Mon, May 13, 2013 at 10:51:31 am
Byron York interviews Jason Richwine, who resigned from the Heritage Foundation when his ties to white nationalists and racist writings surfaced, and it will serve very nicely as an example of how deeply entrenched this kind of racism is in the Republican Party: A Talk With Jason Richwine: 'I Do Not Apologize for Any of My Work'.
Of course he doesn't apologize; that's the standard posture when right wing racists are exposed. They always double down and insist they were just "telling un-PC truths."
But Richwine's excuses for publishing articles at the white nationalist website AlternativeRight.com are simply amazing.
Richwine, the Harvard intellectual, thought he could discuss perhaps the most radioactive subject in America -- a mixture of race, ethnicity, and group intelligence -- in the context of another highly controversial topic -- immigration -- and act as if it were all a matter of scholarly inquiry. In addition, he made what was at best a careless mistake -- why post anything at AlternativeRight? - and further damaged himself by making tone-deaf remarks during a public discussion in Washington. Given the intensity of the immigration fight now raging in Washington, that was more than enough to do him in.
"At best a careless mistake?" Right.
"Oops! I published racist articles at a white nationalist site? How in the world did that happen?"
Here's Richwine's excuse -- he had no idea the site was run by the Ku Klux Klan in $300 suits. He thought it was just, you know, a "paleo-conservative" site. Because after all, John Derbyshire was writing for it, too.
Yes, that's the John Derbyshire who was fired from the National Review for his overtly racist views.
Richwine published the rebuttal in a relatively new website, AlternativeRight. Why there? For several reasons, Richwine told me. First, The American Conservative declined to publish the response on its own site, which left Richwine looking for a place to post. Second, he had met AlternativeRight's founder Richard Spencer at an AEI event. And third, Spencer asked Richwine to write for him. "There was a new website called AlternativeRight," Spencer recalled. "I thought it would be like a paleo-conservative website. I had seen that [former National Review writer] John Derbyshire had also published something there ... Later on, it took on a more extreme version."
Absolutely stunning. They're so immersed in reactionary racism, they don't even see it any more.
By the way, Richwine's claim that AlternativeRight.com only became "extreme" later on, after he wrote for them, is pure, unvarnished bullshit. But you probably already knew that.
Oh... and of course, in the comments for York's article at the Washington Examiner, here come the racists to defend Richwine. As they always do. These views are an integral part of today's right wing.
Our ancestors charged cannon fire and muskets to overthrow tyrannical rule and take charge of their own destiny. Today we cower in fear of being called "racist."
I feel bad for Richwine. People do what they have to do and say what they have to say in order to stay employed and "feed their families." This is an example of how the conservative movement has come to resemble the former Soviet Union. Others like Derbyshire and Sam Francis have been purged. I encourage people to go to Richard Spencer's National Policy Institute website and watch his video response to these events. Many of the readers of this site will find his comments apt.
The accusation of racism is one of the worst things that anyone can call you in public life," he says. "Once that word is out there, it's very difficult to recover from it, even when it is completely untrue."
But saying there is a connection between race and IQ is clearly "racist." The fact is that the universe is "racist" because it gave different innate attributes on average to different races. Mainstream conservatives make a mistake when they say it is wrong to be "racist" because when they do that they are cutting themselves off from the truth that supports their side.
Mainstream conservatives have internalized the politically correct ground rules of the left, and in doing so they have fatally weakened their own cause. When they say it is wrong to be "racist" they are also saying that it would be wrong for whites to look out for their own group interests.
Meanwhile, whites are the only race or ethnic group that doesn't have group identity politics to represent its interests in the political mainstream. The GOP takes white votes while doing nothing to look out for white interests fundamentally. Whites are becoming a minority in this country as a result of immigration (both legal and illegal), and the GOP has done nothing to stop it. Whites are officially discriminated against by their own government, but the GOP avoids this issue in the hope that it can win over a few more black and Hispanic votes. Someone has to stand up for whites explicitly in the mainstream. If the GOP and the conservative movement don't start doing this, then hopefully they will meet the same fate as the former Soviet Union, and it will be sooner rather than later.
Richwine learned the hard way as did Charles Murray did when he wrote "The Bell Curve." You do NOT touch this subject. No matter how objective your analysis may be, if the conclusions don't support politically correct assumptions, you publish at your peril.
I take no offense in learning Asian-Americans perform better on standardized tests or qualify for loans at a higher rate than whites. I also don't find it troubling that blacks or Hispanics perform/qualify lower/less often than whites. In fact, any finding to the contrary would be surprising indeed. Why then does data which comes from an objective, controlled study offend so many people?
The answer is politics. The data may be perfectly valid but it must take a back seat to ideology and leftwing ideology refuses to accept ANY data which shows selected "victim groups" are "inferior" to others. Of course, the data in NO WAY shows racial superiority or inferiority. It simple demonstrates trends and correlates them to race. Liberals know this but admitting the data are true flies in the face of both their ideology and its agenda. So we hear screams of "social Darwinism" and "racism" and "xenophobia" rather than an intelligent, objective response. Richwine IS a bigot. Oppose gay "marriage?" You ARE a "homophobe." Don't want a Muslim cultural center near Ground Zero? You ARE an "Islamphobe." Don't think the federal government should pay for a woman's birth control? How dare you? You ARE a misogynist. No discussion. No facts. End of story. You suffer from some liberal-attributed clinical malady. You ARE sick. Disagree? You're not in the "party of science" and probably not worthy of even drawing further breath. If you're allowed to do that, you'll just hasten the looming climate catastrophe by expelling CO2. Who needs that or YOU?
And the guy is abandoned and left with people thinking that he's a racist and that's what motivates the study. Why is it that we never circle the wagons around our own and speak out to defend and protect them. The left will always protect their own, no matter what and they win the debates in public opinion. When are we going to learn that we have got to back up our folks and stand up the the race baiters? I'm so sick of thisl