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 Academia Affirmative Action Africa Alt Right American Media American Military Black Crime Blacks Britain China Conservative Movement Creationism Diversity Donald Trump Economics England European Right Feminism 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 Republicans Review Russia Science Terrorism The Straggler 2004 Election 2006 Election 2008 Election 2012 Election 2018 Election 2020 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 Antifa Antiracism Antonin Scalia Arts/Letters Asia Asian Americans Asian Quotas Asians Australia Australian Aboriginals Austria Barack Obama Bill Clinton Black Lives Matter Brain Brexit British Politics Cambodia Canada Cancer Capitalism Catalonia Catholic Church Censorship Central Asia Charles Murray Charlottesville Chelsea Clinton Chinese Chinese Evolution Christianity CIA Civil Rights Civil War Communism Confederacy Congress Consciousness Conservatism Constantinople Constitutional Theory Corruption Crime Crusades Cultural Marxism DACA Dalai Lama Dallas Shooting Deep State Democracy Democratic Party Demographics Demography Discrimination 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 Fake News Ferguson Shooting Fertility Rates Finland France Gay Marriage Gays/Lesbians Gaza Flotilla Gender Equality George W. Bush George Zimmerman Germany Global Warming Globalism 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 Human Evolution Human Genetics Human Genome Hungary Hunting Ice People Imperialism Infection Intellectuals Intelligence Intelligent Design 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 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 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 Pete Buttgieg Peter Thiel Philosophy Poetry Population Population Growth Probability Public Schools Puerto Rico Quantum Mechanics Race Race And Iq Race Denialism Race/IQ Racial Profiling Racial Reality Razib Khan Republican Party Richard Lynn 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 Singularity Slavery Slavery Reparations Soccer Social Welfare Programs Solzhenitsyn Somalia South Africa Space Program Spain Stabby Somali Statistics Stephen Wolfram Stereotypes Steve King Steve Sailer Supreme Court 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 Nationalism White Nationalists White Privilege White Supremacy Wikipedia William Buckley Winston Churchill 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, Troll, or LOL 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 once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
🔊 Listen RSS

See also: Turkeys Vote For Christmas—GOP Votes To Import Leftist Indian Overclass (And Also Depress Tech Wages)

The House of Representatives recently passed H.R.1044, the Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act. It’s now in the Senate’s Judiciary committee and could be voted on by the full Senate by September. Javanka is said to favor it, so the chances that President Trump will veto it (as he should) are probably low.

The adjective “high-skilled” is misleading—intentionally so, of course. The immigrants being favored by this act are lower-middle-class drudge workers, mainly computer programmers, most from India and China. They know languages like JavaScript, which anyone with above-room-temperature IQ can learn in 24 hours, or PHP and C++, which I’ll allow are harder but which a few months in trade school will get you capable at.

I know whereof I speak. I spent much of my working life doing the kind of work—commercial computer programming—that these immigrants are being brought in to do. It is, indeed, not rocket science.

To paraphrase Lloyd Bentsen’s much-hyped exchange with Dan Quayle: I was a computer programmer. I know computer programming. The Indian programmers that the Treason Lobby wants to import are no Alan Turings—they’re just cheap.

The whole point of H.R.1044 is to provide cheap foreign labor to employers. You have no doubt heard the stories about big U.S. companies like Disney and Con Ed forcing employees to train their cheaper foreign replacements. H.R.1044 will swell the number of those replacements, further reducing the job opportunities for American college and trade-school graduates.

Demographically, it will also swell mightily the number of Indians settling in the U.S.A. They may not be Alan Turings, but they are skilled enough to augment America’s developing Immigrant Overclass.

Once upon a time we had a system of guest-worker visas to fill gaps in the workforce. When the visa expired, the guest worker went back to his home country. In fact, just to get the visa you had to show “non-immigrant intent”—you had to show the visa officer that you didn’t intend to stay in the U.S.A. permanently.

That’s ancient history now. The rules have been relaxed so that it’s easy to parlay a guest-worker visa into permanent residence—the Green Card—and thence to citizenship.

There are still currently, though, limits on the number of visas that any particular country can get in a given year. H.R.1044 eliminates those country caps. The incoming workforce, taking jobs that American college graduates should be taking, will be even more overwhelmingly Indian and Chinese.

The U.S. Senate is now mulling a bill of its own along the same lines. It’s not altogether clear how this will go. Republicans still hold the Senate; and even among Democrats the flyover portion of the country, the portion I sometimes call Inlandia, is better represented in the Senate than the other portion, Coastal-stan.

These floods of cheap foreign techie labor are great for Coastal-stan, but they tick off a lot of Inlandia voters—voters in states like Kentucky, whose senior Senator is…who is it?…let me check…oh, yes: Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.

So while the eagerness of Republicans to lick the boots of their big-business donors and shaft American workers should never be underestimated, the outcome here is not a foregone conclusion.

In the general matter of bringing in foreign labor, I limp up once more to offer my proposal that we submit the whole process to the Law of Supply and Demand. Visas for guest workers in any line of work should be issued only when there is a clear and persistent shortage of native-born workers, signalled by a dramatic and prolonged rise in the wages on offer to such workers.

Even then I’d want a decent time to let Americans take up the slack.

As I said, speaking as a person who has actually done computer-programming work, and hired and fired programmers, a few months in trade school will get any American with an IQ over 110 up to speed in PHP or C++. If wages for programmers are going through the roof, so will trade-school and Community College applications.

Only if that doesn’t fix the supply problem should we bring in foreign guest workers. And even then, I can’t see why we should offer them permanent residence. We have north of 300 million citizens; so on a normal distribution around seventy million of us have IQ north of 110.

Even if you discount for infants and seniors, there’s plenty of coding talent there for Mark Zuckerberg and Jeff Bezos—if the pay is right.

But, of course, they might vote Republican. And we can’t have that.

• Category: Economics • Tags: H1-B Visas, Immigration, Indians, Silicon Valley 
🔊 Listen RSS

Adapted from the latest Radio Derb, available exclusively on

Marc Thiessen had a recent op-ed column poking fun at all the stern pronouncements we’ve had from senior Democrats like Nancy Pelosi and Elizabeth Warren that “no-one is above the law.” [Democrats say no one is above the law — except on immigration, Washington Post, July 16, 2019] They are, of course, speaking in reference to supposed misdeeds by President Trump. Meanwhile, from the other side of their mouths, they are hyperventilating about how cruelly barbaric it is—”a crime against humanity” according to Kamala Harris, to enforce the people’s laws on immigration. [Kamala Harris: Immigration Raids Are ‘A Crime Against Humanity’, by Susan Jones, CNSNews, July 12, 2019].

The notion of fair laws impartially administered is one of the great glories of Anglo-Saxon civilization. As a reminder of how things go elsewhere, I refer you to an article written by President Xi Jinping of communist China, published over there February 19th:

We must never follow the path of Western “constitutionalism,” “separation of powers,” or “judicial independence.”

Xi: China Must Never Adopt Constitutionalism, Separation of Powers, or Judicial Independence, by Charlotte Gao,, February 19, 2019

Mockery quotes there around those three terms

That’s what he said: I checked the original Chinese: 决不能走西方 “宪政”、 “三权鼎立”、 “司法独立” 的路子.

But now our own Ruling Class seems to agree with President Xi. Those lofty ideals of judicial independence and equality under the law are looking pretty ragged in the U.S.A. right now.

Equal justice under law? Illegal alien scofflaws enjoy the favor and protection of the most powerful people in the land. Violent anarchist gangs own the streets of Portland, Oregon, and no-one in authority wants to prosecute them.

Or consider the case of James Fields, the young man charged with driving into a crowd of Leftist protestors in Charlottesville two years ago. One person died and several were injured. Recently Fields was sentenced to life plus 419 years on state charges. [Man Sentenced to 2nd Life Term in Charlottesville Car Attack, AP, July 15, 2019] That comes on top of last month’s sentence of life imprisonment on federal “hate crime” charges.

To grasp the state of affairs in early 21st-century America, compare the case of John Harris White, which happened just down the road from me in Long Island, the only reason I remember it. Probably there are scores of similar cases nationwide.

John Harris White is black. So is his son Aaron. Back in August 2006, Aaron, then 19 years old, was thrown out of a party by other teens who thought, mistakenly he said, that he had threatened a girl.

Aaron went home, but some partygoers followed him in two cars. They made a scene in the street outside White’s house, and allegedly trespassed into his driveway. White came out with a handgun (unlicensed) and confronted the teens. Daniel Cicciaro, 17 years old at the time, and white, was being particularly obnoxious, so John Harris White—who, remember, is black—shot him in the face, killing him. [Cicciaro’s father breaks his silence, Newsday, December 25, 2010

White said the gun had gone off by accident. He was found guilty of second-degree manslaughter and unlawful possession of a weapon. In March 2008 he was sentenced to two to four years imprisonment—which is way less than the 15 years maximum for second-degree manslaughter. He was then freed on bail pending an appeal.

The appeal dragged on for over a year, but in July 2010 White was finally locked up. He served just five months, then outgoing Governor David Paterson commuted his sentence, leaving him a free man. [John White, convicted of killing Daniel Cicciaro, pardoned by Gov. David Paterson, by Corky Siemaszko NY Daily News, December 23, 2010]

Did I mention that Governor Paterson is black?

Quote from CBS News at the time of the governor’s commutation:

Paterson said the five months John Harris White has served was enough time for the emotion-fueled 2006 shooting death of Daniel Cicciaro, 17. Paterson said everybody connected with the case had suffered enough, and White was released Thursday.

Man Set Free in Teen’s Racially Charged Death, AP (CBS) December 23, 2010

Isn’t that touching? Five months enough jail time for shooting a disorderly white teenager in the face. Everybody has suffered enough! It was emotion-fueled!

But if, at least arguably panicked by a screaming mob, you drive into the mob and cause one to die, you get two life sentences plus 419 years.

Nothing emotion-fueled about that situation! No governor is going to commute your sentence, certainly not the current Governor-weasel of Virginia.

Plus, the feds will hit you with a shelf-full of “hate crimes” charges—a thing that for some reason John Harris White didn’t have to worry about.

The whole concept of “hate crime” is pretty clearly unconstitutional but, like President Xi Jinping, we no longer “follow the path of Western ‘constitutionalism.'”

🔊 Listen RSS

Earlier: Organized African Illegals Storm Pantheon In France, Two Days Before Bastille Day

The Panthéon is a grand 18th-century building in Paris where notable French people have been interred since the Revolution. Voltaire and Jean-Jacques Rousseau are there; so are mathematicians Lagrange and Condorcet, novelists Victor Hugo and Émile Zola, physicists Pierre and Marie Curie, and many other notables of French national culture.

It was therefore very shocking to see a mob of several hundred young men rioting in the Panthéon last Friday. These were all blacks, illegal aliens from West Africa, demanding legal residence in France. After several hours they were removed by police, with 37 arrests made.

Readers: watch the storming of the Panthéon below.

Then go to one of those Steve Sailer posts where Steve ponders what he calls “the world’s most important graph.

Then give me your odds on European civilization surviving this century.

• Category: Race/Ethnicity • Tags: Africa, Blacks, France, Immigration 
🔊 Listen RSS

Adapted from the latest Radio Derb, available exclusively on

Yoram Hazony, author of the book The Virtue of Nationalism (and sparring partner of Editor Peter Brimelow) felt obliged to go on Twitter the other day to note that, quote:

There’s a “dark and dangerous side” to nationalism. But there’s also a “dark and dangerous side” to internationalism. Why are we expected to constantly mention the first, but not the second? It’s like having the surgeon general’s warning on chewing tobacco, but not on cigarettes.

Of course Hazony is right. The commanding heights of our culture are in the hands of fanatical anti-national, anti-white ideologues who are interested in power; they are interested in conquest; they are interested in victory—total victory in the Cold Civil War.

For a look at what we have in store as the ideologues tighten their grip, glance across the Atlantic and consider the case of Tommy Robinson.

Tommy is an Englishman, 36 years old, from the town of Luton, thirty miles north of London. I remember Luton from my London days; it’s on the main road from London to my home town of Northampton, and I passed through it often. Back then, in the sixties and seventies, it was a nondescript light-industrial town, the population white working-class English and Irish.

Later in the last century, when Tommy Robinson was in his teens, Luton was afflicted with mass immigration of Muslims from Pakistan and Bangladesh. Today the town is close to one-third Muslim.

So it’s not very surprising that Tommy, in his twenties, became a nationalist. Tommy’s a working-class lad with not much education, and he’s a keen supporter of his town soccer team, so it’s also not surprising that he came in at the rough, street-fighting end of nationalism.

He’s cleaned up his act considerably the past few years, though, and focused his activism, sometimes a bit erratically, against the efforts by Britain’s political and cultural Establishment to suppress all criticism of multiculturalism, of Islam, of anti-white policies, of mass immigration, of the European Union.

For this the Establishment and their Goodwhite stooges have targeted Tommy as an Enemy of the People. This week he got a prison sentence on a patently trumped-up charge of contempt of court. You can read the details in excellent reporting by Jack Montgomery and James Delingpole at, or Ezra Levant at The Rebel Media.

You can fault Tommy for all kinds of mis-steps. You can even suspect he’s a bit of a publicity hound.

I don’t care: speaking as a working-class English boy myself, I say his heart’s in the right place, and offer him my best wishes for surviving incarceration in a prison system run by homicidal Muslim gangs whom the British authorities are too cowardly to deal with.

Media personality Katie Hopkins, bless her, feels the same way I do. And then some: here she was telling us about going with Tommy to the courthouse for his sentencing.

Just for one moment in time I suddenly felt like Britain was alive again. Britain was surrounded … I was surrounded by people who thought like me, who missed the old country we used to know, who know right from wrong, who want to keep our daughters safe.

It felt like … I don’t know, I felt like I was surrounded by the thing I most want back, which is real British spirit. And that’s why I was so proud of for [sic] Tommy, even though he’s the sort of sacrificialone, as we walked through the streets, just seeing people desperately reaching out to hold his hand, to touch him, to tell him to keep going, people trying to put money in his hand so he can buy snacks if he goes to prison …

Just, all of the faces, just faces of people desperate to have something to believe in, in a country that they don’t really believe in any more …

He said to me—I was just talking to him just before he got sent down; and he really is, literally, sent down—he said: “You know, there’s twelve murder cases here today in this court. I’m the thirteenth case, and I will wait till the end of the day. I’ll be put in a van with twelve murderers and I’ll be taken to prison.”

And he’s still incredulous that this could happen in the U.K. today; and I think Tommy’s message—I want to reflect it fairly—is, this is a warning for America. It doesn’t stop with Tommy Robinson. It doesn’t stop with this Enemy of the State.

All right, it’s a little over-wrought. Lower the volume a bit on the Christian imagery there, Katie.

It touched my old English heart, though. And that warning to America at the end should touch yours. The nation-wreckers are arrogant and mighty, and they won’t stop with England.

I know I’ve told this story before, but it bears telling again. I can’t forget it, and I don’t want it forgotten.

Twenty years ago, my mother was bedridden and near death. It was one of the last times I was with her, perhaps the very last time—I’m not sure. She was drifting in and out of awareness, sometimes just saying things out loud—random things, clear and coherent but not connected to each other.

So I was sitting there by the bed and heard her say: “I don’t mind dying. At least I knew England when she was England.”

• Category: Ideology • Tags: Britain, Immigration, Political Correctness 
🔊 Listen RSS

See, earlier, by Patrick J. Buchanan: Trump’s Patriotism Vs. The New Anti-Americanism

I hope you enjoyed your July 4th as much as the Derbs enjoyed ours. You should in fact enjoy the Fourth each year now with special zest in the knowledge that it may not be a public holiday much longer. Our Cultural Revolution advances ever faster.

Nowadays the word “pride” dwells under a cloud of suspicion. Any time you hear about some organization or event with “pride” in its title, you can infer that it is a vehicle for the promotion of buggery. Steve Sailer has mused that when the younger generation today learns about the 1942 Gary Cooper movie Pride of the Yankees, their first reaction is probably: “Hey, I didn’t know Lou Gehrig was gay!”

For example, we recently had Pride Week in New York City, with the word “pride” used in just that sense. It climaxed on Sunday, June 30th, in a huge parade of proud Ls, Gs, Bs, Ts, and Qs down Fifth Avenue.

Thus primed, I think I may be forgiven for having misapprehended a headline I saw on the Drudge Report. American Pride Hits New Low. “Uh-oh,” I thought, “what have the homo lobbies been up to now?”

On investigation it turned out that the news report had nothing to do with eccentric sexual inclinations. That headline was actually taken from a new press release out of Gallup, the very respectable polling organization:

As Americans prepare to celebrate the Fourth of July holiday, their pride in the U.S. has hit its lowest point since Gallup’s first measurement in 2001. While 70 percent of U.S. adults overall say they are proud to be Americans, this includes fewer than half (45 percent) who are “extremely” proud, marking the second consecutive year that this reading is below the majority level. Democrats continue to lag far behind Republicans in expressing extreme pride in the U.S.

American Pride Hits New Low; Few Proud of Political System, by Megan Brenan, July 2, 2019

The eye-catching sentence is: “Democrats continue to lag far behind Republicans in expressing extreme pride in the U.S.”

The actual percentages expressing themselves “extremely proud to be American” are: Republicans 76, Democrats 22. That’s a heck of a gap: 54 percentage points. In 2001 it was ten points, 64 to 54.

Here’s my question for Democrats. The biggest issue in our politics right now arises from the fact that millions—tens of millions, likely hundred of millions—of foreigners want to come settle in America, with or without proper permission. Isn’t that an occasion for…”pride”?

Apparently not. This last week, we have seen a couple of major strides toward the abolition of Independence Day: .

The logic on this one was hard to follow. Is it the thirteen stars, representing the original thirteen colonies, in all of which (I think) slavery was legal at the time Ms. Ross offered her flag design? If it was, then the thirteen stripes must be equally offensive. That could be…what’s the cant word here?…oh yes: problematic, that could be problematic to a great many not-yet-fully-woke Americans, as our present national flag retains those same thirteen stripes.

The issue got further confused when diehard counter-revolutionary subversives noted that the Betsy Ross flag was prominently displayed at Barack Obama’s second inaugural bash.

Since it is inconceivable that Saint Barack himself was not fully woke to the shameful associations of the flag, a new justification for the ban had to be thought up.

It quickly was. The Betsy Ross flag, we are now told, has been appropriated by white supremacists as a symbol of their deplorable movement.

I must say, I wasn’t aware of this. I have never seen the Betsy Ross flag on display at meetings of my own local white supremacy group SCARF (that’s the Suffolk County Assembly of Racists and Fascists) … but perhaps we’re just behind the curve out here in the sticks.

This logical switch illustrates the nimbleness of the Cultural Revolutionaries. In the fullness of time they will no doubt declare that yes, the current national flag is indeed unacceptable. They know, however, that the time is not yet right for a full-scale assault against all our national symbols. They need to proceed methodically, step by step until the moment is ripe to storm the Winter Palace.

The other revolutionary step forward this week:

  • the city of Charlottesville, Virginia will no longer celebrate Thomas Jefferson’s birthday as an official city holiday.

Charlottesville is the home of the University of Virginia, which Jefferson founded, and of Jefferson’s Monticello estate.

• Category: Ideology • Tags: American Media, Political Correctness 
🔊 Listen RSS

Nonfiction of the month: 1984

June 8th marked the 70th anniversary of the publication of Nineteen Eighty-Four, one of the half-dozen greatest pieces of imaginative fiction the last century produced, and the most politically potent.

My own feelings about the book are more personal than the average. For one thing I am the same age as the protagonist Winston Smith, as precisely as we can deduce from the text. (“He believed that he had been born in 1944 or 1945.”) For another, I read the book in my teens—with pleasure and understanding, not as a chore. Reading experiences of that kind leave a permanent deep impression.

And for another I believe very strongly in the reality of the external world. So did Winston Smith; so did Orwell himself; so did Kipling—one of Orwell’s heroes, and one of mine too.

This is an eccentric, unpopular point of view. We stone-kickers are a small, despised and mostly ignored minority of party poopers who sit apart—check your etymology, please—jeering at the fashionable cant of the times when we should be making our proper prostrations to the Gods of the Market Place.


says the preacher from the pulpit, and


Yeah, yeah, we snicker from the rear pews, and summon up the Party slogans from Nineteen Eighty-Four:


There are deeper, darker personal affinities, too. The degree to which Orwell’s physical condition—he was dying of TB when he wrote Nineteen Eighty-Four—colored the book’s narrative has been much discussed. My own view is that the attitude to death that the author brought to the novel was one that he had carried with him from his childhood, not much heightened, if at all, by thoughts of his own approaching demise.

Each one of us is, in life, separated by a screen or membrane from the Other Place. The membrane is thicker for some of us than for others. For most of us, most of the time, it is blessedly opaque. For Orwell, it was the mere skin of a soap bubble.

Now, approaching the tail-end of life, and with an incurable condition of my own, I am more than ever sure I know the identity of Big Brother.

(A dear Russian friend, when I discussed this with him several years ago, observed that in some pagan cultures, including that of the Slavs, “Big Sister” would be more appropriate. My friend could, if communication were only possible, now give me a more definitive ruling.)

Well, to commemorate this year’s anniversary Picador has brought out a new book about the book: The Ministry of Truth: A Biography of George Orwell’s 1984. After reading some reviews and Googling the author, I think I shall pass on it.

The author, Dorian Lynskey, is a young British democratic socialist, a regular at CultMarx outlets like the Guardian and Observer. Orwell himself was a democratic socialist, of course, so there is a broad ground of sympathy between Lynskey and Orwell. A lot of water has flowed under many, many bridges since 1949, though, and all of it has flowed right past Lynskey without his noticing.

This comes out in the June 4th interview Lynskey [Tweet him] gave to Pacific Standard. First you get a slab of sound Orwellian common sense:

I do find it dismaying that parts of the left continue to make the same old mistakes: a failure to understand the range of fears and desires that motivate ordinary people, a refusal to confront their own flaws, a weakness for authoritarians abroad, and so on. The British Labor Party under Jeremy Corbyn is guilty of this.

Then, in the next sentence, a lapse into CultMarx cluelessness:

I’m more hopeful about the United States, where people like Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez have so far avoided most of these traps and focused on bold domestic policy ideas.

Bold policy ideas like … what? Open borders? Sure, says Lynskey, Orwell would have been right on board with that!

He disliked xenophobia and welcomed immigrants, especially refugees.

Yo, Mr Lynskey: George Orwell is an old friend of mine from long, long acquaintance. I can tell you with high confidence what his shade, if it still exists somewhere (a thing he did not believe possible) would say about the polyglot boarding-house that his beloved England has become:

“Thank God I died in 1950!”

Fiction of the month: When They See Us

In the general zone of fictional productions, the most outrageous this month was the Netflix TV docudrama When They See Us. (Actually released May 31st but all over the news in early June.) It was an imaginative rewrite, by a Trump-hating black nationalist, of the 1989 Central Park Five case, portraying the young muggers and rapists prosecuted in that case as angelic innocent victims of a racist law-enforcement establishment.

• Category: Ideology • Tags: American Media, Political Correctness 
🔊 Listen RSS

The real heart of current Democratic craziness, on plain display in the two debates among Democrat candidates for President this week: the topic of immigration. The candidates left us in no doubt that any enforcement of immigration laws—the people’s laws, passed by Congress properly assembled, according to the Constitution—is inhumane and unacceptable. On this showing, I have to say the quality of the Democrat opposition to Trump is lower than I expected, and his chances correspondingly higher.

The temperature of discussion about immigration had been raised earlier in the week when a young Salvadoran man and his two-year-old daughter were drowned crossing the Rio Grande near Brownsville, Texas. A photograph of their corpses was placed prominently on the front pages of Wednesday’s New York Times and other Progressive outlets.

What had happened, according to the man’s widow, was that husband, wife, and infant had left a poor but comfortable home in El Salvador in hopes of getting asylum in the U.S.A., where they could get better-paying jobs. [‘The river swallowed them’: Widow of Salvadoran father who drowned with their daughter in Rio Grande tells how they decided to make the dangerous crossing after running out of money and how she watched in horror as they were swept away, Daily Mail, June 28, 2019] They’d both had jobs, don’t seem to have been in serious want, and weren’t under any kind of threats or persecution.

I don’t know what grounds they planned to make their asylum claim on. I presume they had some kind of sob story rehearsed.

Anyway, when they got to the U.S. border they were told they faced a long wait because of the surge of asylum-seekers. They had Mexican visas that allowed them to work in Mexico for a year, so they could have waited it out, but decided to swim the river instead. The result followed.

It’s a sad story for sure, but I can’t see how the U.S.A. is at fault. Countries have immigration procedures, and only so many staff to carry them out. What was the border post supposed to do when these Salvadorans showed up—just wave them in?

The answer from this week’s Democratic candidates seems to be: Yes!

None of the so-called moderators—who included such impeccably unbiased persons as Rachel Maddow and Conquistador-American José Díaz-Balart, who works for some Spanish-language TV station and is not to be confused with his brother, GOP Florida congresscritter and Steve Sailer doppelganger Mario Díaz-Balart—asked the obvious questions about this.

Most obvious of all:

Current world population is 7.7 billion. Surveys show that a sizable subset of that number—several hundred million—would like to leave their poor countries and move to richer ones, with the U.S.A. a prime destination. In your opinion, Mr. or Ms. Candidate, is there any upper limit to the number we should allow in?

Of course, nobody asked that. At any rate, searching the two debate transcripts for the word “limit” got no hits.

While I was at it I thought I’d do a search for “Koch,” K-o-c-h, as in “Koch brothers.” I had in mind the memorable reply Bernie Sanders gave to Ezra Klein four years ago when Klein asked him about Open Borders.

Clip: “Open borders? That’s a Koch brothers proposal.”

Didn’t any of the moderators think to remind Bernie of that? Apparently not. I wonder why not…

Beto O’Rourke, Cory Booker, and Julian Castro all threw in a few sentences of Spanish by way of asserting their multicultural credibility. So did one of the so-called moderators, José Díaz-Balart.

So let me say again: I think it’s deplorable for a candidate for public office to address us in a language most of us don’t understand.

I thought so seven years ago in the 2012 campaign when one of the candidates extruded this:

That was Mario Rubio pitching for the Vice-Presidential spot on Mitt Romney’s ticket. He didn’t get it, and I’d like to think that his lapsing into Spanish was one reason he didn’t get it.

The language of our country is English, and our leaders should address us in no other.

John Quincy Adams had lived in Germany and spoke the language fluently, facts that were well-known to the Americans of his time. When he was running for re-election as President in 1828, Adams was asked to address a gathering of German-speaking Americans in German. He refused on principle. Yes, I do know he lost that election; but he was still a better man, certainly a better American, than Marco Rubio.

This country can only work—can only be a country worth the name—under an ethic of relentless assimilation. You settle here, you Americanize yourself, for which the very first step is to master English, so you can join in the national political conversation. John Quincy Adams understood that. My immigrant wife understood it. Marco Rubio does not understand it.

Both Democrat debates were pretty crazy, but O’Rourke, Booker, Castro and Bill de Blasio pushed the Wednesday event well out into Looney Tunes territory. See the transcript here.

The furthest shores of progressive craziness were reached by Castro, who seems to want abortion rights for men. Or perhaps that’s not Peak Crazy. As Greg Cochran pointed out in a tweet:

So I guess we’re not talking total impossibility. Abortions for men is as far into the crazy zone as I personally want to go, though.

• Category: Ideology • Tags: 2020 Election, Democratic Party, Immigration 
🔊 Listen RSS

The issue of reparations for black slavery got an airing in Congress last week, curiously coinciding with renewed Main Stream Media drumbeating for the white-guilting Central Park Five Rape Hoax. I discuss reparations below, but first a word about an obviously-related news item that doesn’t seem to be getting any drumbeating at all.

A 23-year-old “Man,” Temar Bishop, who is black, was arraigned in court in New York las Saturday for charges including rape and attempted murder. He had raped a 20-year-old white woman and then beaten her unconscious.

The charge sheet also includes “Hate Crime,” based on words Mr. Bishop spoke to a witness after the event. Here are the words,

She was a white girl. She deserved it because us minorities have been through slavery … This is what they used to do to us. This is what they did to us during slavery. They used to beat us and whip us.

Man nabbed for Bronx rape allegedly said she ‘deserved it’ for ‘slavery’,by Larry Celona and Stephanie Pagones, June 18, 2019

I think the whole notion of “Hate Crime” is totally misguided and I’d like it removed from the statute books. Why is Temar Bishop’s offense any worse because he hates whites?

If I were judge in the case and Temar Bishop was found guilty at trial, I’d give him twenty years for the rape and fine him ten cents for the “Hate crime. ”

But will the long-standing and massively disproportionate pattern of black-on-white rape, to say nothing of homicides, be factored into any slavery reparation calculation?

The House Judiciary Committee hearings on a bill to … wait a minute, let me get it precisely right: “a bill to create a commission that would make recommendations concerning ‘any form of apology and compensation’ to descendants of enslaved African-Americans was the Congressional Clown Show Of The Week.

That’s the bill: to create a commission to make recommendations. Reminds me of my days as a student union debater, when we had fun with Roberts’ Rules of Order, moving a motion to move the motion that the motion be now tabled.

Sorry, my mind was wandering there. I just have trouble taking this reparations stuff seriously.

For one thing, I see all these race issues through the prism of the Cold Civil War: two big groups of whites going hammer and tongs at each other for all they’re worth while blacks hang around the periphery, dodging on to the battlefield now and then to rob a corpse or land a sucker punch.

I mean, do blacks really care about this, or is it just a way for guilty white liberals to display their mating plumage? Quote from myself:

Anti-racism is a mating display. It says: “Look at me! I have such earning power I can live where I like! I don’t have to worry about feral underclass blacks or Salvadoran gangbangers! I can strike a pose of lofty indifference to matters of race! Drop your knickers right now!”

Why Isn’t Racism Cool?, TakiMag, April 18, 2013

And in fact a couple of blacks (Coleman Hughes and former NFL player Burgess Owens)showed up at the hearing to argue against reparations as demeaning to blacks—as carrying the implication that unless whites give them stuff, they can’t cope. [Coleman Hughes: The Moment You Give Someone Reparations, You’ve Made Them Into A Victim, RealClearPolitics, June 19, 2019]

Which is in point of fact true. When the whites are driven out, as in Detroit or Zimbabwe, or killed off, as in Haiti, the blacks end up with, well, Detroit, Zimbabwe and Haiti. Without whites, blacks really can’t cope.

That’s a hard thing for Talented Tenth blacks like those two dissenters at Wednesday’s hearing to admit, and I intend no offense to them personally—they both seemed like fine, smart American gentlemen—but the Untalented Nine-Tenths is a mighty burden to bear: too much for the Talented Tenth to manage without help.

I revert to my analogy of a man dragging a sack along a road. If the man is big and healthy, and the sack not too heavy, he can cope all right. The sack will slow him down, but he’ll make progress. A smaller man with a bigger, heavier sack won’t cope so well, perhaps won’t be able to cope at all.

Whites have their feckless, troublesome underclasses, too. I know; I grew up among some of them. That’s the sack we have to drag. There aren’t so many that we can’t manage them, though, and make progress in spite of them. Blacks have a different equation to solve.

White Americans have done their best to help Blacks solve it. We’ve done more than that, in fact; we have distorted our entire social system, twisted our laws, and spent trillions of dollars to help them.

Affirmative Action, contract set-asides, hiring favoritism, exquisitely punctilious protocols in speech and writing to avoid offending them, gibberish college courses for them to be professors of, strict media silence over levels of black crime, fake documentaries presenting black thugs and rapists as saintly victims, …

The question I’d put before Congress is not: “Should whites do more?” but, “How much more can whites be expected to do?”

🔊 Listen RSS

Adapted from the latest Radio Derb, available exclusively on

Cover story in last Sunday’s Long Island Newsday: in Trump Era, LI Immigrants Cope With Tougher ICE Actions, “Climate Of Fear”, June 7, 2019, by Will Van Sant [Email him] and Víctor Manuel Ramos. [Email him]

That headline raised my hackles right away. I am an LI [Long Island] immigrant, married to another Long Island immigrant. We’re supposed to be “coping” with something that ICE is doing? Living in a “climate of fear”?

The Derbs have no interactions with ICE at all, and our fears are in the standard late-middle-aged suburban homeowner range: crabgrass, tax audits, atrial fibrillation.

But of course the headline is CultMarx double-speak. The word “immigrant” is code for what our federal statutes refer to as an “illegal alien.”

As I keep wearily pointing out, not only is an illegal alien not an immigrant, he is positively a non-immigrant. So are most legal aliens. Before I got my green card in 1994 I entered the U.S.A. on permits stamped into my passport with the plain words NONIMMIGRANT VISA.

An immigrant is a foreigner who has been accepted by the authorities for indefinite settlement in the U.S.

All other aliens, surely including illegal ones, are non-immigrants.

So we are in the bizarro world of CultMarx polemics, where words are used in the opposite of their correct meaning—War Is Peace, Freedom Is Slavery, and Non-immigrants are Immigrants. Got it.

So what’s this 4300-word story, around four times the length of a major broadsheet newspaper op-ed, about?

Opening quote:

Fearing deportation, a Guatemalan cleaning woman in the country illegally has taught her children to go quiet when they hear a knock on the door at their Hempstead apartment. Under a policy enacted by President Donald Trump, federal agents looking for immigrants wanted for serious crimes could arrest and deport her, too.

More doublespeak there. The phrase, “Under a policy enacted by President Donald Trump” should actually read: “Under laws passed by Congress duly elected and assembled, according to the Constitution.”

But, needless to say, you won’t get two sentences into a piece of CultMarx propaganda nowadays without encountering the President’s name in some negative context.

The story continues in much the same vein for all 4300 of its words. You don’t have to have a heart of stone to find its efforts at tear-jerking strained and unconvincing:

Many legal immigrants are afraid to register for benefits they are entitled to such as food stamps and health insurance because they live in households that include those without legal status …

About 55—or 10 percent—of the students at Suffolk County Community College who are in the country without authorization forgo in-county financial aid, according to Associate Dean Patty Munsch. [Email her] Under state law they must sign a notarized affidavit promising to seek legal status if possible, in effect outing themselves.

Why are legal immigrants entitled to food stamps? Put it another way, why are we admitting for permanent settlement people who can’t support themselves?

We never used to. For an immigrant visa—permission to settle indefinitely in the U.S.A.—you used to have to show you could support yourself and your dependants, and provide the name of a citizen guarantor to back you up. What was wrong with that arrangement?

Likewise, if ten percent of the illegal aliens at our Community College are forgoing financial aid, ninety percent aren’t. Shouldn’t college financial aid be for Americans?

Browsing Newsday at the town library through the week—I refuse to pay money for the lying rag—I’ve been gratified to see that the “Letters” columns contain some scathing critiques of that story. A great many of my neighbors here in Suffolk County are glad to know that the people’s laws on entry and settlement are being enforced.

So Newsday, like much of the legacy print media, still holds on to some old-fashioned notions about fair play and letting dissenting voices be heard, even if the dissenting voices only get a couple of column inches on page A24 while the front several pages of the paper are wall-to-wall Ruling Class propaganda.

But when the final paper edition of Newsday rolls off the press, around five years from now, the last of the old-line liberals will have died or been pensioned off, and the legions of the Woke will be totally in charge. There will then be no more equivocation, no more of this mealy-mouthed petit-bourgeois “on the one hand…on the other…,” no more readers’ letters.

You will be told what to think in no uncertain terms; and if you dissent, your dissent will have no public outlet.

What I have described there is of course not peculiar to New York’s Suffolk County. Local newspapers are like this all over. Staffed as they are by second-raters and recent college graduates, local newspapers are even stupider and more rigidly ideological than the metropolitan broadsheets. Here’s another example from the Portland Press-Herald out of Portland, Maine: Asylum seekers from Africa describe difficult journeys to Maine, by Rob Wolfe, June 12, 2019.

Portland ME has gotten itself a reputation for hospitality to “asylum seekers,” which is to say, border-jumpers and visa-overstayers who have memorized enough of a hard-luck story to get them past the perfunctory screening they’re given by the authorities.

We’ve been reporting on Portland for some years. Our own Patrick Cleburne noted back in 2014 that the state of Maine in general, and Portland ME in particular, are especially attractive to people from non-English-speaking African countries because of their exceptionally lush benefits:

More than 90 percent of asylum seekers receiving assistance in Portland last year arrived from four turbulent African nations: Burundi, Angola, Congo and Rwanda.

🔊 Listen RSS

Adapted from the latest Radio Derb, available exclusively on

George Orwell’s dystopian novel 1984 famously contained the aphorism: “Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.”

Apparently, he was right. It waxes stronger by the day.

This is most particularly true in anything to do with race. The very simplest, plainest facts about race are treated by the guardians of our culture—the media, the schools, the corporations—as radioactive, to be shielded from public view.

Here is a tiny instance, of the kind that is so commonplace, we hardly notice it anymore.

I get a daily delivery of the New York Postpaper edition. Here was a short filler item from last Monday, June 3rd. I’ll read you the item in its entirety, as printed. Headline: Woman, 78, raped. Story:

A creep forced his way into a Queens home Sunday morning and raped a 78-year-old woman, police said.

The sexual assault was reported just after 6 a.m. in a house on 148th Street near 241st Street in the Brookville neighborhood.

The man had broken into the house before attacking, police said.

No arrests have been made, but cops described the suspect as a man in his 30s, about 5-foot-9, weighing around 165 pounds.

The woman was treated at the North Shore University Hospital.

I don’t need to belabor my point here; you know what I’m getting at. Quote from my neighbors re Long Island Railroad gunman Colin Ferguson, as reported in Chapter Six of We Are Doomed: “It must be a black guy. If it was a white guy, they would have told us.”

That quote is from 26 years ago, so there is nothing the least bit new here.(The “creep” was quickly apprehended. In fairness to the New York Post, I should note that the online version of the newspaper—although not, for reasons unfathomable to me, the print version—published his picture. Is he black? Of course he is!)

Ann Coulter noted in her column the other day, the careful sculpting of the past to hide anything that contradicts our rulers’ narrative does sometimes seem to be at well-nigh the level of Chinese suppression of the history of Tiananmen Square.

We’ve been seeing this recently with the case of the Central Park Five. These were the five young black and Latino men who attacked, raped, and left permanently injured a young white woman jogging in the New York City park in 1989.

Netflix is currently running a TV series titled When They See Us, produced by anti-Trump black activist Ava Duvernay.

The guilt of the Central Park Five is not in serious dispute, as Ann and many others have documented. [Netflix’s False Story of the Central Park Five, by Linda Fairstein, WSJ, June 10, 2019]They were convicted by two separate juries and spent years in jail before crazy-liberal 90-year-old District Attorney Robert Morgenthau celebrated his retirement by vacating their convictions. New York City’s communist mayor Bill De Blasio then awarded them forty million dollars from city funds.

Those are the mere facts. The Narrative is that these five young men were randomly arrested and coerced into making false confessions. The current Netflix production follows that Narrative.

So does the entry for it on IMDb, the standard-reference movie database. The heading on that IMDb entry read (I’m sorry for the poor grammar, which is IMDb’s, not mine):

Chronicle the true story of a notorious case of five black teenagers who were convicted of a rape they did not commit.

A bit further down the IMDb entry we read that, quote:

“When They See Us” Shows the Horrors of Injustice.

In the same spirit Wikipedia includes the case in its List of wrongful convictions in the United States.

The false narrative about the Central Park Five is now as thoroughly, firmly established as the ChiComs’ narrative about June 4th, to the slight degree that the ChiComs have a narrative—i.e. that it was trouble stirred up by a tiny group of counter-revolutionary malcontents in the pay of hostile foreign powers.

Watching the 10 o’clock news the other evening on Fox 5 New York I saw the bubble-brained presenters, Steve Lacy and Dari Alexander look straight into the camera and tell me the Central Park Five were “wrongly convicted.” I bet they believe it, too. At the NPC level, which is the level you’re at with local news announcers, the Narrative is fact while facts are heresy.

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