The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information

Topics Filter?
2000 Election 2016 Election 2020 Election Academia Affirmative Action Africa Alt Right American Media American Military Antifa Antiracism Black Crime Black Lives Matter Blacks Brexit Britain Censorship China Conservative Movement Coronavirus Donald Trump Economics England European Right Foreign Policy History Homosexuality Human Biodiversity Humor Ideology Illegal Immigration Immigration IQ Iraq War Ireland Islam Mathematics Miscellaneous Political Correctness Race/Crime Race/Ethnicity Racism Religion Republican Party Republicans Review Russia Science Terrorism The Straggler 2004 Election 2006 Election 2008 Election 2012 Election 2018 Election 9/11 Abortion Abraham Lincoln Afghanistan Africans Al Gore Al Sharpton Aldous Huxley Amazon American Left American Presidents American Renaissance Amnesty Amy Chua Ancient DNA Anglo-Saxons Anglosphere Ann Coulter Anti-Semitism Anti-white Animus Antonin Scalia Artificial Intelligence Arts/Letters Asia Asian Americans Asian Quotas Asians Australia Australian Aboriginals Austria Barack Obama Bill Clinton Boris Johnson Brain British Politics Cambodia Canada Cancer Capitalism Catalonia Catholic Church Central Asia Charles Murray Charlottesville Chelsea Clinton China/America Chinese Chinese Evolution Christianity CIA Civil Liberties Civil Rights Civil War Communism Confederacy Congress Consciousness Conservatism Constantinople Constitutional Theory Corruption Creationism Crime Crusades Cultural Marxism Culture/Society DACA Dalai Lama Dallas Shooting Deep State Democracy Democratic Party Demographics Demography Discrimination Disease Diversity Dreamers East Asians Ebola Education Eisenhower El Salvador Elections Elian Gonzalez Emmanuel Macron Energy Enoch Powell Environmentalism Espionage EU Eugenics Europe European Union Eurozone Evolution Evolution Of Language Evolutionary Biology Facebook Fake News Feminism Ferguson Shooting Fertility Rates Finland Floyd Riots 2020 France Gay Marriage Gays/Lesbians Gaza Flotilla Gender Equality George Floyd George W. Bush George Zimmerman Germany Global Warming Globalism Globalization Goldman Sachs Google Government Debt Government Spending Greece Gun Control Guns H-1B H1-B Visas Haiti Hamilton: An American Musical Harvard Hate Hoaxes Hbd Hillary Clinton Hispanic Crime Hispanics Hitler Hollywood Hong Kong Housing Huey Newton Human Evolution Human Genetics Human Genome Hungary Hunting Ice People Imperialism Indians Infection Intellectuals Intelligence Intelligent Design Internet Iran Iraq Islamophobia Israel Israel Lobby Israel/Palestine Italy James B. Watson James Comey Japan Jared Taylor Jeff Sessions Jeremy Corbyn Jews Jimmy Carter Joe Biden John Derbyshire John McCain Judicial System Jussie Smollett Justice Kaiser Wilhelm Koreans Kurds Libertarianism Libya Love MacArthur Awards Maoism Marc Faber Margaret Thatcher Mark Steyn Martin Luther King Mass Shootings Massacre In Nice Memory Mencken Meritocracy Merkel Mexico Michael Bloomberg Middle East Mind Minorities Mulatto Elite Multiculturalism Muslims National Debt Nationalism NATO Nature Vs. Nurture Neandertal Admixture Nelson Mandela Neocons Neoconservatism New York City New York Times Nicholas Wade Nordics Norman Podhoretz North Korea Northern Ireland Nuclear Weapons Open Borders Orban Orlando Shooting Orwell Ottoman Empire Outsourcing Paris Attacks Pat Buchanan Paul Ryan People's Republic Of China Pete Buttgieg Peter Thiel Philosophy Poetry Police Population Population Growth Probability Proud Boys Public Schools Puerto Rico Quantum Mechanics Race Race And Crime Race And Iq Race Denialism Race/IQ Race Riots Racial Profiling Racial Reality Razib Khan Refugee Crisis Richard Lynn Riots Robots Ron Paul Ron Unz Ronald Reagan Roy Moore Rudyard Kipling Saddam Hussein Sailer Strategy San Bernadino Massacre Scandinavia Science Fiction Science Fiction & Fantasy Scotland Senate Siberia Silicon Valley Singularity Slavery Slavery Reparations Soccer Social Welfare Programs Solzhenitsyn Somalia South Africa Space Program Spain SPLC Stabby Somali Statistics Stephen Wolfram Stereotypes Steve King Steve Sailer Supreme Court Switzerland Syria Ta-Nehisi Coates Taiwan Taxes Tea Party Technology Television The Economist The New York Times Thomas Perez Tibet Tom Wolfe Tony Blair Torture Treason Turkey UKIP Unemployment Uruguay Vietnam Violence Vote Fraud WASPs White Americans White Nationalism White Nationalists White Privilege White Supremacy Wikipedia William Buckley Winston Churchill Woke Capital World Cup World Population World War I World War II Xhosa Yemen Zimbabwe
Nothing found
 TeasersJohn Derbyshire Blogview

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter

[Excerpted from the latest Radio Derb, now available exclusively through]

Of the sixteen persons nominated for a cabinet position, as listed in the January 23rd issue of The Economist [After the chaos of the Trump era, what can Joe Biden hope to achieve?] nine have now been confirmed by the U.S. Senate and have assumed office. So we are better than halfway through the confirmation process.

You can’t help but notice the diversity. Not one of them—not one of the sixteen—is a non-Hispanic white Protestant heterosexual male. To put that another way: Not one of the sixteen comes from the same slice of the diversity pie as did every single one of our nation’s Founding Fathers.

(Am I still allowed to say “Founding Fathers“? “Founding persons,” whatever.)

That is the working definition of the word “diversity” in our benighted age: no non-Hispanic white Protestant heterosexual males! That’s true diversity!

Only one of the sixteen is a white male Protestant: Peter Buttigieg, the Transportation Secretary; and as an Episcopalian, his Protestantism is borderline. I used to be an Episcopalian, and I recall that bit in the liturgy where we prayed for the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

Confessionwise I count eight Roman Catholics, four Jews, two Protestants, one Hindu, and one unknown. By sex they break down as ten guys and six gals. Cutting by race and ethnicity: ten white, three black or blackish, three Hispanic. By sexual preference: fourteen apparently heterosexual, one homosexual, one unknown.

Concerning the confirmation process itself: There is a customary understanding—a sensible one, I think—that a new President is entitled to his cabinet picks, and that the Senators should practice forbearance in challenging them, with due allowance for a bit of televised grandstanding on particular issues. Given that, and the present balance of parties in the Senate, these confirmation hearings are somewhat of a formality.

They can be instructive, though. Instruction this week came from Merrick Garland, picked by Biden—or whoever pulls Biden’s strings—to head the Justice Department.

Justice in the U.S.A. is in serious trouble. It has been politicized. Our Ruling Class has been seized by an ideology: the one loosely called “Wokeness,” although as a longtime fan of Professor Paul Gottfried, I prefer “Cultural Marxism.” This ideology has many facets, but its most central characteristics are 1) deep hostility to the founding stock of the U.S.A.—as illustrated by the statistics I just gave you on Biden’s cabinet picks—and 2) fierce intolerance of all dissent.

In the matter of justice, the effect of that ideology has been to give us a two-tiered system, a shameful double standard. Anarchist mobs who burned, looted, and murdered their way through our cities last year have been smiled on by the courts. The motley protestors who entered the Capitol on January 6th, by contrast, are being hunted down and crushed like bugs: no bail, no celebrity support, no GoFundMe pages, no allowance for personal circumstances.

Sample quote from my new journalistic heroine, Miranda Devine:

As for Portland, Oregon, charges were dropped for 90 percent of rioters arrested in September’s anti-cop violence. One 23-year-old charged with attempted murder, arson, possession of a destructive device, and rioting was released on a $1,000 bond.

Seattle was as bad. Mayor Jenny Durkan lauded the lawlessness that would lead to the fatal shooting of 19-year-old Horace Lorenzo Anderson in July as a “summer of love.”

These were the deadly protests Biden benignly described as “peaceful” and [Kamala] Harris said are “not going to stop … and they should not.”

Yet after a few hours of madness one day in January, every Trump supporter in the country is to be treated as if they flew a plane into the World Trade Center. They all are under suspicion for what Biden said last week was “the greatest threat … in America: domestic terror.”

[ There shouldn’t be a double standard for law & order: Devine , New York Post, February 21, 2021]

Plainly—it could not be more plain—there is one system of justice for persons who hold approved opinions, another for dissidents.

Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence has of course always allowed intent as a factor in the dispensing of justice: an unintended homicide is treated differently from an intended one.

But that principle has now been distorted to:

  • If I burn down your store because of some grudge I bear, not towards you but towards society in general, I will not be punished so long as my grudge is a good fit for the Ruling Ideology.


  • If I enter some federal building unarmed with the vague intention of disrupting a parliamentary procedure—even if uniformed security personnel let me in—and then I put my feet up on a legislator’s desk, I shall be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, so long as my intention, or any of my personal connections, are at odds with Regime Ideology.

This gross and obvious double standard is Third World jurisprudence. It’s how things are done in Congo, Uzbekistan, China, or Guatemala.

No American jurist with any respect for our nation’s history or constitution should tolerate it.


Earlier: Biden’s Treasonous Immigration Bill Opportunity For GOP Leader To Say Two Words “Immigration Moratorium”

Thursday this week the Biden administration brought forth a bill on immigration. It comes in two versions, one for the Senate and one for the House, although the texts are well-nigh identical. Both versions are 353 pages long. [READ: Text of Biden-supported immigration bill, CNN, February 18, 2021]

My boss Peter Brimelow sent me the House version. I obediently settled down to read the thing.

By page 17 I was deep in the weeds.


Subsection (a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 5 of title II of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1255 et seq.), as amended by Section 1101, is further amended by inserting after Section 245B the following:


Subsection (a) REQUIREMENTS.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary may adjust the status of a lawful prospective immigrant to that of a lawful permanent resident if the lawful prospective immigrant —

Paragraph (1) subject to subsection (b), satisfies the eligibility requirements set forth in section 245G(b), including all criminal and national security background checks and the payment of all applicable fees;

Paragraph (2) submits an application pursuant to the procedures under section 245G(b)(1);

Paragraph (3) has been a lawful prospective immigrant for not less than 5 years …

At about this point, I lost the will to live. In my defense, I’ll wager that I had already read more of the bill than any of the congresscritters who’ll be called upon to vote on it.

I resolved to do the best I could from secondary sources—that is to say, by poaching from the commentary of other pundits more fluent in Congressperanto than I am.

My shame in this case was assuaged by seeing, as one of the first things these more knowledgeable commentators all said, that the bill stands no chance of becoming law.

Why is that? Well, here you have a conflict of strategies.

The Holy Grail for Open Borders lobbyists—which is to say, all of the well-funded business and ethnic lobbies—has always been “Comprehensive Immigration Reform.” That’s understood to mean a bait-and-switch model, a retread of Ronald Reagan’s 1986 law giving both sides what they want: mass Amnesty to please the lobbies, firm controls on employment and border security as boob-bait for the Bubbas. Once the law’s enacted, the Amnesty rolls ahead but the firm controls melt away quietly under judicial action and Executive Branch inaction.

That’s “Comprehensive Immigration Reform.” It was tried with Arlen Specter’s 2006 bill, again with the McCain-Kennedy bill in 2007, and yet again with the Gang of Eight bill in 2013.

All these efforts failed; but hope springs eternal in the Open-Borders breast. With majorities in both houses, Biden’s people—how naturally we say “Biden’s people,” as if the President were just a holographic image, which he might as well be—figured it was time for another try at “Comprehensive Immigration Reform.”

It actually isn’t, though. With the Covid pandemic, caravans of thousands assembling in Central America, and doubts about Mexico’s continuing fortitude in preventing those caravans crossing Mexican territory, a lot of Democratic congresscritters are getting spooked.

Here was Rep. Vicente Gonzalez, a Texas Democrat, talking this week to

Our party should be concerned. If we go off the rails, it’s going to be bad for us. Biden is going to be dealing with a minority in Congress if he continues down some of these paths.

‘Recipe for disaster’: Dem fears mount over immigration overhaul, by Sabrina Rodriguez and Marc Caputo, February 19, 2021

What to do, then? The lobbyists have to be appeased. And it would be really, really nice to have a big fat tranche of new Democrat voters in place before November 2024.

And I should say before proceeding that while I’ve been flinging around the time-honored expression “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” with gay abandon, this week’s bill is not actually a good fit for that term, as I have defined it. Most to this point: There does not seem to be any boob-bait for the Bubbas. Where are they, those clear promises to secure the border, punish employers of illegal aliens, and the rest?

The optimistic assumption must be that the Congressional drones who drafted this bill know that we know how bogus those promises were in past efforts at “Comprehensive Immigration Reform,” and decided that it wasn’t worth their time to go on lying.

I call this the optimistic assumption because it does at least signal a slight increase in honesty.

• Category: Ideology • Tags: Amnesty, Democratic Party, Immigration, Joe Biden 

[Excerpted from the latest Radio Derb, now available exclusively through]

Reading my New York Post, I caught this little news item from the nearby metropolis: A 72-year-old guy just getting off a subway train in Midtown was knocked to the ground by an assailant unknown to him:

The suspect, described as a man in his 20s and about 5-foot-10 inches tall, was wearing a green jacket with the words “Anti Social” written on it.

Elderly straphanger attacked in Midtown subway station By Jorge Fitz-Gibbon, Larry Celona, Tina Moore and Amanda Woods, NY Post, February 11, 2021

The perp was of course black. As you have heard said several hundred times over the past thirty years, including a couple of times from me: “If it was a white guy they would have told us.

In the art of rhetoric there are terms relating to omission—saying something by pointedly and deliberately not saying it.

I’m not sure precisely which term of rhetorical art applies here. I don’t think it’s apophasis: for that, you have to mention the fact that you won’t mention something. That’s a favorite of Donald Trump’s:

Why would Kim Jong-un insult me by calling me “old,” when I would never call him “short and fat”?

Trump sarcastically responds to Kim Jong Un insults, CNN, November 13, 2017

Strategic Silence—conveying information to the listener by omitting a key fact, as opposed to saying aloud that you’re not going to mention it—must be some other rhetorical figure, not apophasis. I leave it to your own researches.

Here I’m just going to observe that our elite Media have taken it to a new level. They tell us things by being silent about them, knowing that we know the significance of their silence.

The Officer Sicknick case comes under this heading. I passed comment last week on the strange media silence about cause of death.

This was the Capitol Hill cop who, we were told in a January 10th New York times headline, was killed by a Trump supporter—smacked on the head with a fire extinguisher, according to the story.

He Dreamed of Being a Police Officer, Then Was Killed by a Pro-Trump Mob, By Zolan Kanno-Youngs and Tracey Tully, January 8, 2021

Revolver.News just posted a fine report on the Sicknick case, concentrating on the complete lack of information we’ve been getting—i.e. the silence.

Acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen says the DOJ will “spare no resources” in getting to the bottom of what happened to Sicknick. Yet well over a month after his death, precisely zero information has been disclosed by the DOJ, the FBI, the US Capitol Police, the DC medical examiner, the hospital that cared for him, or the treating physicians.

MAGA Blood Libel: Why Are They Hiding The Medical Report? , February 9, 2021

Now we hear that Officer Sicknick’s remains have been cremated. So, no more autopsy. May we have the medical examiner’s report, since it must now be final?

No, apparently, we may not. Why not?

Because it would contradict the story about Sicknick having been killed by Trump supporters,

Prosecutors now concede they have no evidence this happened, and no-one is under investigation. [Investigators struggle to build murder case in death of US Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick, CNN, February 2, 2021]

But the Ruling Class like this story. It works for them.

Strategic Silence has also been deployed in the Ashli Babbitt case, the shooting of the unarmed young white woman by a black Capitol Hill cop. Early this week we were told that

The shooting of the Capitol rioter, Ashli Babbitt, remains under investigation by the DC Metropolitan Police, the US Attorney’s Office in Washington, DC, and civil rights prosecutors, a routine process for shootings involving the Capitol Police. A final decision hasn’t been made, the people familiar with the probe told CNN.

Justice Department officials could make a final decision in the coming days.

A spokesperson for DC’s Metropolitan Police Department said in an email to CNN that “it is irresponsible to make an investigatory assumption or to jump to any conclusion without completing the thorough investigation.”

Investigators recommend no charges for US Capitol Police officer accused of killing pro-Trump rioter during insurrection, sources say By Evan Perez, Katelyn Polantz and Paul LeBlanc, CNN, February 2, 2021

Cop shoots lady at close range, all on video. How long does a “thorough investigation” take?

Just long enough until everyone’s forgotten about it, I guess.

The lesson here: The media arm of our Ruling Class golem are Masters Of Silence—of informative silence.

What sticks in my throat here is their arrogance. The message to us here in every case is:

We’re not going to give out any information. We’re going to stay silent until it’s Old News and faded into the cosmic microwave background.

Yes, this is informative all by itself: The fact of our silence tells you what the truth is.

You can figure it out. But we don’t care.


[Excerpted from the latest Radio Derb, now available exclusively through]

A leading candidate for the title Truer Words Were Never Said is surely T.S. Eliot’s observation that,

… human kind
Cannot bear very much reality

Burnt Norton, 1936

If you want a set, that quote pairs off nicely with science fiction writer and occasional LSD user Philip K. Dick’s observation in a speech he gave in 1978 that:

Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn’t go away.

“How To Build A Universe That Doesn’t Fall Apart Two Days Later”

There is of course a great deal more than that to be said about the nature of reality—a very great deal more. This is one of the oldest topics in philosophy, overlapping with theology, psychology, physics, and other disciplines.

Neuroscience, for example. There’s a mental condition called anosognosia that I mentioned in a column here at VDARE once.

Anosognosia is a condition in which the patient is suffering some severe neurological impairment but does not know it. [Anosognosia,, February 27, 2019] The impairment is strictly neurological, in the higher processing regions of the brain. You might, for example, be suffering from paralysis of a limb, yet be unaware of it.

There are even some extreme cases recorded in which the sufferer is blind but does not know it! The eyes and optic nerves have normal function, but the brain centers that process visual stimulus are not working. To compensate, the brain makes up a visual field, trying to use cues from memory and the other senses.

It doesn’t work very well. You keep falling over things, but you can’t understand why.

Western society seems to have fallen into something like a social anosognosia. Our collective senses are gathering information OK, more than ever before in history in fact. But our collective brain is failing to process it, and compensates by making stuff up.

These things all came to mind when I read this February 2nd column by the notoriously Woke New York Times technology correspondent Kevin Roose [Tweet him]”How the Biden Administration Can Help Solve Our Reality Crisis.”

Steve Sailer and Gregory Hood have tossed and gored the column here at VDARE, but it’s such a big fat target I can’t resist adding my two pennyworth.

Roose locates the reality crisis in two areas: “extremist groups and conspiracy theory movements.”

The only people he actually names as being an “extremist group” are the Proud Boys. His other references are to unnamed “white supremacist groups” and “far-right militias.”

Ctrl-F “Black Lives Matter” … no hits. Ctrl-F “antifa” … no hits.

In the other area of his reality crisis, “conspiracy theory movements,” Roose includes believers in the QAnon theory, people skeptical of Joe Biden’s election victory, and those who think Covid-19 was manufactured in a Chinese lab. Roose actually uses the word “baseless” to describe the beliefs of both latter groups.

The QAnon theory sounds loopy to me, although no loopier than the stuff a lot of harmless, productive, otherwise-sane folk carry around in their heads.

The other two points, election tampering and a lab origin for Covid, are well within the scope of possibility, not at all “baseless.” Much stranger things have turned out to be the case. If Roose had said “improbable,” I might have passed it without comment, but “baseless”? This is highly slanted journalism, even by the dismal standards of the New York Times.

Roose tells us that he called around some “experts” to get ideas about how we might restore a proper respect for reality. Who were they, these “experts”? He doesn’t supply a full roster, but names a few names.

I confess I haven’t had time to do my due diligence and look up these people’s professional output, but the job titles don’t inspire confidence.

“Disinformation researcher”? Uh-huh. Anyone who pays attention knows that the word “disinformation” has at this point been bled dry of all honest significance. It’s just a Woke word, a CultMarx word for any true facts the Ruling Class want suppressed.

Several of the experts, Roose tells us, said the Biden administration should assemble a task force to tackle the reality crisis. This task force would be led by a Reality Czar.

Roose allows that this sounds, quote, “a little dystopian.” Ya think?

A Discussion

Join the Book Club!

My just-posted discussion with John Derbyshire for the VDARE Book Club can be thought of as the completion of a cycle. If we weren’t both mistaken, John Derbyshire coined the term “Dissident Right” and was using it in 2012—which today seems like ancient history. Now, the term has re-emerged as a separation from the “Alt Right” of 2015-2017. We end where we began, as graduates of the historic American Conservative Movement who have realized that changing demographics, cultural degeneracy, and a hostile elite are destroying the things conservatives are supposed to “conserve.” Conservatism Inc. isn’t doing anything about it, so that leaves us.

However, how can we do it? Both John and I are skeptical of the prospects for separation from the United States. The only way the “System” may be brought to a halt is through some external disaster.

Of course, even to contemplate something like that, something akin to the Russian military defeat in the Russo-Japanese war might be required, which is horrifying because it will mean Americans paying for the mistakes of their rulers.

If we’re lucky, John said in the discussion, it will be something more akin to the largely bloodless Suez Crisis that finally brought home to the United Kingdom that was no longer an imperial power.

John suggests that we are on the brink of hard tyranny, something akin to what the Polish and Hungarian peoples faced in the 1960s. (I agree with him.) Looking to the way those nations survived and overcame a hostile regime may be useful for Americans today.

I’ve argued explicitly that the historic American nation is essentially a stateless people, devoid of representation in the Regime that rules over them, discriminates against them, and tries to replace them.

In a global context, the exploding Third World population, especially in Africa, means that immigration issues will surge in importance, even if elites would rather bury the discussion.

John and I discussed these issues and more yesterday. Of course, the point is not just to explain the world, but to change it. There will be hard times ahead. However, this should be seen as a challenge to become and a crucible that will strengthen us. There is hope and reason for faith in victory—not least because of all the readers and supporters who make possible.

Enjoy the discussion (the first 20 minutes of which is posted below) and we look forward to your feedback. If you haven’t already, join the Book Club and get involved.

James Kirkpatrick [Email him |Tweet him @VDAREJamesK] is a Beltway veteran and a refugee from Conservatism Inc. His latest book is Conservatism Inc.: The Battle for the American Right. Read Editor Peter Brimelow‘s Preface here.


A race realism primer

Race realism is of course deeply taboo. Expounders of race realism are mere squeaking mouse voices off in a corner of the room, inaudible in society against the roaring and shrieking of race denialism. Even in the dwindling number of social spaces where some limited dissent from ideological orthodoxy is still allowed, you will not hear race realism. Tucker Carlson will never have Jared Taylor as a guest on his show, nor any of the names in the next paragraph, nor me.

Race realism is true none the less, rooted in the desire to understand the world, while race denialism is a lie, rooted in the desire for social approval. All honor and glory, therefore, to those scholars who, driven by the love of truth — that “faintest of all human passions“—have labored to improve our understanding of race as a biological phenomenon: Greg Cochran, Richard Lynn, Helmuth Nyborg, Tatu Vanhanen, E.O. Wilson, Michael Woodley of Menie, and others no longer among us, notably the late J. Philippe Rushton.

Given the fierce obloquy and sometimes violent physical assault that comes upon any academic working in this area, it’s remarkable that our understanding has made any progress at all. It has, though, and Ed Dutton, Professor of Evolutionary Psychology at Asbiro University in Łódź, Poland, has given an excellent up-to-date summary in his book Making Sense of Race.

Ed himself wrote a column for the book here at VDARE when it came out a few weeks ago, and that column gives the general idea: the book is a primer of race realism. You should buy a copy of your own, though. It’s available on Amazon, although for how much longer in the current climate of intensifying censorship, I wouldn’t venture to speculate.

(Can anyone tell me why in America we pronounce “primer” as if it were spelled “primmer“? Or is that just an impertinent question from an obnoxious immigrant old-timmer? Never mind.)

I read Making Sense with pleasure and instruction. It filled in many gaps for me—things people ask to which I didn’t know the answer.

For instance: According to Rushton’s application of Life History Theory to our species, human populations living for thousands of generations in harsh Arctic conditions will, from dealing with the challenges of their environment, perforce evolve to higher intelligence than others more comfortably situated. This, according to Rushton, accounts for the mean-IQ difference between Northeast Asians (Chinese, Japanese, and Korean, mean 105) and sub-Saharan Africans (mean 70).

Hold on there, though. “Arctic peoples” (by which Ed means Eskimos) have mean IQ only 91, well below Europeans, and even further below Northeast Asians, to whom they bear a strong physical resemblance. What’s up with that? Ed’s answer, which I found plausible, is on pages 117-118.

If we lived in a sane country, Ed’s little primer would be on the recommended-reading list for high-school seniors nationwide. Instead they get Robin DiAngelo and Ibram X. Kendi. Heaven help America!

In hora mortis nostrae—Remembering Kathy Shaidle

Still with Ed Dutton: In a January 28th post here at Ed used the term “mortality salience,” which I had never seen before. A respectable psychology website describes mortality salience as “a psychological state in which a person is consciously thinking about his or her own death.”

Personally, I’m not in that state very often, and would be content never to be in it at all. Other people’s deaths can be food for thought, though.

Kathy Shaidle died early this month. James Fulford posted a notice here at on the 9th. It includes Kathy’s own self-written obituary, which shows a spirit of cheerful resignation. I always admire that.

And envy it. It is unfortunately not granted to many of us to know, with our mental faculties all intact, that we shall die at some point in the near future. Some of us will go unexpectedly, more or less instantaneously: stroke, heart attack, accident. Others will sink into drawn-out senility, until neither death nor anything else has much meaning to us. That was the fate of my own poor parents.

To have time to compose yourself, to put your affairs in order and prepare a dying that accords with the way you have lived—that seems to me ideal, at any rate since modern drugs came up to suppress the final pains.

If you do have that time, the alternative to cheerful resignation is angry defiance of the kind Dylan Thomas urged on his father:

Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Sorry, Taff, I don’t see the point. Sure, it’s honorable to give Death the defiant finger; but that’s what Kathy Shaidle was doing too, just with more class.

• Category: Ideology • Tags: China, Political Correctness 

[Excerpted from the latest Radio Derb, now available exclusively through]

Earlier, by Peter Brimelow: A Long Farewell To Donald Trump, Immigration Patriot. And Thanks.

Back in the Golden Age of Science Fiction seventy-something years ago there was a novel everyone read, title The World of Null-A. It was about a future planet Earth that had moved on from simple Aristotelean logic to something more subtle. So the “A” there stood for Aristotle.

The author, A. E. Van Vogt, was actually promoting a trendy philosophical system called General Semantics. This was one of those pseudoscientific fads that were popular in the mid-20th century, like William Sheldon’s body-typing, Wilhelm Reich’s theory of orgone energy, Immanuel Velikovsky’s colliding planets, or J.B. Rhine’s parapsychology.

I’m a bit surprised to see that the Institute of General Semantics is still around seventy years later. A bit surprised, but only a bit; these fads never disappear completely. In New York City you can still find people practicing Freudian psychoanalysis. I bet there’s a Velikovsky discussion group active on the Upper West Side somewhere.

Well, I shall leave you to look up General Semantics in your own time You might also read The World of Null-A, which can still be found in the sci-fi shelves of municipal libraries. I don’t actually recommend you do either thing; but hey, it’s your time.

Much more relevant to current concerns would be a novel titled The World of Null-T—the “T” of course standing for Trump. We’ve not yet given up on Aristotle‘s logic, but we have, for better or worse, moved on from Trump’s Presidency.

What’s the verdict on that Presidency? My view: it has to be failure.

It’s not that Trump did nothing in those four years. He accomplished a great deal. The evangelist group Liberty Counsel has published a list covering fourteen pages. It’s naturally tilted towards evangelistic concerns, and is too heavy on neoconnery for my taste—”Restoring American Leadership Abroad,” etc.—but there are some real useful actions in there. On immigration, for example, quote:

Removals of convicted criminal aliens increased by 14 percent from FY 2017.

Also on federal regulations:

President Trump has followed through on and exceeded his promise to roll back two regulations for every new one created.

The problem is, none of it has any permanence.

Removals of convicted criminal aliens? Starting yesterday, Thursday, Biden’s DHS has suspended all deportations.

In the matter of enforcing federal law, Congress proposes but the Executive disposes. If DHS, under the President’s instructions, don’t want to enforce the people’s laws on immigration, they don’t have to.

And it’s plain they don’t want to. ICE agents will quickly get the message and head for the donut shop.

Similarly with Trump’s rule on federal regulations. It’s a sensible rule. If you want to add a regulation to the seventy thousand pages of the Federal Register, you first have to annul two existing rules.

Well, forget about that. One of Biden’s first actions—on Wednesday, right after the inauguration—was to rescind that rule. If you want to saddle the U.S. economy with a vast labyrinth of mostly pointless regulations, mostly implemented as special favors to some rent-seeking lobby or other—and that of course is what the new administration does want—seventy thousand pages is not enough! We need more!

It’s the same with cultural issues. Biden—again on Wednesday, so this is high-priority for him—signed an executive order revoking Trump’s ban on federal agencies and federal contractors imposing Critical Race Theory training on employees.

So now, if you work for the feds or one of their contractors, you have to submit to being lectured by black grifters and white lunatics about the evils of whiteness.


[Excerpted from the latest Radio Derb, now available exclusively through]

See, earlier, May 30, 2020: Even Right Abandoning Accused Minneapolis Cop—But They Shouldn’t

The incoming new administration will, with high probability, face three major crises in the next year or so. China will probably invade Taiwan. T he stock market bubble will burst and the economy will contract at exactly the time that the Democrats, seeking to Elect A New People and subjugate the Historic American Nation, open the borders and amnesty 20-30 million illegal aliens.

And then there’s the Derek Chauvin trial.

Chauvin, you’ll recall, is the former Minneapolis Police Officer charged with second-degree murder, third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter in the death of George Floyd last May. Jury selection for Chauvin’s trial begins March 8th, so this is pretty immediate.

Three other police officers who were present at the scene when Officer Chauvin succeeded in restraining Floyd have been charged with lesser offences of the aiding-and-abetting sort:

[Minneapolis Judge Peter] Cahill [Above left] previously ruled in November that it was in the best interest of justice that all four cops be tried together, saying this would allow the jury to have “all of the evidence and the complete picture of Floyd’s death.” But the persisting realities of COVID-19 seem to have changed his mind.

Derek Chauvin to Stand Trial Separately From Other Cops Charged in George Floyd’s Death, by Ishena Robinson, The Root, January 14, 2021

There follows some stuff about the physical limitations of the largest courtroom in the justice center. It’s not big enough for all the lawyers and supporting staff needed when trying four defendants, without violating COVID-19 restrictions.


Given the stakes here, you have to suspect skullduggery.

The stakes for Judge Cahill are, that if you glance over his left shoulder you see the sinister figure of Keith Ellison, Minnesota’s white-hating black Muslim Bernie-bro Attorney General, who is determined to get Chauvin put away for 400 years.

Allowing the jury to have “all of the evidence and the complete picture of Floyd’s death” might get in the way of that. If all of the evidence says that Floyd died of a massive drug overdose only indirectly related—perhaps not related at all—to Officer Chauvin’s having used a commonplace method of restraint on him, [Neck Hold Used By Minneapolis Officer Was Approved By Department Policy,, May 29, 2020]and if one or two intelligent citizens slipped through the jury-selection process, the prosecution’s case could be in trouble.

The stakes for the rest of us: an acquittal of Officer Chauvin would mean another round of mayhem like the one we saw last year—public buildings defaced and torched by anarchist mobs, highways closed, random citizens beaten and killed, private businesses looted, while Biden and his crew blame it all on “white supremacists,” Kamala Harris starts a GoFundMe account to bail out the rioters and looters, and big corporations donate another ten billion dollars to Black Lives Matter.

Remember the Rodney King riots in 1992? They started because the police officers who arrested King and beat him when he resisted, were acquitted at state trial.

King didn’t even die, although he got a broken leg and some nasty bruises.

Plus, America was a lot more sane in 1992 than it is today. That was before Satan rose from the Underworld to gift us with the internet, smartphones, and social media. The rioters back then were mostly black and disorganized: anarchist Goodwhite mobs were not yet a thing.


[Excerpted from the latest Radio Derb, now available exclusively through]

I’m going to open with a confession here: watching those protestors rampaging through the halls of Congress on Wednesday afternoon, there was a part of me that was cheering them on.

I hasten to add that it was only a part. My very strong preference is for orderly government, carried on by dignified procedures long tried at settling differences and producing widely-acceptable conclusions.

I have a secondary preference for seeing those solemnities conducted in grand old buildings like the Capitol, in spacious high-ceilinged rooms with lots of polished wooden paneling, decorated with oil paintings in gilt frames and elegant statues of historical worthies, all hushed but for the voices of soberly-dressed adults uttering grammatical sentences in moderate tones.

Yet still, even with those preferences, I confess that, as I watched those protestors clambering over Nancy Pelosi‘s office furniture, traipsing their muddy boots along the carefully-polished floors, shrieking gleefully, and taking selfies posed in ridiculous costumes by those gilt-frames oil paintings, a part of me was smiling.

The word in my mind: “Turbulence.”

Dedicated followers will recall my September 2012 column for TakiMag titled “Losing Our Turbulence.” I keyed that column off a remark of George Orwell’s back in the 1930s, when England’s coalminers were suffering badly during the Depression. After attending large gatherings of miners, Orwell described them as “sheeplike,” and concluded that “There is no turbulence left in England.”

Orwell’s point: when those solemn, dignified processes of orderly government lead large portions of the population to a place where they are hungry, cold, and idle, and see no hope of improvement in their condition, then some turbulence is called for: some public protesting, some shouting and waving of banners, some breaking of Ruling Class windows.

That comes of course with a sheaf of qualifications. Turbulence can veer off into revolution; and revolutions can turn out badly, including for the revolutionaries. Nobody should wish for that.

Also, turbulence draws in a lot of idiots and clowns. I am as far from being a fan of Chuck Schumer as it is possible to be without drifting into homicidal fantasies; but I would rather look at Schumer’s smug, sneering face than look at a guy standing in Schumer’s senate office wearing a Viking horned hat, face paint, and body tattoos.

Yes: I laughed involuntarily when I first saw the Viking, and perhaps you did too. He’s funny. As Ed West just commented, though,

It’s also the case that frustrated, unfulfilled men are both the funniest and the most dangerous members of society.

[Why funny men are the most dangerous,, January 8, 2021]

And once thoughtful reflection settled in, my sympathies fled to the multitude of ordinary people protesting outside, the great majority of whom were neither funny nor dangerous.

These people—I know some of them personally—were there to protest peacefully, non-destructively, with moderate, measured turbulence, against a Ruling Class which they believe despises them and has no interest in hearing their grievances; and which has, furthermore, recently rigged a national election in order to thwart their political choice.

They have a case. November’s election was an appalling mess. The people who work in the Capitol—the senators and congressmen—have never paid the slightest attention to Badwhite concerns: to the exporting of jobs to cheaper factories abroad, to the mass im-porting of cheap foreign working-class labor through Open Borders and ditto of cheap foreign middle-class labor through extravagant guest-worker programs, to the endless pointless wars maiming and killing young Americans, to the poisoning of our legal and educational systems by crackpot ideologues.

When orderly, rational government leaves half the population disgruntled and mistrustful, it needs work, it needs reform.

If there isn’t reform, there will be revolution. That is an eternal political truth.

  • The collapse of trust.

What kind of reform do we need?

First and most important, we need an electoral system we can trust. We sure can’t trust the system we have.


Yet more evidence, if more were needed, that we live in an increasingly lawless society showed up in New York City news outlets last week. Here’s the story.

December 24th last year … sorry: 2019, December 14th 2019, in the Bronx, sixty-year-old Juan Fresnada was out walking with a friend when a group of teenagers attacked them. Fresnada was knocked to the gound, kicked, stomped on, and pounded with a garbage can. He died from his injuries three days later.

One of the teenagers, name of Jordon Benjamin, was arrested and charged with manslaughter. He seems to have been 15 at the time. He was held in a juvenile center, but freed in March by a judge of the Bronx Supreme Court, Justice Denis Boyle, as part of a policy prompted by the coronavirus pandemic. The authorities didn’t want teenage muggers catching COVID-19—Heaven forfend!

So that was March this year … dammit, last year, 2020. Forward to December 14th. Apparently there had been no progress on the manslaughter charge. Jordon Benjamin had been roaming free since March. At this point in his roaming, December 14th, he encountered a young woman, Amya Hicks, and slashed her in the stomach.

Jordon Benjamin, now aged 16, was arrested three days later and charged with felony assault and attempted assault, and misdemeanor weapons possession. At his subsequent arraignment he was—wait for it: this is the punch-line — he was released without bail by that same judge. He’s now strolling around the streets of the Bronx in freedom again.

The race angle here isn’t hard to figure out. Justice Boyle is white; everyone else in the story is black. The pictures accompanying the news story don’t show Amya Hicks, the girl who got slashed; but there’s an interview with her mother, whose name is Tynisha Smith and whose age is given as 33. We don’t know Amya’s age, but presumably she’s at least a coeval of Jordon’s, so her Mom’s was a teen pregnancy.

We’re down among the black underclass here. That means the killing of Mr Fresnada and the slashing of Ms Hicks are your fault, Whitey. It’s only right and fair that little Jordon is out free.

That seems to be the approach taken by the authorities, anyway. I’ll leave you to play the head games about what would have followed if Jordon Benjamin had been white, with the same black victims.

This was just an inside-page story in a local newspaper. It goes with so many other things, though: the coddling of illegal aliens, the legalization of shoplifting in California, the free pass usually given to Antifa and BLM rioters, …

How did we become such a lawless nation? The same way the guy in Ernest Hemingway’s book said he’d gone bankrupt, I guess: “Gradually and then suddenly.”

John Derbyshire
About John Derbyshire

John Derbyshire writes an incredible amount on all sorts of subjects for all kinds of outlets. (This no longer includes National Review, whose editors had some kind of tantrum and fired him. He is the author of We Are Doomed: Reclaiming Conservative Pessimism and several other books. His most recent book, published by com is FROM THE DISSIDENT RIGHT (also available in Kindle).His writings are archived at