Did John Derbyshire Write the Most Racist Rant EVER?

Meet John Derbyshire. If you're Black, he probably hates your guts.

Before Twitter and Facebook the two things that flourished most on the Internet were porn and racism. Both are still going strong with the most repellent and toxic forms of racism banished to hate sites and forums where bigots can gather in their little communities and rail against the Kenyan in the White House and applaud the dead teenager in Florida.

Beyond the knuckle-dragging, white-hooded, deep-fried racism of White supremacist websites, there is the genial, polished and sophisticated racism by educated, articulate intellectuals who are just as full of hate for Blacks as the two losers in Tulsa who went on a shooting spree killing three people and wounding two more for no other reason than they were Black.

The Tulsa police have downplayed any racial angle to the shootings.  Nothing about this so far screams “Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman” but it is safel to wonder if that controversy spurred this crime?

This brings us to one John Derbyshire.  Unless you are a conservative whose reading habits takes you beyond the internet and talk radio and Fox News, you probably aren’t familiar with the name of  Derbyshire, a columnist for The National Review.

But If you are Black he is quite familiar with you. Derbyshire knows all about Blacks. He knows how violent we are. He knows how stupid we are. He knows how much we hate Whites and can’t resist any chance to intimidate, assault or kill them.

Derbyshire wrote the most overly racist screed I have ever read outside of of a White supremacist website in response to “the talk” Black parents often feel compelled to give their kids on how to interact with the police.

Derbyshire describes his take on “the talk” as the “Non-black” version Whites (and Asian) parents should give their children as how to conduct themselves when they interact with Blacks. It is long, rambling and disgustingly extreme in its contempt for Blacks. Here are some notable excerpts:

(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.

(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.

(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.

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.

(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.

(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.”

Racism is readily recognized when it looks like this...

Derbyshire’s rant did not run in the National Review, the publication that gave him whatever notoriety he enjoyed, but after criticisms from other conservatives, editor Rich Lowry fired him with a message on the website.

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.

Kicking Derbyshire to the curb was the right thing for the National Review to do, but his racial views were always prickly and problematic. There is a necessary skill required to be a successful racial arsonist and to take the worst stereotypes and deviant behaviors of a given group, then magnify them into critically considered commentaries while provoking nevertheless pushes all the usual hot buttons.

Everybody knows what racism is supposed to look like. It looks like the Ku Klux Klan, the original boyz in the hoodies, It’s the sophisticated racists that are much more difficult to spot. In a moment of weakness Mr. Derbyshire permitted his hood to slip off and expose himself as the raving bigoted beast he truly is and always has been.

It’s easy to spot the redneck trailer trash types.  They go out of their way to expose their own ignorance.  It’s the quieter and more subtle bigots that are harder to spot.   By going too far Derbyshire in expressing his hatred and loathing, Derbyshire effectively outed himself and got fired for it.  Don’t think for a minute though that his sentiments were expelled from contemporary conservative thought with him.

...less so when it sports a suit and tie.