|
In last week’s column,
I described an article by National Review contributor John Derbyshire
in which he said, “There is a talk that nonblack Americans have with their
kids, too.” In an article
for Taki’s magazine, Derbyshire listed a litany of racist things he
had told his children, including that in random interactions with Blacks, “the
black stranger will be less intelligent than the white” and “do not settle in a
district or municipality run by black politicians.”
Derbyshire has since been fired by the National
Review.
Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR), the
media watchdog group, noted
that conservative Forbes columnist Josh Barro had stated, “I’m pleased
that the National Review has fired John Derbyshire as a result of his
racist screed in Taki’s Magazine last week. Derbyshire’s remarks were
beyond the pale, and this severing of ties is important for the credibility of
one of the pillar institutions in conservative publishing.”
FAIR noted, “Apparently Barro believes purging
Derbyshire will remove a racist taint from the ‘pillar’ of conservative
publishing. That’s funny because NR’s 57-year history has been defined
in good part by racism. And while Derbyshire may have been the magazine’s
latest house bigot…he is just one in a continuous line of racists writing in
the pages of NR.”
That lineup of racists began with William F.
Buckley, the magazine’s founder. In an editorial in the magazine, dated August
24, 1957, titled, “Why the South Must Prevail,: Buckley wrote:
“The central question that emerges – and it is
not a parliamentary question or a question that is answered by merely
consulting a catalog of the rights of American citizens, born Equal – is
whether the White community in the South is entitled to take such measures as
are necessary to prevail, politically and culturally, in areas in which it does
not predominate numerically? The sobering answer is Yes – the White community
is so entitled because, for the time being, it is the advanced race. It is not
easy, and it is unpleasant, to adduce statistics evidencing the median cultural
superiority of White over Negro: but it is fact that obtrudes, one that cannot
be hidden by ever-so-busy egalitarians and anthropologists. The question, as
far as the White community is concerned, is whether the claims of civilization
supersede those of universal suffrage.”
In case anyone missed the point, Buckley added:
“National Review believes that the
South's premises are correct. If the majority wills what is socially atavistic,
then to thwart the majority may be, though undemocratic, enlightened. It is
more important for any community, anywhere in the world, to affirm and live by
civilized standards, than to bow to the demands of the numerical majority.”
Appearing on NPR’s “Fresh Air” on Feb. 28, 2008,
Buckley was given an opportunity to repudiate his earlier comments. When his
words were read to him, Buckley said, “Well, I think that’s absolutely
correct.”
It’s not surprising that Buckley applied that
same stand of logic – or illogic – when supporting minority-ruled South Africa.
That racist DNA has continued to appear on the
pages of the National Review throughout its history.
As Steve Rendall stated in his FAIR posting: “In
1993, NR published a gushing review (1/18) of Paved With Good
Intentions: The Failure of Race Relations in Contemporary America by Jared
Taylor, which argued that black Americans are more violent and criminal than
others. Taylor has since become a leading voice of white nationalism as the
publisher of American Renaissance magazine. (In the 1990s, Taylor
described himself to me as a ‘white separatist.’) The NR review was
written by fellow white nationalist Peter Brimelow, who launched the openly
racist and nativist VDare website in 1999.”
Rendall also pointed out,” In a positive review
(NR, 9/12/94) of Race, Evolution, and Behavior, a 1994 book
by Philippe Rushton, reviewer Mark Snyderman eagerly recounted the book's
‘ambitious’ and ‘fearless’ thesis:’ ‘Orientals are more intelligent, have
larger brains for their body size, have smaller genitalia, have less sex drive,
are less fecund, work harder and are more readily socialized than Caucasians;
and Caucasians on average bear the same relationship to blacks.’”
John Derbyshire’s racist bile was par for the
course at the National Review.
As the FAIR posting by Steve Rendell aptly put
it, “It is blatant racism, but it's hard to see a great deal of difference
between what he was fired over–assertions that black people are less civilized,
less intelligent and more prone to violence and criminality than others–and the
racist views NR has promoted since its birth 57 years ago. And it's
hard to see why anyone would take NR seriously ‘when they write about
racial issues.’”
George E. Curry, former editor-in-chief of
Emerge magazine, is editor-in-chief of the National Newspaper Publishers
Association News Service (NNPA) and editorial director of Heart & Soul
magazine. He is a keynote speaker, moderator, and media coach. Curry can be
reached through his Web site, www.georgecurry.com. You can also follow him at
www.twitter.com/currygeorge.
Next Column:
Rodney King Symbolized Police Brutality
Back To Columns |