary subversives noted that the Betsy Ross flag was prominently displayed at Barack Obama’s second inaugural bash.

Since it is inconceivable that Saint Barack himself was not fully woke to the shameful associations of the flag, a new justification for the ban had to be thought up.

It quickly was. The Betsy Ross flag, we are now told, has been appropriated by white supremacists as a symbol of their deplorable movement.

I must say, I wasn’t aware of this. I have never seen the Betsy Ross flag on display at meetings of my own local white supremacy group SCARF (that’s the Suffolk County Assembly of Racists and Fascists) … but perhaps we’re just behind the curve out here in the sticks.

This logical switch illustrates the nimbleness of the Cultural Revolutionaries. In the fullness of time they will no doubt declare that yes, the current national flag is indeed unacceptable. They know, however, that the time is not yet right for a full-scale assault against all our national symbols. They need to proceed methodically, step by step until the moment is ripe to storm the Winter Palace.

The other revolutionary step forward this week:

  • the city of Charlottesville, Virginia will no longer celebrate Thomas Jefferson’s birthday as an official city holiday.

Charlottesville is the home of the University of Virginia, which Jefferson founded, and of Jefferson’s Monticello estate.

• Category: Ideology • Tags: American Media, Political Correctness 
John Derbyshire
About John Derbyshire

John Derbyshire writes an incredible amount on all sorts of subjects for all kinds of outlets. (This no longer includes National Review, whose editors had some kind of tantrum and fired him. He is the author of We Are Doomed: Reclaiming Conservative Pessimism and several other books. His most recent book, published by VDARE.com com is FROM THE DISSIDENT RIGHT (also available in Kindle).His writings are archived at JohnDerbyshire.com.