Why John Derbyshire’s racist screed is bullshit

Why John Derbyshire’s racist screed is bullshit. Shall we?

While one could do this with the entire piece post, I’ll just stick to #10:

(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 whites not all known to you personally.

(10b) Stay out of heavily white neighborhoods.

(10c) If planning a trip to a beach or amusement park or summer camp at some date, find out whether it is likely to be swamped with whites on that date.

(10d) Do not attend events likely to draw a lot of whites.

(10e) If you are at somewhere and the number of whites suddenly swells, leave as quickly as possible.

(10f) Do not settle in a district or municipality run by white politicians.

(10g) Before voting for a white politician, scrutinize his/her character much more carefully than you would anyone else.

(10h) Do not act the Good Samaritan to anyone in apparent distress.

(10i) If accosted by a strange white in the street, smile and say something polite but keep moving.

If you think for one second that you are going to find MORE instances of black-on-white crime to push the racist message that white people should fear black people, Mr. Derbyshire, you obviously know little about history, demographics, and reality (and one’s ability to google such facts).

Shame on you, sir. Shame on you.


11 thoughts on “Why John Derbyshire’s racist screed is bullshit

  1. Is this supposed to be refutation by anecdote. Derbyshire was correct. Even by leftwingers own reasoning he’s probably correct. They think poverty accounts for most crime. Blacks are impoverished, therefore blacks are more criminal, therefore be more wary of blacks. Oh but always remember to presume the races are equal and it’s just racism that made them unequal.

  2. I don’t even know what you’re saying with that last sentence. I should presume that there are inherent differences between races of people? And that racism didn’t historically play a role in how racism functions today?

    The point is that Derbyshire’s piece was based on anecdote.

  3. How do refute anecdote except by anecdote? Oh, whatever. You don’t believe the races are equal. That’s all I need to know about you. It’s all anyone needs to know.

    Make sure that you say that outright in every social or work situation, and especially when meeting new people. It will make it SO much easier for people to ignore the rest of whatever you have to say.

  4. I’m saying that the races are unequal physically and are unequal in mental and behavioural performances. Therefore you have no reason to presume equality between them. You can say they’re morally equally or something fuzzy like that but you have no reason to assume the averages of racial groups in their ability are equal.

    It’s like assuming the existence of an all loving God even though the world is filled with suffering. You have no reason to assume it in the first place. But then you defend the initial presumption by saying Satan made the world into a garbage heap. Likewise you assume racial equality and then defend it by saying racism distorts the natural equality of all races. You have no reason to make the presumption in the first place if inequality is the observable reality.

    Take Jewish people. They’re 0.2% of the world population, but 20% of Nobel laureates.


    They’re 2% of the US population, but almost 10% of Congress:


    Why are they so over-represented? Jewish people have made enormous contributions and most likely have a genetic component to their advantage in intelligence. That’s how they get to where they are, unless you wanna think there’s some kind of Jew privileging society that promotes them or something. I think even Steven Pinker has entertained the idea that Jewish people have a genetic component in intellectual advantage.

    Racial groups are not equal, there’s no reason to think they are equal. Yes, there’s more variation within racial groups than between, but the same can be said of men and women and yet I’m pretty sure the sexes exist. Derbyshire’s advice is based on sound reasoning and on knowledge of the statistics. You people base your rebuttal on nothing but egalitarian dogma. You’re bainwashed.

  5. “You don’t believe the races are equal. That’s all I need to know about you. ”

    Spoken like a true cultist.

  6. What a neat thought experiment!

    The problem is that you seem to care very little for history and the many different factors that over time have created the disparity between different peoples. So, until you spend more time actually trying to figure out why things are the way they are rather than relying on idea that some people “most likely have a genetic component to their advantage in intelligence” I give no fucks what you have to say.

    If you post this drivel again, I will delete it. This is my blog. If you want to support Derbyshire, go write on your own blog.

  7. Fine. I’ll go, but I like how you’re totally unselfconscious about being totally closed minded. The face of progress!

    I doubt you’d accept anything I could cite, I’ll leave with this:

    it’s beyond doubt that intelligence and emotional traits are heritable to *some* extent – what are the chances that differences in intelligence and behaviours between groups are totally, completely,
    and absolutely due to environmental factors? Small. Small to the point of vanishing.

    There’s also every reason to think black culture was very brutal before blacks came under Whitey’s yoke. Zulu imperialism was much more savage than anything visited upon Africa by Europe. They called the devastation it caused “Mfecane”. Look it up I guess.

    Just know that intellectually you’re no better than the religious right. You both deserve each other’s garbage. Bye.

  8. Wow. “Black culture” = Zulu imperialism? No. First, the Zulu were never enslaved by Europeans so not sure what that has to do at all with the US. Second, there was nothing, nothing, nothing monolithic about people who lived in Africa pre-contact w/ Europeans (or after contact or right now, for that matter). Third, if anyone had a brutal and violent culture before enslavement it was the Europeans. So…what is your point with that? It’s a red herring that proves nothing…again.

  9. The whole point is that the Zulus were not enslaved by the Europeans at the time! Thus refuting the idea that slavery created the brutality you see among people of that ancestry. Sub saharan black culture was more brutal than anything in Europe, before Europe had anything to do with it. You cannot blame the violent and criminal state of large swathes of black groups on European influence, they were plenty violent before! I don’t even know what point the rest of your post is supposed to make!

  10. One last time and I’m done: Zulus have nothing to do with modern America. AND Europeans were incredibly brutal and violent. You have no proof that sub-Saharan Africa was more brutal than Europe. None. You couldn’t begin to find that evidence because it doesn’t exist. Whatever you locate in Africa was just as present in Europe – if you want to argue that one set of people is somehow pre-disposed to be violent thugs based on pre-contact ways, you have to take into account what Europeans were doing, too.

    Your history is wrong, your argument is flawed, and the fact that you are trying to dismiss the influence of slavery on our society today shows that you know little beyond whatever you can google on the internet.


    I’m sure there’s a place at Reddit for you where everyone will pat you on the back for hating people in just the right way.

  11. Nice.

    You haven’t addressed my argument. Not my initial post, not the one questioning whether racial equality is a justified belief, and all you have against my argument regarding black culture is a misunderstanding of the point I was trying to substantiate with the Zulu example.

    I don’t like reddit, or circle jerks in general, but I find it ironic an egalitarian cultist tells me with the prissy snark that characterizes your type that *I’m* the one who craves social approval.

    You haven’t noticed obviously, but *you* are the mob, not me. That’s why you “social justice” crazies swarm anybody who says anything that offends your dogma, like Derbyshire. If anybody’s preoccupied with what gets socially approved, then guess what, it’s you.

    I’m done too. You’re an imbecile, and you’re exactly what’s going to help sink your country.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s