Let's talk about Trayvon Martin, George Zimmerman, and how unbelievably fucked up this all is

might be the first time anyone at NROLand has tossed someone to the dogs

comments disabled!

anyway, i feel like: aaaaare you sure about that, rich?

I'm reeling from that article still. Sort of sorry I
posted it (sorry I ever read it or saw it for sure).
It's just that there's no codewords or anything.
It's just pure racism. Basically no different than
those klan types gawker reported on the other
day. Usually you expect some room for plausible
deniability or whatever. All the things that ppl
sort of half-joke about getting said behind
closed doors -- he just comes out and says them
all. It's very depressing.

yeah, the lack of 'code words' has me reeling as well. i've read my fair share of consevative op eds that more or less boil down to the same thing... but man.... i almost don't want to admit it but being shameless and up-front really hits me harder. honestly shocked and can only hope that the deep-seated hate that this smug asshole has decided to nurture eats him up inside.

Gallup also acknowledged it had collected information on the Hispanic perspective on the Trayvon Martin case that it had not seen fit to report publicly. On its website, Gallup says it interviewed 3,006 people, including 2,334 non-Hispanic whites and 242 blacks. When I pressed for a breakdown, Gallup said it had interviewed 239 Hispanics. Note the numbers: While the Hispanic sample was virtually the same size as the African-American sample, Gallup did not regard the Hispanic viewpoint as worth reporting either in its release to the media or online.

Gallup did provide the data when I asked, and the numbers show that Hispanics view the case rather differently from both blacks and whites.

http://www.salon.com/2012/04/07/trayvon_polls_ignore_latinos/

Wow. I'd been seeing references to this on facebook and twitter all day, but hadn't had a chance to investigate until now. Really wishing I hadn't bothered.

“Only the sample sizes for non-Hispanic white and non-Hispanic black were large enough to be meaningful,” Pew told me.

The collective viewpoint of Hispanics and others who don’t identify as white or black wasn’t “large enough to be meaningful” — even though they were more numerous than the African-Americans whose views were reported. It’s hard to think of a more clear-cut example of how the American media “privileges” the political  narratives of blacks and whites over those of Americans who are neither.

no...it really just isn't statistically meaningful...the more important fact is that 109 non-hispanic blacks barely is too

that derbyshire thing is prob the most racist thing i've ever read that was explicitly some KKK/nazi shit from the outset

wasn't**

the thread keeps trying to veer away from it, we keep coming back. really digs its thorns in yr brain, stinks up the joint.

i just visited the museum of tolerance in LA, it's a lot like some of the nazi shit you can see there

vile racist cunt taki is regularly referred to in Private Eye as Takialotofcokeupthenose

wait a second, how is this website NOT explicitly racist trash?

i just randomly clicked another article and read this: "if I write that Islam is a vile religion for advocating the execution of homosexuals I will likely be sued and pursued by my own kind: white Christian heterosexuals who believe that appeasing the so-called “towels” will one day bring us peace and prosperity."

it *is vile racist trash.

The fact that Taki is reduced to self-publishing his racist screeds, rather than having them aired in mainstream publications like The Sunday Times and The Spectator, is a cause for celebration. It's just a shame that the guy who employed him to write about "black thugs" at the Spectator is Mayor of London and a reasonable bet for the next Conservative PM.

I woke up still angry about that thing, wanting to pen a Letter To My Son about how white people are insanely dangerous, but obv that's also dumb but Jesus. This fuckin asshole. And the way he frames it as "well, we have a talk with our kids, too, black people...and it's about how scary you are" is so fuckin

makes me mad is what

http://www.forbes.com/sites/joshbarro/2012/04/06/why-national-review-must-fire-john-derbyshire/

it's funny how my totally racist father never had The Talk with me.

makes you think

guess he figured it worked through osmosis rather than a series of bullet points.

I really wish I had remained ignorant of takimag, it is one of the most depressing things I've seen in a long time.

Wow this is really bad. Did somebody read this before publishing it?

I'm on page 2 now and it's like, each point is blowing my mind more than the last one. What century is this bigot living in?

So, I'm not reading this thing. Ever.

However, has everyone who has read it considered that it could be poorly-done satire? It wouldn't make it any less offensive but it would explain how it got published in the first place.

I doubt that it was, but I have no doubt derb will try to spin it that way after the fact

"see where's the outrage when black parents do this, I'm rly making u think with this good ass satire" *every decent person throws rocks at him when in an appropriate throwing distance*

Derbyshire had an uncredited role in Meng long guojiang (released in the West as Way of the Dragon and Return of the Dragon), a 1972 martial arts film starring Bruce Lee. Of landing the part, Derbyshire says: "The casting director had obviously just trawled around the low-class guesthouses for unemployed foreigners of a sufficiently thuggish appearance."

Please tell me there is footage of Bruce Lee beating the living shit out of this guy.

john derbyshire is not known for his humor

there is something about the fully-delighted-with-itself tone of the piece that almost does read as satire, but given what i know of derbyshire and takimag, i can't believe it. also its underlying purpose is to cite a lot of pseudoscientific bullshit about the inferiority of black people, and there's every reason to believe that that's an article of faith for contributors to takimag.

i need to punch something

the quintessential taki episode was when he referred to himself as a soi-disant antisemite, thinking that it meant 'so-called'

hahahaaaa

anyway, derbyshire has been saying stuff nearly identical to this for years. this is not out of character and it's not satire.

"it's satire and that was my point" is almost certainly going to be his deal on Monday - he'll claim he was "pointing out" that talking to one's black children about how not to aggravate white cops lest they shoot you is "just as racist" as telling your white children to fear all black people.

It's been obvious for years that NRO tolerates Derbyshire's iconoclasm and atheism because he hates everything.

i wonder if nat'l review will fire him now. but why would they? they know what he is and they can't be surprised or offended, if they've never been before. they've been paying money for years and years to employ a writer whose job is to make racist arguments.

i cant help but think about how Takimag is probably popping champagne in their office for all he traffic they're getting

god i know everything's the worst

Yet another reason why I'm not reading that thing

CLICK NOTHING DAY

"derb" is the one entree into the conservative world that the rest of NRO is still too washington-republican-genteel to touch. (other of their writers function similarly for different sub-sets i guess) when seriously hard-right people say crazy shit about the "decadent reign of centrist rich lowry" or w/e they aren't kidding, or wrong really

I think National Review just fired that tool.

http://takimag.com/article/10_hatefacts_for_those_who_hate_facts_gavin_mcinnes/page_2#axzz1rSOEkZ00

^#5

I am a racist and a homophobe -- but a mild one.

National Run Off

Alfred, that post is incredible. I love the weird anti-logic of it, wherein benefit of the doubt can be invoked to justify the worst, least likely option, beginning with the presumption/concession of homophobia and racism then working its way up from there. It's hard to know where to begin. But I like this one:

I grew up in England where that level of antisemitism was pretty well universal. It was perfectly harmless.

To say the least of it, male homosexuality is very
unhealthy–much more so than, for example, cigarette smoking.

"B-b-but Kingsley Amis did it!"

Yeah this guy's just full of shit.

am I the only one who isn't able to see any of these takimag articles? not that I'm complaining.

I think the site can't handle the uptick in web traffic. consider yourself lucky