Derbyshire’s Talk

John Derbyshire - The Much Maligned Tolerant RacistJohn Derbyshire is a British-American writer, journalist and commentator who worked at the National Review until he sparked outrage from Blacks and their Liberal enablers by penning an article for Taki’s Magazine called “The Talk: Nonblack Version.”

The article in question was his singular response to the overblown reports in the lamestream media of “talks” given by Black parents to their children warning them against White authority figures.

His version of the talk for non-Black children is a mixed bag of reasonably pragmatic, if overly security-minded, advice for non-Black, especially White, children and outright racism. This is not surprising since Derbyshire describes himself as a “mild and tolerant racist.”

What is more shocking than surprising is what Derbyshire’s detractors have focused upon in their outrage against him. By and large, they focus solely or primarily on point 10 of his 15-point list:

(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.

In points 7 & 8 Derbyshire described Blacks as more and more dangerously antisocial, especially towards Whites, and in point 11 he described Blacks as being on average significantly less intelligent than Whites. Both of these statements can easily be classed as truly racist and point 11 in particular would certainly be worthy of condemnation by most people.

These points aren’t focused upon by the Liberals and their minority tenants though. Instead they focus upon the 9 subpoints of point 10 which are, in point of fact, pragmatic advice for non-Black, especially White, children and teens in these times.

Frankly, Derbyshire’s advice in point 10 if his version of “The Talk” are, if one changes up the races, quite similar to the attitudes Blacks pass on to their children are in many ways good advice to live by irrespective of race, if one is most concerned with one’s safety. But this is what they complain about instead of other points in Derbyshire’s article.

Why Is That?

So why do they focus on those sections of Derbyshire’s “The Talk: Nonblack Version” which are pragmatic though harsh safety advice for non-Black youths instead of those parts that are classically and definitively racist in tone and character?

It’d be all too easy, especially for the frustrated and/or more nasty-minded people, to decide that the Liberals and Blacks were simply conceding those points and accepting that Blacks were more antisocial and were more violently so, and that Blacks were on average less intelligent than Whites. I sincerely doubt that’s the case though and believe that’s a line of reasoning and argument that is less than worthless to pursue.

No, I don’t think that they’re conceding those points. I think they just don’t care enough to argue them. In their ideology it doesn’t matter whether those points are true or false. Whites are not “allowed” to counsel one’s children to avoid perceived danger if, by doing so, one is seen as disadvantaging the outcomes of Blacks. The risks, real or imagined, are immaterial to them.

Isn’t that what the modern corruption of Liberalism comes down to? The consequences to unprotected peoples never matter in their quest to improve the results of specially protected groups.

Tags: | | | | | |