Joanna Schroeder wonders to what degree a publication is responsible for the reprehensible behavior of its writers.
Should a writer be fired for publishing racist work?
If you’re not familiar with John Derbyshire, he’s a relatively well-respected writer and contributing editor at National Review. He recently published a piece in Taki’s Magazine called “The Talk, Non-Black Version”, in which he shares the advice he has given his children about how to stay safe. From black people.
Here are a few gems from his list (these are the sub-points to his point #10). I’m going to paraphrase here, because Taki’s doesn’t allow for “cut and paste”… But trust me, click on over there and you’ll see I’m not misrepresenting him.
- Avoid black neighborhoods.
- Plan your trips to beaches and amusement parks for times when there aren’t going to be a lot of black people.
- Don’t move to a neighborhood where your representative politicians are black (My thought: is Derbyshire planning to move to Finland?)
- Do not ever help black people in distress, such as on the freeway.
- Scrutinize a black politician more harshly than you would a white one.
There are so many other racist, dehumanizing references to black people in Derbyshire’s article that I have to just stop myself here before I recount the entire thing point by point with fuming rage.
But that’s not even the point of what I’m writing. We know there are racist people in the world. I’m not telling you anything new. But what matters here is whether Derbyshire should be fired from National Review, as many are demanding. Forbes‘ Josh Barro who published a piece yesterday called “Why National Review Must Fire John Derbyshire“, is one of such writers.
Barro explains why Derbyshire should be fired in the context of another piece written by National Review editor Rich Lowry. Lowry’s article points out that while Trayvon Martin’s death was a case of non-black-upon-black crime, the biggest problem young black men are facing is black-on-black crime. Lowry was called a bigot for this piece.
Barro doesn’t think Lowry’s piece is necessarily bigoted, but he says this:
…this is the problem for Lowry and other conservatives who want to be taken seriously by broad audiences when they write about racial issues. Lowry wrote a column containing advice for black Americans. Why should black Americans take him seriously while he’s employing Derbyshire? If Lowry wants NR to be credible on race, he should start by firing John Derbyshire.
Beyond trying to gain credibility in the black community, NR should decide what to do about Derbyshire based upon what’s right. I know that’s subjective, but every publication draws its line somewhere. Why not here? Derbyshire is advocating for racial profiling and behavior, which, in the context of the profound systematic racism young black men are facing, cannot be seen as anything other than overtly racist, dangerous behavior.
Why is it dangerous? Because propagating the idea that we should be afraid of black men, of black people in general, makes this world dangerous for innocent Americans, as gun-toting fear-motivated people (civilians and police alike) who think this is the Wild Wild West—shoot first, ask later—are going to keep killing innocent people.
Despite the fact that Derbyshire’s piece in question was not published at National Review, as an editor—and even as a writer—he represents what values they espouse.
So how about those who think he shouldn’t be fired? In my curiosity to learn why people think he should keep his position, I discovered this piece by Slate.com writer David Weigel.
In it, Weigel seems to make the argument that Derbyshire shouldn’t be fired due to the fact that he’s just one of many who feel as Derbyshire does:
There’s a sort of micro-movement building to shame National Review into firing Derbyshire. Why would they? Derbyshire is saying something that many people believe but few people with word-slinging abilities know how to say: There are differences between the races, and whites should watch out for blacks.
So now we have another writer saying that white people should “watch out” for black people?
Slate.com published this?
Let’s follow Weigel’s logic here: It’s okay if you say something, as long as you’re not the only one who feels that way…
You guys all know what they say, right? If you meet someone who says, “I’m not a racist, but…” you can bet your ass that whatever comes next is going to be some seriously racist shit.
Weigel’s entire piece is basically one, “I’m not a racist, but…” and I’m here to clarify something for Weigel: I don’t know you in real life, but in reading this piece, it seems you just might be a racist, pal.
The trick is that very few people actually think they’re racist, including the woman who sold the “Don’t Re-Nig in 2012” anti-Obama bumper sticker. But just because a person doesn’t think they are racist doesn’t mean that their actions and words aren’t harming others.
The idea of doing what’s right gets to the root of why a publication cannot allow a racist to continue to represent them. When people who have prejudicial or racist thoughts or tendencies read stuff like this, they think, “Yeah, I feel that way too. I’m so relieved I’m not alone. Maybe that thought process isn’t really racist, maybe I’m not really bad at all…” When in fact, racism is not “normal” and editors and publications should never allow propaganda like this to be published. If and when it is published, and the writer is exposed as a racist, the writer must be fired in order to show the world that this sort of thinking is not right, it is not normal, and it is not okay.
So if National Review should fire Derbyshire, do you think Slate.com should fire Weigel?
On a much bigger level, even if both Derbyshire and Weigel are fired, are we doing nothing more than treating the symptoms and ignoring the disease? For the publishers of both NR and Slate, it seems that right now that disease is alive and thriving.
What do you think? How responsible is a publication for the words of its writers?
—
EDITOR’S NOTE: On Saturday, Weigel posted a second, clarifying piece, “Derbyshire Again” in an attempt to better explain his views:
There’s been some tsuris about my Friday post on John Derbyshire’s Taki magazine essay “The Talk: Nonblack version.” It was written in a pretty dry way, so I never ended up saying the obvious: People, the essay was disgusting.
—
photo: raphaelstrada / flickr
There’s a few people in this thread speaking about how black neighbourhoods are dangerous, and that it’s justified for white parents to tell their kids to stay away from it. I don’t think we should ignore that, or tell them to shut up. It’s a real problem when there’s a certain street your kids can’t go down because they might get shot. Next to that (trying to keep your kids alive), an appeal not to hurt someone’s feelings is is grotesque. But what I would like to say to those people is that while you have every right to be… Read more »
Peter, your protestations about how you have dangerous neighborhoods in Ireland too (despite it mostly being white people) is no rebuttal, or even any kind of an argument. What does Ireland have to do with the US? The point of “The Talk (non Black version)” is that here, where we live, Black neighborhoods are in fact dangerous (and more so to whites or other groups than to other blacks, due to racial animosity). In fact, your closing sentence is a simple logical error – a fallacy . You have argued that the proposition that blacks are dangerous cannot be true… Read more »
As a Masculist, I am shamed and uncomfortable with the level of apologetics being accorded to Derbyshire’s views. Would we be minimizing, dismissing, and ignoring this kind of behavior were it coming from Feminists engaged in yet another attempt to disenfranchise men? Are we really so divisive that as men we cannot recognize the unique ways in which Black people, especially Black men, who are our brothers, are oppressed in America? One commenter above stated, “I do wonder why there is no great outcry over the articles that spurred Derbyshire’s response. It is ok for black parents to have a… Read more »
Interesting interview. Good point by Derbyshire about avowed vs revealed behavior.
http://gawker.com/5900452/i-may-give-up-writing-and-work-as-a-butler-interview-with-john-derbyshire
Issue also of avowed preferences vs revealed preferences. I suspect a lot of white conservatives and liberals follows parts of Derbyshire’s advice in terms of choosing a place to live, schools to send their children and neighborhoods to avoid.
It’s offensive to articulate it though.
OK this is just getting silly. Sure Derbyshire needs to be fired (and perhaps slapped around a bit) But then we have one so called “liberal” criticizing another “liberal” for overtly stating the clear position and practice of the Democratic party and every other “social progressive” for the last 50m yrs or so. How can this woman sit and write with a straight face that Weigel should be scrutinized for saying what all of her own beliefs and actions support and promote? Are we going to hear her denounce affirmative action? Are we going to hear her denounce the welfare… Read more »
I am confused by your quotation marks. Is a ‘so-called “liberal”‘ only a liberal in name? Who is calling her a liberal, herself or others? I have the same confusion over your use of “social progressive.” Maybe it’s the structure of the comment threads but I can’t figure it out. Who are the two individual “liberals” you refer to? Derbyshire sure doesn’t self-identify as “liberal” and, if he is, I don’t see it. If it is Ms. Schroeder who is writing “with a straight face that Weigel should be scrutinized for saying what all of her own beliefs and actions… Read more »
Derbyshire’s kids aren’t white. Their mom is Chinese. His kids are Asian.
I didn’t like his article, and NPR has fired him. But remembering who his kids are makes parts of his article very much the equivilant of the article to which he was responding in the first place.
His kids are as much white as Asian.
Let’s be clear:
You can be just fine with your Asian wife and kids and still be racist toward black people.
No one’s calling Derb a white supremacist, we are calling him a racist. The race in question here being black.
In view of last Summer’s Wisconsin State Fair, Chicago, and Philadelphia wildings, and the viral video of the young man beaten in Baltimore, some of Derbyshire’s advice might be well considered, although it certainly could have been nuanced. I believe Jesse Jackson said he feared young black men under some circumstances.
I don’t think he should be fired. I think he should be debated. I believe I know the reason no one wants to argue with him. Its because though he is wrong about a lot of things…he is right on a few things. We talk about having a discussion on race. This is a good opportunity but instead of having the discussion we have shut the whole thing down. Why don’t we let Derbyshire post here! And we can debate this directly.
“There is nothing more painful to me at this stage in my life than to walk down the street and hear footsteps… then turn around and see somebody white and feel relieved.” – Jesse Jackson
I think the piece by Derbyshire proves rather conclusively that Derbyshire is a liberal.
Why is no one mentioning the fact that the big losers in shutting down this discussion are the black family themselves?
What is to be gained by liberals (and now conservatives) consigning the black family to a continued slide into the abyss?
Shame!
(absence of voice) + (anger) = violence
But ..
(radical voice) + (anger) = violence
I think the key discriminating issue is: Does a writer lead, or does he follow? Derbyshire is clearly a follower. Nothing that he says is very new or original. Derbyshire is an echo, not a voice. He is a shadow, not a threat. As such, he is an important moderating influence. Keep him.
Please, please, please. Do not shut him up. Voicelessness is how you make a Brevik.
“Weigel’s entire piece is basically one, “I’m not a racist, but…” and I’m here to clarify something for Weigel: I don’t know you in real life, but in reading this piece, it seems you just might be a racist, pal.” Y’know, he might well be a Communist too, and maybe he should be put on probation and have someone very trustworthy read over all his pieces for possibly subversive content. Better to silence a few good-hearted writers than risk being undermined by wreckers. The good-hearted ones will agree, if their hearts are really good, and will be happy to be… Read more »
Hi all, Thanks for posting your thoughts Joanna. I consider John Derbyshire to be similar to an organization like the Westboro Baptist Ministry. They represent the blatant racism (or homophobia, in the case of Westboro) that is otherwise left unsaid by their more moderate counterparts. They create a position that less extreme media outlets can distance themselves from, and thus hopefully distance themselves entirely from accusations of prejudice. So Sean Hannity will bring some poorly educated representative from Westboro on his show, poke fun at them relentlessly, and then everybody pats themselves on the back for not being THAT crazy.… Read more »
Err, Josh I think you’ll find a lot of people tacitly follow Derbyshire’s advice. Look at revealed preferences rather than avowed preferences.
Weigel wrote a second post and clarified his thoughts. Did you read it?
some have
https://goodmenproject.com/good-feed-blog/racist-writings-should-derbyshire-and-weigel-be-fired/comment-page-1/#comment-141013
I think you’re inching toward, without actually confronting, a multiculturalist double-think problem. Because this discussion is, or seemed to be, politically and socially exhausted, something “we” had all gotten past, many of its premises, even where they are paradoxical, are simply accepted without question. Yet their very non-questionability in turn provides an opportunity for individuals like Derbyshire to rise up and question them anyway, as infringements on his personal freedom to live his life as he rationally sees fit. Man of us have learned and accepted the teaching that, as inheritors of a racist-sexist-classist culture, we will be to some… Read more »
Have People read Weigel’s follow-up post? https://twitter.com/#!/zerOdysseus/status/188653510240370688 There’s been some tsuris about my Friday post on John Derbyshire’s Taki magazine essay “The Talk: Nonblack version.” It was written in a pretty dry way, so I never ended up saying the obvious: People, the essay was disgusting. Pointing out racism, however clumsily, is not the same as racism. Hoping to pull back the curtain on racists is helpful. I think it is more than helpful, it is a moral obligation. Silence isn’t acceptable. When Weigel cites the “alleged value of Derbyshire-style analysis of race” the key word is “alleged” and not… Read more »
The reason I sent the Weigel piece to so many people I know who are all very smart, is because it just didn’t seem to make sense… I don’t think Weigel should’ve lost his job, but I couldn’t quite make sense of it. He didn’t condemn Derbyshire at all in that piece, and yes, he should have. And the word “alleged” isn’t actually said in Weigel’s piece that I link to in my original piece. Weigel is saying that there is no reason for NR to fire Derbyshire because so many people who aren’t as good of writers are saying… Read more »
The issue here is that you started out in bad faith. You immediately latched onto what you believed Weigel didn’t say. You couldn’t exactly tell what Weigel’s thoughts were so you launched into assuming that Weigel somehow supports Derb and his ilk. None of that was evident from the original posting. He was merely discussing the attitude of many in the conservative movement in respect to race. Your glee to call out Weigel as a racist, with zero evidence except your own misreading, is shameful. The fact that you sent it out to your friends to read does not provide… Read more »
You can stop searching! I was referring to (and quoting from) Weigel’s follow up-post, “Derbyshire Again.” I asked if people had read the post and gave links when I quoted from it. But I wasn’t explicit when citing the “alleged value of the Derbyshirestyle…” I meant to be clear. I’ll try to be clearer. http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2012/04/07/derbyshire_again.html In Weigel’s first piece, “John Derbyshire’s Advice for White People,” I think it’s a case of “pronoun trouble,” as Daffy Duck would put it. http://youtu.be/6e1hZGDaqIw There’s a sort of micro-movement building to shame National Review into firing Derbyshire. Why would they? Derbyshire is saying something… Read more »
Odysseus, If I’ve got this right… You and I might be in complete agreement? Thanks for your insights about Weigel… Here’s an interesting thing. I would never witch-hunt someone. I want to challenge people to do better, to write more clearly, and to imagine the impact of what they write. And I hope people challenge me, and that if/when I am/have been that I can handle it with some grace, to grow, and to keep moving. One must think, before publishing something, whether the fallout of what they write could harm someone. So, while it’s good to be “open” with… Read more »
I do wonder why there is no great outcry over the articles that spurred Derbyshire’s response. It is ok for black parents to have a “Talk” with their chidren but somehow not so for whites? A black male walking in a predominantly white neighborhood is much safer than a white male walking in a predominantly black neighborhood. A black male walking into a white neighborhood is safer than a black male walking a predominantly black neighborhood. We can ignore such things or try to fix them. Unfortunately, it is easier to stick our heads in the sand and pretend that… Read more »
The problem is not that people are talking about fear — which we obviously should be talking about — it’s that Derbyshire’s writings lead to the systematic marginalization of a class of people based on their skin color. Do your really think white people are every going to be marginalized and systematically disenfranchised the way minority groups are? If we are talking about our own fears, we should be doing so with empathy and understanding of all sides.
Japanese have higher average incomes than whites in the US (lower crime rates too). Are whites marginalized?
Maybe it comes back to group behavior.
Actually Derbyshire’s writings leads to no such thing since he, thankfully, has no political power. And no I do not think white people are going to be disenfranchised the way (some) minority groups are. However, I would like to know where in my post you drew that conclusion. A major problem, in my opinion, is many rail against the barriers they have little short term control over, systemic discrimination, while ignoring those areas they have massive control over, personal behavior. Much systemic discrimination is reinforced by awful behavior of large numbers of young black males. I wish ALL parents would… Read more »
I am in complete agreement about your last point Tom. In fact, one of the reasons we have such ongoing, public, difficult discussions here on The Good Men Project is to give people a vocabulary for which to talk about these things. And a deeper understanding of the interconnectedness of the issues. We don’t pretend to have all the answers, but if we can get the conversation started beyond the stereotypes than we’ve done some good.
It is nice to agree on something in a subject that is so open to reflexive disagreement. And since I think it is the most important thing, all the better.
A common vocabulary would be a wondrous thing. Good luck in that endeavor, I sincerely hope you’re successful.
Count me among those who want to fix things! Knowing where you got your safety facts (statistics, whatever) about black and white neighborhoods would help me. I feel that the power disparity means that black parents must talk to their children about the world they live in. White parents should talk to their children about the world they have created. You’re right when you say we shouldn’t “pretend that the only problem is nasty old white men who don’t trust young black men.” Another problem is nasty old white men who collapse the economy, take bailouts, etc. It’s enough to… Read more »
Which white parents created this world? I was the son of a bus driver, I doubt that the power differential between my father and the black bus drivers he worked with was too enormous. You’re wrong, all parents should talk to their children about the world they live in. And for the most part the talks should be similar. Stay in school, work hard, don’t do drugs, don’t get pregnant if you cannot care for a child, be respectful of people, I could go on and on. As far as where I get my statistics from you can easily find… Read more »
I don’t think we are in complete agreement.. but I don’t think we disagree. That’s a tangled sentence. Thank you for your kind tweet reply. (I am still trying to figure out Twitter. It’s not going well.) “[I]nsights about Weigel” might be too kind. I do follow him on Twitter* and read a fair amount of his reporting at Slate** He tweets constantly and some of his numerous Slate pieces are little more than extended tweets. I agree with you that, [o]ne must think, before publishing something, whether the fallout of what they write could harm someone. But I have… Read more »
Thanks for this reply and summation, Odysseus. Yeah, my original intent was two-fold… To say that I thought Derb should be out – because his writing validates racism for any of the people like some of the commenters here who truly believe that all white people believe as he does. And second to say to guys like Weigel that you gotta be clear in times like this, because his shit was sounding bad in that first piece. Now he’s clarified it, and that is helpful. We all make mistakes, we all post something too quickly, or don’t edit close enough… Read more »
Prejudices might also be called pattern recognition. People are pretty good at it (see Blink). I did find it offensive though the bald manner in which he set them out.
My comment of Chris Rock’s monologue is in moderation, but he expresses similar prejudices 🙂
GMP uses a program that automatically puts some comments into moderation and sometimes it ends up doing it to a comment that isn’t actually problematic; it just triggered the program. It’s early in the morning and GMP doesn’t have a full time moderator.
On this basis black comedian Chris Rock is a racist? “Who’s more racist, black people or white people? It’s black people! You know why? Because we hate black people too! Everything white people don’t like about black people, black people really don’t like about black people. There’s a civil war going on with black people right now and there’s two sides, there’s black people and theres niggas. The niggas have got to go. Every time black people want to have a good time, ignant-ass niggas fuck it up. Can’t do shit without ignant-ass niggas fucking it up? Can’t keep a… Read more »
I tend to agree, there is nothing to be gained by suppressing our prejudices. One of the worst things that can happen in any so-called free society is to silence or punish unpopular opinions. Let’s face it, there are huge numbers of people who have bigoted opinions alive in this country. You won’t change any of their minds by forcing political correctness on them. If anything, it will make matters worse, and foster resentment. (Remember the old psychological saw, “That which you resist, persists?”) Getting emotional never solves anything (outrage is an emotion). If the problems of racism and bigotry… Read more »
i think its better that this kind of thing comes out in public rather than being hidden with arguments like “playing the numbers.” Alot of white people feel this way and it needs to be addressed, not covered up. So long as it was made clear that it was his opinion, not that of the publication, then I think it’s worth airing (and debunking).
Derbyshire’s crime isn’t being foamingly, appallingly racist. That’s what the National Review pays him for. His crime is saying out loud what his colleagues know they’re supposed to say in private. In public, they’re supposed to say “Oh, well, it’s not that I have anything against those people, I just think some of this data is rather, well, suggestive of certain trends, if you see what I mean.” That’s what Rich Lowry always says, it’s what all of them always say. They believe the same things Derbyshire does, but they obey the rule about not saying it in public. Derbyshire’s… Read more »
Nailed it.
Actually, his crime is for saying out loud what we all privately know to be true.
That many white people (mostly men but women not totally innocent) today are still self-serving, pretentious capitalist-worshipping hypocrites who praise a blue-eyed and blonde Jesus in public but refuse to uphold most if any of his teachings in their everyday lives? I couldn’t agree more! Though to be fair, poor conduct or morals has absolutely no racial bias or exclusivity, something only thinking, fair-mindedpeople come to conclude… And here I was thinking all this animosity, character assassination and incendiary, factually-challenged opionating of the Obama administration was all based in policy and things he actually said and did, and not that… Read more »
Noah, I would take this all a lot more seriously if people on the political and social Left would admit that there are all kinds of hatreds and racisms, and that those things are not confined to the political right. Leftists too often define hatred as something that the Other Guys do, and turn their heads when someone on their own side of the aisle does it. It wil remain merely a game of schoolyard name-calling until both sides are willing to police their own. National Review has. When will liberals start calling out other liberals for the peculiar kinds… Read more »
Exactly. Couldn’t have said it better myself. Good on you for being honest.
I think you really misread what Dave Weigel is saying. He’s saying that National Review isn’t in the business of firing staffers who are saying things that a significant number of people are thinking. He’s not independently supporting the point. Look at that paragraph in the context of the rest of the post, for heaven’s sake.
Yeah, that’s why I said this: Let’s follow Weigel’s logic here: It’s okay if you say something, as long as you’re not the only one who feels that way… I sent this article to no less than eight people last night, all saying, asking them to interpret this writer’s words… each one said the same thing as you, Anonymous. “He’s saying that a guy shouldn’t be fired for saying what others are thinking”… But I disagree that just because there are a bunch of racist assholes in the world, a publication with any credibility should publish it. Any racist can… Read more »