white nationalism

GOP Candidate Michael Peroutka Fails To Shake Extremist Label With ‘Not a Racist’ Press Conference

For Republicans who would like to “rebrand” the party to reach more voters, Michael Peroutka is a nightmare.  Peroutka won the Republican primary for a county council seat in Anne Arundel County, which includes Maryland’s state capital. As we have been reporting, Peroutka is a Christian Reconstructionist who believes “It is not the role of civil government to house, feed, clothe, educate or give heath care to…ANYBODY!” He is an ardent supporter of the white nationalist League of the South, which promotes the secession of southern states, and whose leader recently wrote about “Fourth Generation Warfare” in which citizen hit squads would target “political leaders, members of the hostile media, cultural icons, bureaucrats, and other of the managerial elite without whom the engines of tyranny don't run."

Last week, Larry Hogan, the Republican nominee for governor, disavowed Peroutka over his extremist positions. Yesterday, Peroutka held a press conference in which he repeatedly claimed he is not a racist, vowed that he would not play the “race card game,” and produced two African American Republicans, Eric Knowles and Robert Broadus, to vouch for his not-racism.

But if the press conference was meant to dispel the notion that Peroutka is an extremist, it failed miserably. Peroutka repeatedly refused to disavow the League of the South, on whose board he has sat. He would not say it was a mistake to have called Dixie the national anthem at a League of the South convention. And he refused, in spite of repeated questions, to disavow the idea that the southern states should secede. In response to the suggestion that the Civil War settled the question of secession, he said “No moral issue is really ever settled by the point of a sword.” He repeatedly stated that secession is “a historical fact” and “a political reality.” The American Revolution was an act of secession, he said.  And it is a kind of secession when people move out of Maryland to escape its high taxes.

Huffington Post blogger Jonathan Hutson has video of the entire press conference. Unfortunately, nobody asked Peroutka about his belief that Maryland’s General Assembly is “no longer a valid legislative body” because it has passed laws he thinks are in violation of God’s law. Or about his participation in Larry Klayman’s “revolutionary” rally last year, whose goal was to force President Obama out of office. Or why state Republicans should support Peroutka, a former Constitution Party presidential candidate, given that it was less than a year ago that he wrote this:

“Anyone, including those who identify with the ‘Tea Party’, who loves America and desires real reform, would do well to disengage themselves from the Republican Party and their brand of worthless, Godless, unprincipled conservatism.”

The Five Most Racist, Anti-Semitic Claims From The American Thinker's Puff Piece On White Nationalist Jared Taylor

Today, the American Thinker – an online magazine that also publishes the writing of Concerned Women For America’s Janice Shaw Crouse, World Congress of Families spokesman Don Feder and “ex-gay” activist Robert Oscar Lopez, published a lengthy, fawning profile of Jared Taylor, the prominent white nationalist and founder of American Renaissance.

American Thinker writer Jeff Lipkes, whose last article for the publication explored the alt-birther theory that President Obama’s real father was communist organizer Frank Marshall Davis, asked Taylor to expound at length on “the concept of an ethnostate,” the doomed future of a diverse America, “the Jewish question,” and Taylor’s own “pure heart.”

The Southern Poverty Law Center describes Taylor as “a kind of modern-day version of the refined but racist colonialist of old” who “projects himself as a courtly presenter of ideas that most would describe as crudely white supremacist.” We’ll just include that rather than going into Lipkes’ several paragraphs on Taylor’s “civility and dapper appearance.”

1. Racist Internet commenters give Taylor hope for the future.

Taylor spends a good deal of his interview with Lipkes lamenting the fact that people are leaving racist comments on his racist website. “How could people who generally agree with us be so uncivilized?” he asks. But then, later in the interview, he says that racist comments on other websites give him hope for the growth of “race realism” in the future: “More and more Americans are pointing out the obvious so long as they can remain anonymous,” he says.

“When people can post comments anonymously, they often write crude, offensive things they would never say to someone’s face. At first I was surprised and disappointed -- how could people who generally agree with us be so uncivilized? -- but every website has this problem. Most of our commenters learn good manners eventually; those who don’t get the boot.”

But if commenters don’t use vulgar language, they are free to say what they like about African-Americans, and of course the stories of heinous crimes are red meat to readers. While it may be cathartic for Whites to write things they are unable to say in public under the multicultural regime, the comments on the news stories undoubtedly lend credence to the familiar accusation of “hate-mongering.”

The crime stories sometimes inspire more interesting comments: accounts by readers of their own experiences with minorities and with the enforcers of multiculturalism. Blacks, just under 13% of the population, commit 52% of murders and still higher percentages of other violent crimes, and about 90% of all inter-racial violence is attacks by Blacks on Whites. So lots of readers have first-hand experience of the subject. Some have written about the transformation of their neighborhoods or towns. Other news stories generate more amusing anecdotes: tipping by Blacks in restaurants, adventures at the DMV, etc.

Still, the stream of abuse is depressing, and it troubles Taylor.

“I wish our commenters were better behaved. I agree that they are sometimes mean-spirited, and I wish nothing ever appeared on the site that was mean-spirited.”

Derogatory comments about Asians, less frequent, naturally, sometimes elicit counter-attacks by others. One of the divisions among readers seems to be between “White Nationalists,” who want to see the return of a White ethnostate, and color-blind “race realists,” who admire East Asians for their high IQs and test scores and low crime rates, and, occasionally, Hispanics for their work ethic. The defenders are are usually outnumbered and outgunned.

Taylor is both optimistic and pessimistic about the future.

On the one hand, he sees a growth of “race-realism.”

“There are two very clear signs of this. One is the comments sections of mainstream Internet news sites. More and more Americans are pointing out the obvious so long as they can remain anonymous.”

2. Taylor explains why "racially conscious whites" are ‘"suspicious of Jews."

When Lipkes asked Taylor about “the Jewish question,” Taylor responded that “racially conscious whites tend to be suspicious of Jews” because of their “effort to demonize any sense of white identity” and their “annoying” support for Israel. Lipkes goes on to speculate

On “the Jewish question,” Taylor seems to walk a tightrope.

Taylor acknowledges the animosity of a lot of his followers toward Jews: “Racially conscious whites tend to be suspicious of Jews for two reasons. First, Jews have been prominent in the effort to demonize any sense of white identity. Second, Zionist Jews support an ethnostate for Jews -- Israel -- while they generally promote diversity for America and Europe. This is annoying, but understandable for historical reasons.”

3. Taylor says he’s not a “white nationalist,” just supports “the concept of an ethnostate.”

Because “white nationalist” implies violent revolution…and Taylor seems himself more like Abraham Lincoln or Teddy Roosevelt.

Is Taylor then a “White Nationalist”?

He rejects the term: “To me, it has an unpleasant whiff of gunpowder. One thinks of Basque nationalists and Kurdish nationalists. But,” he adds, “I entirely agree with the concept of an ethnostate that reflects the heritage and aspirations of a people.” He prefers the French word “identitaire ,” but there’s no English equivalent.

“There is no good term for racially conscious white people. This is because their views were taken for granted and needed no name. How did contemporaries characterize the racial view of Thomas Jefferson -- or those of Abraham Lincoln or Teddy Roosevelt or of Woodrow Wilson? There was no word for someone with their views for the same reason there was no word for someone who expected the sun to rise in the East or who loved his own children more than he loved the children of strangers: Our language does not need words for unnecessary distinctions. My views on race are natural, normal, healthy, and entirely moral, just as Lincoln’s were.”

4. Taylor warns that a decline in the white population will lead to the collapse of America.

And laments that there is no party representing “race realists,” who he is confident would win “a majority of the white vote in the rural South.”

“The United States is one of the least democratic of democracies, in that our system practically bars the door against anyone not a Republican or a Democrat. Who is served by such an oppressive system? Why, the very Republicans and Democrats who pass our laws and the lobbies that cultivate them. It is this closed political structure, not a lack of racial identity, that prevents political progress.

“Imagine a system of proportional representation, and a list of attractive race-realist candidates. How many votes would we win? Fifteen percent? Twenty percent? A majority of the white vote in the rural South? As parliamentary democracies in Europe show, numbers like that have a powerful impact on policy.”

By 2034, if current trends continue, the United States will have a bare majority of whites, many of whom will be elderly. The working-age population will be heavily black and Hispanic. To give you an idea of what sort of country we will have, I could cite endless statistics on rates of crime, AIDS, diabetes, poverty, welfare dependence, etc. but I’ll cite just one figure. By the time they graduate from high school, blacks and Hispanics are reading and doing math at the level of theaverage white 8th grader. That will not have changed in 20 years, and it will mean we are well on our way to becoming another Brazil.

“We will have a painfully stratified society, run by a mixed elite that keeps the masses of poor browns and blacks at a safe distance. Our rulers will continue to mouth slogans about equality and redemption-through-diversity but their lives will be even more hypocritical than they are today. They will live in fortified enclaves, and will increasingly see America not as a beloved nation whose destiny they hold in trust but as a herd to be milked. In 20 years, their cynicism will have begun to dull the patriotism even of Southern whites.

Our increasingly Third-World and unproductive population will force more cities into bankruptcy, and the federal government will lurch from crisis to crisis. Our decline in world stature will not be graceful.

“There will still be pockets of white civility, but only for the wealthy. The middle class will shrink, as school quality declines and more and more whites are forced into low-wage service jobs. Marriage will increasingly be a relic practiced only by the elite, and more whites will copy the degenerate behavior of the black and Hispanic underclasses.

“We will slowly lose the public trust and moral infrastructure that prevents bribery, nepotism, kickbacks, and government looting. Politicians will begin to buy and rig elections, especially at the local level. Fewer people will feel they have a stake in society, so there will be less volunteer work or charitable giving.

“Too pessimistic? Show me trends that prove me wrong.”

5. Taylor says he's being persecuted by “elites” despite his “pure heart.”

Taylor’s views, according to political elites, their media allies, and the indoctrinated, are not only wrong, but evil.

“When I began this work 25 years ago, I was naïve enough to think that because I am right and have a pure heart, I could reach and persuade ever larger numbers of people. I did not understand the forces opposed to me or how fearful Americans have become."

Rep. Stockman Joins White Nationalist-Tied Groups in Effort to Weaken Gun Laws

Rep. Steve Stockman (R-TX) has joined two far-right groups led by White Nationalists in filing an amicus brief in a case involving gun crimes. Stockman’s brief in United States v. Abramski seeks to weaken the power of the government to prosecute cases dealing with “straw purchases” of guns and false statements made on required forms for gun purchases.

As Warren Throckmorton first reported, the congressman filed the brief along with Michael Peroutka’s Institute on the Constitution and Gun Owners of America, led by Larry Pratt.

Peroutka is a board member of the white supremacist and secessionist League of the South and denounces the Union’s victory in what he calls the “War Between the States.” He even pledged to use the Institute on the Constitution to aid the League of the South and advance the cause of imposing biblical law.

Pratt’s ties to White Nationalist and anti-Semitic groups are also well documented, and he joined Peroutka at a July 4 event hosted by an anti-Semitic rock band. Pratt also fears that the Obama administration may be building a black paramilitary force that will target straight, Christian white people.

We wonder how a Republican congressman’s decision to team up with White Nationalist-linked groups will mesh with the GOP’s new minority outreach campaign….

Gays Out, Racists in at CPAC, Again

Last year we wrote about how CPAC allowed notorious white nationalists to speak on multiple panels but banned the gay conservative group GOProud. This year the CPAC organizers, who aren’t entirely oblivious to the 2012 election, are trying to emphasize diversity. There’s even a panel entitled, “Conservative Inclusion: Promoting the Freedom Message to all Americans,” which boasts a racially diverse lineup of conservative activists.

“Conservative inclusion” is a nice idea, but it doesn’t go very far at CPAC. For the second year in a row, the gay conservative group GOProud has been banned from the conference. So at best, “inclusion” at CPAC means “straights only.”

Even more telling is the roster of sponsors and exhibitors at CPAC. Most troubling is the inclusion of the anti-immigrant group ProEnglish, which is run by longtime white nationalist organizer Bob Vandervoort. The Institute for Research & Education on Human Rights has reported extensively on his activities:

Vandervoort was at the center of white nationalist activity during his time in Illinois. While he was in charge, Chicagoland Friends of American Renaissance often held joint meetings with the local chapter of the Council of Conservative Citizens. The group held events featuring numerous white nationalist figures. Vandervoort also made appearances at white nationalist events outside Illinois, for instance participating in the 2009 Preserving Western Civilization Conference.

When CPAC and its organizers at the American Conservative Union were widely criticized last year for allowing Vandervoort and other white nationalists to speak on multiple panels, the conference organizers played dumb:

“This panel was not organized by the ACU,” CPAC spokeswoman Kristy Campbell told The Daily Caller, ”and specific questions on the event, content or speakers should be directed to the sponsoring organization.”

There’s no such excuse this year. CPAC knew all too well about Vandervoort’s white nationalist background and yet they allowed his group to return. Apparently “conservative inclusion” means shunning gays while including racists.

The reality is that CPAC couldn’t open its doors to gay conservatives even if it wanted to. As Brian reported last week, the head of CPAC sponsor Accuracy In Media is not only pleased with the GOProud ban, he wants to see a panel at the conference on “the dangers of the homosexual movement and why some of its members seem prone to violence, terror, and treason.”

Another important sponsor is the Family Research Council, which has been designated by the Southern Poverty Law Center as an anti-gay hate group. The group’s top policy expert, Peter Sprigg, explicitly supports the criminalization of homosexuality, and readers of this blog are familiar with FRC’s aggressive and dehumanizing advocacy against gays and lesbians. There is no compromising on gays with extremists like these.

As we’ve reported, GOProud isn’t the only group banned this year. Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer, co-founders of the Freedom Defense Initiative, are vicious Islamophobes and conspiracy theorists. Had CPAC banned them for spreading lies and fomenting hate against Muslims, it would be a sign of progress. But Geller and Spencer were really banned for having made the mistake of extending their Muslim Brotherhood conspiracy theory to include two American Conservative Union board members, Suhail Khan and Grover Norquist.

In past years, ACU has happily given Geller and company a platform to bash Muslims. And Spencer, who runs the blog “Jihad Watch,” overwhelmingly won this year’s CPAC People’s Choice Blogger Award. But their paranoid rantings hit too close to home this year, so CPAC pulled the plug. Even “conservative inclusion” has its limits.

Foreigners Are Like Seasoning, Put in Too Much and You Ruin the Soup: John Derbyshire

White nationalist and former National Review columnist John Derbyshire has a new column on VDARE about this

In the column, “On Immigration, Liberty, and Mating Choices,” Derbyshire tries to explain his Asian wife to his racist buddies:
VDARE.com contributors and readers all want the same thing: a rational immigration policy that preserves the historic white-European ethnic core of the American nation[.]
 
I have signed on to it; I have for 12 years been writing in support of it; and yet … here am I with an Asian wife!
 
What's up with that?
Derbyshire, after explaining that he’s not a “racial purist” and is “fine with miscegenation,” argues that the VDARE position on immigration (which he calls V1) is not compatible with untrammeled liberty – one that would enable the individual to move freely from country to country. However, he thinks it is likely compatible with the freedom to marry people of other races, so long as only a small percentage of whites actually do so:
Much as we love liberty, a liberty that would swamp our ethnic core, from which all our liberties derive—a liberty incompatible with V1—is not to be tolerated. So forget about that liberty.
 
All right, let's try a different liberty: the liberty to marry whomsoever you want to marry. Might that be incompatible with V1?
 
Yes, it theoretically  might; though I don't, in present circumstances, think it is. It depends on your estimate of how wide, and how unsatisfied, is the desire of white Americans to marry people of other races. […]
 
With all due allowances, though, marrying out doesn’t seem to be a huge enthusiasm among white Americans.
Derbyshire immigrants are like seasoning. A little bit makes your soup taste great, but put it too much, and it’ll be ruined:
In the end, it's a question of numbers. If, in some given decade, a thousand, or ten thousand, Chinese or Mexicans settle in the U.S.A., no-one should mind or care. If they were all to marry U.S. citizens, it's still no-one's business. It's not the thousand or the ten thousand that effects demographic revolution: it's the million and ten million. As the late great Enoch Powell used to say: "Numbers are of the essence."
 
To put it slightly differently, it's how you salt your stew. A little salt actually improves the taste; but if the chef were to dump a whole box of salt in there, you'd have a reasonable complaint against the chef.
Quoting the “race-realist blogger” OneSTDV, Derbyshire argues that there’s little desire for overly seasoned soup:
‘Less than 1.5 percent of middle-class white women and about 3.0 percent of lower-class white women are sexually attracted to black men.’
 
He added: ‘Whopping numbers, huh? Hide your daughters and girlfriends!’
Derbyshire’s argument, then, is that we must be racist at the macro level but provide at least some liberty at the micro level for “marrying out,” so long as it doesn’t affect the overall macro trend:
A crowd, a neighborhood, a race, a nation, is unfortunately not an individual, and in many life situations statistics—what baseball managers call “going with the percentages” —must be our guide. 
 
Mate selection is not one of those situations.
That, I suppose, is about the best argument a white nationalist can make to his buddies about his Asian wife. But it’s worth pointing out that Derbyshire’s own “mating choices” are in line with the thoroughly debunked racial theory of IQ famously set forth in the Bell Curve and promoted by VDARE and the affiliated – and more aggressively racist – Alternative Right:
The differences in average IQ among races has been fairly well-established, with Asians having the highest IQ scores, whites next, and blacks third. This order – Asians, whites, blacks – or the reverse order, can be seen in many aspects of life and society.

Second White Nationalist Writing for Dow Jones’ MarketWatch

This has been a bad week for white nationalists at National Review – John Derbyshire was fired over the weekend and Robert Weissberg was fired on Wednesday. Both men were also contributors at VDARE, the white nationalist website run by Peter Brimelow, who moonlights at Dow Jones’ MarketWatch when he isn’t calling for end to immigration or promoting racial theories about genetic inferiority. 

Brimelow is already rallying to the defense of Derbyshire and Weissberg, but with any luck he’ll be able to land them jobs at MarketWatch like he did another of his white nationalist collaborators – Edwin Rubenstein. Rubenstein, an economic consultant, is a frequent contributor to MarketWatch and VDARE. He also provides research and analysis for the National Policy Institute, which was founded in 2005 to “elevate the consciousness of whites, ensure our biological and cultural continuity, and protect our civil rights.” Here’s NPI’s “about” page:
 
Rubenstein’s writing at VDARE seems to focus on three themes:
  • Americans (i.e. European whites) are on the verge of losing their country if they don’t take drastic steps to stop immigration
  • Education and affirmative action won’t help blacks and Hispanics because they can’t, or won’t, improve and assimilate
  • Not only are blue collar whites getting crushed by immigration, but so are white professionals, including doctors and PHDs in the sciences
This partial archive of Rubenstein’s writing for MarketWatch, which he does in conjunction with Brimelow, shows that he’s been working for them since 2003. That’s also when he began writing for VDARE.
 
MarketWatch, part of News Corporation’s Dow Jones division, has thus far refused to comment on why they employ a disgraced white nationalist leader who was fired back in 1998 from the right-wing National Review over his racist views and writing. Now it turns out that they employ not one – but two – prominent white nationalists. They have some explaining to do.
 
I’ve collected some of Rubenstein’s greatest hits on VDARE. Since the entire site has been temporarily given over to a fundraising appeal by Brimelow, I’ll instead link to Google cache versions of the articles:

 

 

White Nationalist Leader Peter Brimelow Still Working for Dow Jones’ MarketWatch

On Tuesday I wrote about John Derbyshire’s firing from National Review over a racist screed he authored for another publication. I also noted that prominent white nationalist Peter Brimelow, of VDARE.com and Alternative Right, was rallying support for Derbyshire. Brimelow has posted an update on VDARE saying that he’s spoken with Derbyshire, who “has agreed to start a weekly column for us as soon as his health allows—maybe as soon as next week! Help us pay him as much as possible!” 

Brimelow himself served as senior editor at National Review from 1993 until he was purged in 1998 for his white nationalist views. He then founded VDARE as safe-space of a different sort – one where racists, bigots, and hereditarians could meet and share their views. It’s no surprise then that Derbyshire, who was also purged for white nationalist views, would land at VDARE.
 
What is surprising is that Brimelow is still writing for Dow Jones’ MarketWatch, whose management knows full well about Brimelow’s other activities. You may recall that Brimelow made a controversial appearance in February at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference. Conference organizers preemptively distanced themselves from Brimelow, who spoke out against both illegal and legal immigration:
Brimelow participated on a panel discussion called "The failure of Multiculturalism: How the pursuit of diversity is weakening American Identity" at CPAC on Thursday. During the panel discussion, Brimelow and other panelists said immigration is polluting America. […]
 
Brimelow, an immigrant from Great Britain, said he's opposed to not only illegal immigration, but legal immigration too. He said it is creating a "Spanish speaking underclass parallel to the African American underclass."
 
"These are people who are completely dysfunctional. They're on welfare; they're not doing any kind of work - at least not legal work - and their children are having a terrible time. They're dropping out of school; there's an increase in teenage pregnancy," Brimelow said. […]
 
California is "rapidly turning into hispanic slum." He said California used to be "paradise" but is now "totally overrun by barrios of illegal immigrants."
Following the panel, Mark Lacter of LA Observed and Joe Weisenthal of Business Insider both asked aloud why MarketWatch was employing a white nationalist organizer as a columnist. Both then reached out to MarketWatch about Brimelow and said they’d update their posts when they heard back. That was in February. As of today – there are no updates, and Brimelow is still writing twice weekly for MarketWatch:
 
 
Brimelow’s MarketWatch column focuses on the stock market, gold prices and economic forecasting, and it must be said that Brimelow was once a full-time financial journalist. In fact, he was as an editor for years at Fortune, Forbes, Influence and the Financial Post and served as economic counsel for Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT). But in the early 90s he transitioned from business to politics, serving as senior editor at National Review, and by the late 90s he was a professional white nationalist.
 
Once Brimelow made that transition, he lost legitimacy and found that previously open doors had been closed. National Review senior editor Ramesh Ponnuru wrote in 2007 that “Brimelow regularly whines about his justly stalled career.” Stalled, that is, with the exception of MarketWatch.
 
The question – already asked by Business Insider and LA Observed – remains: Why is Dow Jones’ MarketWatch employing a white nationalist? And not just any white nationalist, but a national racist organizer who is riding to the rescue of John Derbyshire, who was fired by the right-wing National Review for penning a “nasty and indefensible” column about why whites should avoid contact with blacks.

UPDATE: Ask MarketWatch directly at @MarketWatch

Purged White Nationalists Circle the Wagons at VDARE and Alternative Right

Former National Review contributing editor John Derbyshire has friends in low places. Derbyshire, who was fired for a racist article he wrote for Takimag, told Gawker that he plans to write for a series of white nationalist publications:

Will you continue at Taki's Magazine?
 
Derbyshire: Haven't thought much about it. Yes, Takimag is very congenial. I'll probably try to write for other opposition-conservative outlets too, if they want me: VDARE, AltRight, American Renaissance, and so on. I know a lot of the proprietors there.
VDARE itself was founded by Peter Brimelow, who himself was a senior editor at National Review from 1993 to 1998. He was eventually purged for his explicitly racist views and founded VDARE to provide a forum for like-minded reactionaries.
 
Currently, VDARE is running a personal fundraising appeal from Brimelow concerning Derbyshire’s firing under the headline “Help VDARE.com Save Immigration Patriots From Living In “A State Of Constant Fear”!”:
I always hate closing VDARE.com during appeals. And it’s particularly frustrating now, with the continuing Two-Minute hate of John Derbyshire. Note that, as far as I can see, not one Establishment Conservative voice has been raised in his defense—indeed, many are joining in the Hate. These cowards are practically begging Obama to play the race card against them in this fall’s election. But our Spring Appeal is always critical to getting us through the cash drought in the summer. And it’s now more obvious that ever that VDARE.com must survive if voices like Derbyshire’s are to be heard. I was delighted to see that, in his remarkable Gawker interview posted last night, Derbyshire named VDARE.com as one of the sites he hopes to write for—if his health permits. […]
 
John Derbyshire is merely the latest victim.
 
Without betraying confidences, I hope that John Derbyshire will resume writing for us—he was prevented from doing so by NR’s current degenerate (and fearful) management.
 
But we will need to pay him. We need to pay all our writers.
While Brimelow is best known for VDARE, he is also the driving force behind one of the other publications that Derbyshire mentioned – AltRight (short for Alternative Right). Brimelow announced the launch of Alternative Right in March, 2010:
Our friend Richard Spencer, until recently editor of Takimag, has launched his new webzine, Alternative Right. It features an excellent essay by Richard Hoste on the need for an “Alternative Right” here. You can donate to Alternative Right here. Alternative Right is currently a project of the VDARE Foundation and donations are tax-deductible.
Alternative Right often manages to make VDARE look moderate by comparison. Here, frequent contributor Colin Liddell says that European colonialism of Africa should be seen as a “vote of confidence” in the “Black man”:
So, what use does the global economic order have for Africa? Sadly, the Africans are terrible producers, lacking the precision, conscientiousness, group ethic, and self-sacrificing qualities needed to constitute a hard-working, reliable industrial population. Not to mention the issue of IQ! They are equally inept when it comes to consumption, and not only because of their proverbial penury and otherwise laudable penchant for reusing every piece of junk that comes their way. Even when they have money to burn, they seem more attracted to simple bling than to acquiring the wide variety of gizmos, gadgets, home appliances, bric-a-brac, and exotic interests that support vast export industries. [...]
 
This is how 19th-century colonialism really should be seen—as a vote of confidence by Europeans in the capabilities and ultimate potential of the Black man.
And here, blogger Richard Hoste sets out the mission of Alternative Right:
We've known for a while through neuroscience and cross-adoption studies--if common sense wasn't enough--that individuals differ in their inherent capabilities. The races do, too, with whites and Asians on the top and blacks at the bottom. The Alternative Right takes it for granted that equality of opportunity means inequality of results for various classes, races, and the two sexes. Without ignoring the importance of culture, we see Western civilization as a unique product of the European gene pool. [...]
 
For example, low-IQ Mexican immigration is the greatest threat to America. Anti-discrimination laws should be repealed not only because they're unconstitutional and infringe on the right to free association, but because whites have very good reasons for avoiding NAMs. Schools should stop wasting time trying to close achievement gaps. And not only do whites have nothing to feel guilty about, they are the best thing to ever happen to blacks. Even ignoring race, humanity will not move forward through equality or by raising up the really stupid to the level of just plain stupid. 
It appears that John Derbyshire will fit right in.

John Derbyshire and National Review – What Took So Long?

Over the weekend, National Review editor Rich Lowry ended the magazine’s long relationship with contributing editor John Derbyshire (“Derb”) over a racist article he wrote for another publication: 

His latest provocation, in a webzine, lurches from the politically incorrect to the nasty and indefensible. We never would have published it, but the main reason that people noticed it is that it is by a National Review writer. Derb is effectively using our name to get more oxygen for views with which we’d never associate ourselves otherwise.
Lowry is certainly right to call Derbyshire’s piece “nasty and indefensible,” but I’m not so sure about his claim that National Review would never associate itself with such views. After all, they’ve been associated for years with people who hold such views, despite efforts to purge the magazine of so-called paleo-conservatives.
 
Here’s a taste of the article that got Derbyshire fired, which consisted of a list of suggested items for white and Asian parents to tell their teenage sons:
  • (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.
Back in February, Derbyshire appeared on the notorious CPAC panel on the “Failure of Multiculturalism,” which featured prominent white nationalist Peter Brimelow. Brimelow himself was a senior editor at National Review from 1993 until he was purged by William F. Buckley, Jr in 1998. He then went on to found VDARE.com, which he named after the first white child born in the Americas to English parents.
 
At CPAC, Derbyshire argued that society could avoid disaster and racial violence by accepting that some groups (e.g. blacks) are inherently inferior and other groups (e.g. whites) are inherently superior. Once society accepted this premise, Derbyshire argued, individuals would be happier and know their stations in life:
Imagine you are a member of a group that, in the generality, underachieves socially and economically: a black in the U.S.A., an Inuit in Canada, a Pacific Islander in New Zealand, even a Malay in Malaysia. If the Standard Model is true, the only possible explanation for your group's underachievement is malice on the part of other groups. Hence the rancor, resentment, rage, and division.
 
If, on the other hand, group underachievement is a consequence of the laws of biology working on human populations, there is no blame to assign. The fact of group inequalities, even in societies that have striven mightily to remove them, is as natural and inevitable as individual inequality, which nobody minds very much. The only proper object of blame is Mother Nature; and she is capable of inflicting far worse things on us than mere statistical disparities between ancient inbred populations.
 
Under a reigning philosophy of candor and realism, each of us can strive to be the best he can be, to play as best he can the hand he's been dealt, in liberty and equality under the law.
The CPAC speech, which was published verbatim on VDARE, is arguably even more offensive and racist than the one that got him fired, but it wasn’t as explicit. The National Review apparently tolerates racism so long as there’s a sheen of intellect or sophistication. Derbyshire made the mistake of being too honest about his extremist views, and Lowry was forced to act.
 
UPDATE: Peter Brimelow is currently running a fundraising appeal on VDARE that suggests that National Review editors knew about Derbyshire's racist inclinations and were keeping him on a short leash: "Without betraying confidences, I hope that John Derbyshire will resume writing for us—he was prevented from doing so by NR’s current degenerate (and fearful) management."

 

Rick Santorum Just Had Dinner with White Nationalist Bob Vandervoort

Bob Vandervoort’s group, ProEnglish, just tweeted:
You’ll recall that Vandervoort, the executive director of Pro-English, was previously the leader of the white nationalist group Chicagoland Friends of the American Renaissance. He is scheduled to appear at a panel tomorrow morning at CPAC along with two Republican members of Congress and the Kansas Secretary of State, Kris Kobach.
 
Kobach, an outspoken immigration opponent, distanced himself from Vandervoort and ProEnglish this morning:
Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach said he “had no idea who was going to be on my panel” when he agreed to appear Saturday on an immigration panel at the Conservative Political Action Committee conference in Washington, D.C. […]
 
Kobach said he does not recall ever meeting Vandervoort. He also said organizers usually try to put people with differing views on panels to make it interesting.
 
The two split on bilingual ballots, mandated by federal voting law. Kobach said he thinks bilingual ballots are “reasonable,” so voters will clearly understand the ballot.
Around noon, the Competitive Enterprise Institute’s Alex Nowrasteh, who is also scheduled for tomorrow’s panel, tweeted that Vandervoort appears to be a racist.
 
And the organizers of CPAC even distanced themselves from Vandervoort and another white nationalist speaking at the conference:
The American Conservative Union, CPAC’s organizer, is keeping its distance.
 
“This panel was not organized by the ACU,” CPAC spokeswoman Kristy Campbell told The Daily Caller, ”and specific questions on the event, content or speakers should be directed to the sponsoring organization.” 
Despite all of this, Rick Santorum just had dinner with Vandervoort. We can hope that Santorum did not yet know Vandervoort’s full background. Now that he does, will he denounce white nationalists, including Vandervoort, and say they have no place within the GOP and conservative movement?

UPDATE: Santorum adviser Hogan Gidley told BuzzFeed that Vandervoort "was part of a large gathering that showed up to listen to rick speak today at a CPAC luncheon." No response yet from Vandervoort.
 

Two Miami-Area Congressmen to Appear with White Nationalist at CPAC

There’s already been substantial coverage of yesterday’s CPAC panel on multiculturalism featuring not one, but two, prominent white nationalists – Peter Brimelow and Bob Vandervoort. That may have just been the warm-up act for tomorrow morning.

Reps. Mario Diaz-Balart and David Rivera, both Republicans from the Miami metro area, are scheduled to appear on stage at CPAC with Vandervoort on an immigration panel entitled “High Fences, Wide Gates: States vs. the Feds, the Rule of Law & American Identity”:
 
Vandeervoort is currently the head of ProEnglish, which supports making English the official language of the US, but previously he was the leader of the white nationalist group Chicagoland Friends of the American Renaissance. As the Institute for Research & Education on Human Rights has reported:
Vandervoort was at the center of white nationalist activity during his time in Illinois. While he was in charge, Chicagoland Friends of American Renaissance often held joint meetings with the local chapter of the Council of Conservative Citizens. The group held events featuring numerous white nationalist figures. Vandervoort also made appearances at white nationalist events outside Illinois, for instance participating in the 2009 Preserving Western Civilization Conference.
 
Started as a modest newsletter in 1990, American Renaissance has grown into an important vehicle for white nationalist ideas. American Renaissance first described itself as a "literate, undeceived journal of race, immigration and the decline of civility." It claimed that "White people" had lost their voice and that the United States was in danger of losing its "national and cultural core."
American Renaissance founder Jared Taylor wrote in the magazine that “the greatest threat to whites today comes from immigration.” He continued: “Racial preferences, guilt-mongering, anti-Western education, even anti-white violence are manageable problems compared to a process that is displacing whites and reducing them to a minority. With a change in thinking at the right levels, anti-white policies and double standards could be done away with practically overnight, but that would still leave us with nearly 100 million non-whites living in the country.”
 
Vandervoort’s extremism hasn’t gone unnoticed by conservatives who don’t share his bigoted ideology, including fellow panelist Alex Nowrasteh, who suggested today that Vandervoort is a racist:
The conservative Daily Caller also noted the explicit white nationalism of American Renaissance and put the conference organizers on the defensive:
The American Conservative Union, CPAC’s organizer, is keeping its distance.
 
“This panel was not organized by the ACU,” CPAC spokeswoman Kristy Campbell told The Daily Caller, ”and specific questions on the event, content or speakers should be directed to the sponsoring organization.”
But let’s recall that the American Conservative Union was fully in control when it came to GOProud, the conservative gay rights group that it banned from CPAC this year. Evidently, they can keep gay groups out but are powerless when it comes to white nationalists.
 
Which brings us back to tomorrow’s panel featuring Vandervoort, two Republican members of Congress, and Kris Kobach, Secretary of State of Kansas. Do Reps. Diaz-Balart and Rivera and Secretary Kobach really think it’s appropriate to appear on stage with a white nationalist? Will they denounce white nationalism and say it has no place within the GOP and conservative movement?
 
Tune in tomorrow morning to find out.

 

 

CPAC: White Nationalism Shunned in 2011, Welcomed in 2012

How times have changed. Last year, white nationalist Jamie Kelso attended CPAC looking for European-American allies in his quest to keep America genetically pure and lily-white. However, his potential young recruits weren’t having any of it:

As Ed Morrissey reported on Hot Air:
A group of young attendees, and a few older conservatives as well, at first politely rebuff Kelso’s racist arguments, and then begin aggressively arguing with him in the hallway. Ron Paul supporters told him four times to take off his Campaign for Liberty button and paraphernalia.
The Daily Caller reported that Kelso “got an earful from some conservative activists who sent him packing” and “let him know that racism is not welcome in the conservative movement.” It was heartening to see young conservatives take a stand against the kind of bigotry that has no place in modern conservatism.
 
That was 2011. CPAC 2012 has revealed that the paleoconservatives are still firmly in control.
 
The conservative gay rights group, GOProud, was banned this year, but two prominent white nationalists were allowed to appear on a panel opposing multiculturalism.
 
And they were hardly sent packing. Iowa Republican Rep. Steve King of Iowa fawned over Peter Brimelow, founder of the white nationalist site VDARE, saying, “I read your books!” Tomorrow, white nationalist Bob Vandervoort is scheduled to appear alongside two other Republican members of Congress.

 

Syndicate content

white nationalism Posts Archive

Peter Montgomery, Thursday 07/31/2014, 2:28pm
For Republicans who would like to “rebrand” the party to reach more voters, Michael Peroutka is a nightmare.  Peroutka won the Republican primary for a county council seat in Anne Arundel County, which includes Maryland’s state capital. As we have been reporting, Peroutka is a Christian Reconstructionist who believes “It is not the role of civil government to house, feed, clothe, educate or give heath care to…ANYBODY!” He is an ardent supporter of the white nationalist League of the South, which promotes the secession of southern states, and whose... MORE
Miranda Blue, Thursday 04/24/2014, 10:34am
Today, the American Thinker – an online magazine that also publishes the writing of Concerned Women For America’s Janice Shaw Crouse, World Congress of Families spokesman Don Feder and “ex-gay” activist Robert Oscar Lopez, published a lengthy, fawning profile of Jared Taylor, the prominent white nationalist and founder of American Renaissance. American Thinker writer Jeff Lipkes, whose last article for the publication explored the alt-birther theory that President Obama’s real father was communist organizer Frank Marshall Davis, asked Taylor to expound at... MORE
Brian Tashman, Monday 07/29/2013, 10:50am
Rep. Steve Stockman (R-TX) has joined two far-right groups led by White Nationalists in filing an amicus brief in a case involving gun crimes. Stockman’s brief in United States v. Abramski seeks to weaken the power of the government to prosecute cases dealing with “straw purchases” of guns and false statements made on required forms for gun purchases. As Warren Throckmorton first reported, the congressman filed the brief along with Michael Peroutka’s Institute on the Constitution and Gun Owners of America, led by Larry Pratt. Peroutka is a board member of the white... MORE
Josh Glasstetter, Thursday 03/14/2013, 3:38pm
Last year we wrote about how CPAC allowed notorious white nationalists to speak on multiple panels but banned the gay conservative group GOProud. This year the CPAC organizers, who aren’t entirely oblivious to the 2012 election, are trying to emphasize diversity. There’s even a panel entitled, “Conservative Inclusion: Promoting the Freedom Message to all Americans,” which boasts a racially diverse lineup of conservative activists. “Conservative inclusion” is a nice idea, but it doesn’t go very far at CPAC. For the second year in a row, the gay... MORE
Josh Glasstetter, Tuesday 06/12/2012, 10:40am
White nationalist and former National Review columnist John Derbyshire has a new column on VDARE about this:  In the column, “On Immigration, Liberty, and Mating Choices,” Derbyshire tries to explain his Asian wife to his racist buddies: VDARE.com contributors and readers all want the same thing: a rational immigration policy that preserves the historic white-European ethnic core of the American nation[.]   I have signed on to it; I have for 12 years been writing in support of it; and yet … here am I with an Asian wife!   What's up with ... MORE
Josh Glasstetter, Friday 04/13/2012, 1:55pm
This has been a bad week for white nationalists at National Review – John Derbyshire was fired over the weekend and Robert Weissberg was fired on Wednesday. Both men were also contributors at VDARE, the white nationalist website run by Peter Brimelow, who moonlights at Dow Jones’ MarketWatch when he isn’t calling for end to immigration or promoting racial theories about genetic inferiority.  Brimelow is already rallying to the defense of Derbyshire and Weissberg, but with any luck he’ll be able to land them jobs at MarketWatch like he did another of his white... MORE
Josh Glasstetter, Thursday 04/12/2012, 11:02am
On Tuesday I wrote about John Derbyshire’s firing from National Review over a racist screed he authored for another publication. I also noted that prominent white nationalist Peter Brimelow, of VDARE.com and Alternative Right, was rallying support for Derbyshire. Brimelow has posted an update on VDARE saying that he’s spoken with Derbyshire, who “has agreed to start a weekly column for us as soon as his health allows—maybe as soon as next week! Help us pay him as much as possible!”  Brimelow himself served as senior editor at National Review from 1993 until... MORE