The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewJohn Derbyshire Archive
Razib Khan Hired and Fired By the New York Times, Both On the Same Day!
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Yesterday (i.e. Thursday) morning I was reading this article about a raft of new names hired to post at the New York Times blog. To my surprise, I saw the name Razib Khan among them. “Wow,” I thought, “Things are looking up.”

I’ve known Razib for 15 years or so, since we both belonged to Steve Sailer’s Human Biodiversity email group. He’s a brilliant guy; better read in the human sciences than anyone I know — and I know Steve Sailer, Nicholas Wade and Steven Pinker.

Just to give you a flavor of Razib, here is the kind of thing he posts. This is extracted from his own blog, March 9th, a post titled Genetics of why Finns are less anxious than Italians.” Extract, just for the flavor:

The point of this post is not to suggest that variation within the FAAH locus is not relevant to phenotypic differences in individuals or populations. There’s a lot of epidemiological, and now molecular, biochemical, and neurological, evidence that this missense mutation is important in a functional sense. It is likely to make a difference in outcomes. In The New York Times piece the author speculatively suggests that variation at this SNP somehow perpetuates personality heterogeneity in our species, and is a boon to a society. Granted, this doesn’t seem to be true in all cases, as the Mbuti Pygmies and Papuans may lack polymorphism here. But, it is interesting to me that the derived mutation is found at variable frequencies all across the world. There’s probably a evolutionary and biomedical story here to be told about some sort of balancing selection. But, as with many narratives which are fixated upon endophenotypes, the scientific conclusions aren’t quite cut and dried, and rather are still developing, because the endophenotypes themselves are at the end of a long causal chain.

That’s the kind of stuff Razib writes, usually with supporting graphs, tables, and references to papers in journals with titles like Current Directions in Psychological Science. Don’t read Razib if you’re not willing to engage with the latest results in behavioral genetics, population genetics, computational genomics, and related areas of the human sciences.

(And, by the way, don’t post to the comments thread on Razib’s blog unless you’re on-topic and at least as well-informed as he is on the point under discussion. Razib does not suffer fools gladly, and is merciless with commenters who don’t come up to his own high standards.)

So, having known Razib all these years and admired his erudition; and having met him a few times and found him articulate, witty, and charming; I was glad to see him elevated to the status of New York Times contributor.

ORDER IT NOW

Glad, but also surprised. Razib is of course a race realist, as anyone who knows as much genetics as he does is bound to be. True, the Times also publishes Nicholas Wade, another race realist, to write in their Science section: but Wade is a skillful diplomat, who softens his articles on population genetics with many qualifications and cautions about the provisional nature of results and the fallacy of inferring “ought” from “is.” Razib can’t be bothered with diplomacy, he just talks science … and sometimes also history, and religion, and philosophy, always from a deep background of reading, quoting half a dozen scholarly books and papers to you as he goes.

Well, so I was looking forward to Razib’s contributions to the New York Times blog, and to seeing him pitilessly demolish some of the innumerate idiots he’d be sharing that blog with.

Alas, it was too good to be true. I was browsing the blogs that same evening, Thursday evening, and I saw a post on geneticist Greg Cochran’s blog with the title The Once and Future Khan. From which:

Razib Khan managed to get himself hired and fired by the New York Times over the course of a single day, an enviable record. Having the Times look upon you with favor is a dubious honor in the first place, something like having a leper ask you out on a date — so a quick hire-and-fire is optimal. Something for the CV, but you never had to actually hang out with the slimebags. Not as cool as “refused the Fields Medal.” but pretty cool.

What seems to have happened is that Gawker.com, a Cultural Marxist website, did a hit piece on Razib exposing his associations with such racist white-supremacist racist far-right racist bigots as racist Taki Theodoracopulos, racist Steve Sailer, and oh my God! racist John Derbyshire.

I am of course exaggerating their fondness for the word “racist,” but not by much: the Gawker piece is 518 words; “racist” occurs seven times (not counting the title occurrence), for an average of once every 74 words. That puts “racist” up there with “and” and “the.”

The piece is also sloppy. It describes VDARE.com, for example, as being named after, quote, “the first white child born in America.” Nope: as Peter Brimelow clearly states — in the page that Gawker actually links to! — Virginia Dare was, quote, “the first English child to be born in the New World.” The first white child was Snorri Thorfinnsson, born six hundred years earlier.

These Marxists of course don’t deal in facts, data, and accuracy. They deal in vituperation, status whoring, and social shaming. The New York Times went along with that and dropped Razib as soon as the dogs started barking. About that, I am not surprised.

(Republished from VDare by permission of author or representative)
 
Hide 47 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Anahita says:

    So Razib is the victim of other people’s idealogical bias?

    Get their Social Issues (TM) out of science journalism. This is about ethics in journalism. End ideological collusion.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Immigrant from former USSR
    I remember a joke told to me by a person from Odessa (Ukraine.) Sure, it is Communist Party and life in USSR that joke tells the story about.

    Rabinovich (apparently, typical last name of a person of specific ethnicity in jokes)
    was just expelled from the Party.
    That night in his sleep he sees this dream:
    Anti-communist revolution just took place in Odessa. People gathered to the central square of Odessa, and the leader of the crowd asks through his bull-horn:
    --- Citizens of free Odessa! What would be our first claim in free Odessa?
    And the crowd, as one person, shouts synchronously:
    “We require the re-installment of Rabinovich’s Party membership!”

    I have good feelings towards Razib Khan and towards his young family of 4.
    But, dear commentators, please,
    do not require his re-installment as NYT contributor.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    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
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Rifleman says:

    is that Gawker.com, a Cultural Marxist website

    No it isn’t.

    These Marxists of course don’t deal in facts, data, and accuracy.

    Neither do you or other neo-McCarthyite paranoids when you throw around “Marxist/Cultural Marxist” labels that don’t apply.

    Gawker media is pro fag, racistly anti-White, shallow and vindictive.

    They have no interesting in or respect for Old White Guy ideas like Marxism, Cultural or otherwise.

    Read More
    • Replies: @bomag
    Marxism as practiced has come to mean using centralized state power to crush your opponents while claiming to be following truth and science. In this sense, Gawker is very much Marxist.
    , @Anonymous
    You sound like you don't know what Cultural Marxism is. You may know of its twin sister, identity politics.
    At this point, it has very little to do with Karl, but Cultural Marxism is a fair descriptor.
    , @rhhardin
    We learn to attach labels to things as children. I know that I had a bag of labels given to me by my philosopher parents, so that I could learn the names of things.

    "Wez are my wabels," I used to say. I'd mark off what things are called, and tie little label to them.

    Wittgenstein remarked somewhere that it's remarkable how little of language works like that, but I don't know what that would be called.
    , @John Jeremiah Smith

    Neither do you or other neo-McCarthyite paranoids when you throw around “Marxist/Cultural Marxist” labels that don’t apply.
     
    Um, "Rifleman", for a year or so, I have endeavored to dissuade the so-called "race realists" from their rather comical habit of using the pathetically mis-coined term "Cultural Marxism". However, my personal amusement at their insistence on looking like stupid, uneducated jackasses who understand neither the dynamics of culture, nor the simple economic theory of Karl Marx, has resulted in a stubborn doubling-down on looking dumb.

    They mean well, but until they adjust their preferred terminology so as to target what intelligence might yet lurk in the propaganda-fogged brains of Millenials ... well, so be it. It doesn't matter what they know or how they know it, if they refuse to communicate it in terms their target audience can accept and understand ... might as well dig a hole in the ground and bark into it.

    "Neo-McCarthyite" is a bit harsh, but has elements of truth.
    , @Wyrd
    Gawker media is pro fag, racistly anti-White, shallow and vindictive.

    In other words, Cultural Marxism.

    , @threestars
    The left dropped Marx and "vulgar Marxism" back in the 50's and 60's. They mostly follow Gyorgy Lukacs' philosophy and Gramsci's tactics. Even so, they still labeled themselves as Marxist for the most part, so it's kind of fitting we use the term as well.
    Heck, I thought everybody in the alt-right knew as much...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. Gregorios says:

    Talking about sloppiness, Virginia was not English. She was a colonist born to English parents.

    Read More
    • Replies: @X
    Right….

    Well, Greg, all I can say is congratulations on your acumen.

    Tell me why then, using your awe inspiring powers of intellect, if race is only a social construct, I have to check two little boxes for White and non-Hispanic/Latino every time I have to fill out a government form.

    Speak to us O Great Toothless One (a slang expression referring to flatulence).

    , @John Cunningham
    @Gregorios talk about sloppiness yourself, asswipe. If Virginia Dare was not English, what was she? Japanese? Zulu?
    , @Currahee
    um, ....ah, what?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. bomag [AKA "doombuggy"] says:
    @Rifleman

    is that Gawker.com, a Cultural Marxist website
     
    No it isn't.

    These Marxists of course don’t deal in facts, data, and accuracy.
     
    Neither do you or other neo-McCarthyite paranoids when you throw around "Marxist/Cultural Marxist" labels that don't apply.

    Gawker media is pro fag, racistly anti-White, shallow and vindictive.

    They have no interesting in or respect for Old White Guy ideas like Marxism, Cultural or otherwise.

    Marxism as practiced has come to mean using centralized state power to crush your opponents while claiming to be following truth and science. In this sense, Gawker is very much Marxist.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. X says:
    @Gregorios
    Talking about sloppiness, Virginia was not English. She was a colonist born to English parents.

    Right….

    Well, Greg, all I can say is congratulations on your acumen.

    Tell me why then, using your awe inspiring powers of intellect, if race is only a social construct, I have to check two little boxes for White and non-Hispanic/Latino every time I have to fill out a government form.

    Speak to us O Great Toothless One (a slang expression referring to flatulence).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Rifleman

    is that Gawker.com, a Cultural Marxist website
     
    No it isn't.

    These Marxists of course don’t deal in facts, data, and accuracy.
     
    Neither do you or other neo-McCarthyite paranoids when you throw around "Marxist/Cultural Marxist" labels that don't apply.

    Gawker media is pro fag, racistly anti-White, shallow and vindictive.

    They have no interesting in or respect for Old White Guy ideas like Marxism, Cultural or otherwise.

    You sound like you don’t know what Cultural Marxism is. You may know of its twin sister, identity politics.
    At this point, it has very little to do with Karl, but Cultural Marxism is a fair descriptor.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. Lousteau says:

    I read Khan’s article here a couple of days ago, the one with many graphs and what not. I was guffawing from the get-go – not because it’s nonsense, which is what may be. I haven’t read anything this cranky in ages. The quote about the less anxious Finns (and I’m one, by the way) is displayed not because it states some awesome scientific truth. It’s displayed to showcase Khan’s dense writing style – the guy uses “big” words and plays with the poetic connotations of scientific jargon. He’s, at least for now, an aspiring poet. His verbiage must be converted into a movie! I’m working on it now. Thinking of “My Dinner with Andre.” You say Khan is not diplomatic, i.e., doesn’t have social skills, blurts out awkward sayings at a wrong time when less gifted people would hold their tongue, etc. Does Khan also drool?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  8. rhhardin says: • Website
    @Rifleman

    is that Gawker.com, a Cultural Marxist website
     
    No it isn't.

    These Marxists of course don’t deal in facts, data, and accuracy.
     
    Neither do you or other neo-McCarthyite paranoids when you throw around "Marxist/Cultural Marxist" labels that don't apply.

    Gawker media is pro fag, racistly anti-White, shallow and vindictive.

    They have no interesting in or respect for Old White Guy ideas like Marxism, Cultural or otherwise.

    We learn to attach labels to things as children. I know that I had a bag of labels given to me by my philosopher parents, so that I could learn the names of things.

    “Wez are my wabels,” I used to say. I’d mark off what things are called, and tie little label to them.

    Wittgenstein remarked somewhere that it’s remarkable how little of language works like that, but I don’t know what that would be called.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. @Rifleman

    is that Gawker.com, a Cultural Marxist website
     
    No it isn't.

    These Marxists of course don’t deal in facts, data, and accuracy.
     
    Neither do you or other neo-McCarthyite paranoids when you throw around "Marxist/Cultural Marxist" labels that don't apply.

    Gawker media is pro fag, racistly anti-White, shallow and vindictive.

    They have no interesting in or respect for Old White Guy ideas like Marxism, Cultural or otherwise.

    Neither do you or other neo-McCarthyite paranoids when you throw around “Marxist/Cultural Marxist” labels that don’t apply.

    Um, “Rifleman”, for a year or so, I have endeavored to dissuade the so-called “race realists” from their rather comical habit of using the pathetically mis-coined term “Cultural Marxism”. However, my personal amusement at their insistence on looking like stupid, uneducated jackasses who understand neither the dynamics of culture, nor the simple economic theory of Karl Marx, has resulted in a stubborn doubling-down on looking dumb.

    They mean well, but until they adjust their preferred terminology so as to target what intelligence might yet lurk in the propaganda-fogged brains of Millenials … well, so be it. It doesn’t matter what they know or how they know it, if they refuse to communicate it in terms their target audience can accept and understand … might as well dig a hole in the ground and bark into it.

    “Neo-McCarthyite” is a bit harsh, but has elements of truth.

    Read More
    • Replies: @D. K.
    Let me get this straight: People around the country, in recent years, have lost their livelihoods, and become de facto victims of blacklisting, for failing to toe the new party line, even when it is disproved by science itself; but it is right-wingers like Mr. Derbyshire who are now "neo-McCarthyites" for pointing out the process, rather than the left-wing "social-justice warriors" who are the ones actually enforcing the blacklist?!?
    , @silviosilver

    Um, “Rifleman”, for a year or so, I have endeavored to dissuade the so-called “race realists” from their rather comical habit of using the pathetically mis-coined term “Cultural Marxism”. However, my personal amusement at their insistence on looking like stupid, uneducated jackasses who understand neither the dynamics of culture, nor the simple economic theory of Karl Marx, has resulted in a stubborn doubling-down on looking dumb.
     
    Cultural marxists themselves have been known to use it to describe their views.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. David says:

    The “flavor” of Razib’s style and erudition we are offered in this piece is indeed a typical windbag paragraph of his. First, it’s about what his post is not about. Second, he is not attempting to convey understanding to the reader, but to allude to the understanding Razib could share with us if only we were worth the trouble. Third, at least half of any paragraph of his could be removed leaving it, at least, not more meaningless.

    …this missense mutation is important in a functional sense. It is likely to make a difference in outcomes.

    If the mutation is important, it’s likely to be important functionally. And if it’s important functionally, it’s likely to have an impact on outcomes.

    …the derived mutation is found at variable frequencies all across the world. There’s probably a evolutionary and biomedical story here to be told about some sort of balancing selection.

    Wait. There is a mutation whose frequency varies around the world? Must be a story in there. When you find it, don’t forget that Razib one of the 57 PhD candidates credited with the discovery.

    Being pleased with himself for knowing Steven Pinker and Razib is a rare example of poor judgement on John Derbyshire’s part.

    Read More
    • Replies: @John Jeremiah Smith

    he is not attempting to convey understanding to the reader, but to allude to the understanding Razib could share with us if only we were worth the trouble
     
    Although some of Asimov's books on science are now out-of-date, if you have had occasion to read a few of them, you would be impressed by how well Asimov could explain relatively complex scientific theories to an audience that ranged from school-boys to retired business executives. Razib may be a nice guy, but his exposition tends to glaze the eyes.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. D. K. says:
    @John Jeremiah Smith

    Neither do you or other neo-McCarthyite paranoids when you throw around “Marxist/Cultural Marxist” labels that don’t apply.
     
    Um, "Rifleman", for a year or so, I have endeavored to dissuade the so-called "race realists" from their rather comical habit of using the pathetically mis-coined term "Cultural Marxism". However, my personal amusement at their insistence on looking like stupid, uneducated jackasses who understand neither the dynamics of culture, nor the simple economic theory of Karl Marx, has resulted in a stubborn doubling-down on looking dumb.

    They mean well, but until they adjust their preferred terminology so as to target what intelligence might yet lurk in the propaganda-fogged brains of Millenials ... well, so be it. It doesn't matter what they know or how they know it, if they refuse to communicate it in terms their target audience can accept and understand ... might as well dig a hole in the ground and bark into it.

    "Neo-McCarthyite" is a bit harsh, but has elements of truth.

    Let me get this straight: People around the country, in recent years, have lost their livelihoods, and become de facto victims of blacklisting, for failing to toe the new party line, even when it is disproved by science itself; but it is right-wingers like Mr. Derbyshire who are now “neo-McCarthyites” for pointing out the process, rather than the left-wing “social-justice warriors” who are the ones actually enforcing the blacklist?!?

    Read More
    • Replies: @John Jeremiah Smith

    Let me get this straight: People around the country, in recent years, have lost their livelihoods, and become de facto victims of blacklisting, for failing to toe the new party line, even when it is disproved by science itself; but it is right-wingers like Mr. Derbyshire who are now “neo-McCarthyites” for pointing out the process, rather than the left-wing “social-justice warriors” who are the ones actually enforcing the blacklist?!?
     
    No, D.K., you did not get that straight. Is "cultural marxism" one of your preferred phrases, perchance? It is unfortunate that you are incapable of reading and understanding simple declarative sentences in the English language.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. @D. K.
    Let me get this straight: People around the country, in recent years, have lost their livelihoods, and become de facto victims of blacklisting, for failing to toe the new party line, even when it is disproved by science itself; but it is right-wingers like Mr. Derbyshire who are now "neo-McCarthyites" for pointing out the process, rather than the left-wing "social-justice warriors" who are the ones actually enforcing the blacklist?!?

    Let me get this straight: People around the country, in recent years, have lost their livelihoods, and become de facto victims of blacklisting, for failing to toe the new party line, even when it is disproved by science itself; but it is right-wingers like Mr. Derbyshire who are now “neo-McCarthyites” for pointing out the process, rather than the left-wing “social-justice warriors” who are the ones actually enforcing the blacklist?!?

    No, D.K., you did not get that straight. Is “cultural marxism” one of your preferred phrases, perchance? It is unfortunate that you are incapable of reading and understanding simple declarative sentences in the English language.

    Read More
    • Replies: @D. K.
    No, I do not use the term "Cultural Marxism"-- other than to point out that many others choose to use it for what I call "Neobolshevism." The term that I took issue with, in my previous reply, was "neo-McCarthyite," not "Cultural Marxism," however; so, apparently, I am not the one deficient in English-language comprehension.

    'Rifleman' was the one to bring up "neo-McCarthyite," above, and applied it to Mr. Derbyshire and his ilk of contemporary right-wingers-- rather than to the contemporary left-wingers who are administering the new blacklist. Even as someone who is neither a left-winger nor a right-winger, I found that very odd.

    You then said that the term "neo-McCarthyite" was "a bit harsh, but has elements of truth." I saw nothing in your reply to 'Rifleman' that either stated or implied that it was partially true, to whatever extent, of the neobols (which is how I prefer to refer to those whom Mr. Derbyshire et al. call "Cultural Marxists") who are actually engaging in latter-day witch hunts, rather than of neo-reactionaries like Mr. Derbyshire, who merely are pointing out the hunts and hunters, and decrying them.

    So, what did my previous reply (which was actually a query, rather than a statement, and therefore incapable of being wrong per se) allegedly not get straight, Mr. Smith, and which declarative statement by whom did I supposedly not understand? [Perhaps, with your help, I will be able to get a partial refund on my B.A. in English (and History), or even on some of my three advanced university degrees!?!]

    Regardless, your reply to my own previous reply to you failed to answer my question; so, I will rephrase it: Why are those complaining about the new blacklisting craze the new McCarthyites, rather than those demanding and enforcing the blacklist?
    , @razor
    Tell you what johnny...when you stop calling White people racist,nazi,and anti-semite for giving their opinions that are not deemed politically correct or speaking for their collective White interest and want to ruin them financially for having done so...then we will stop calling you leftist cultural marxist...but thats not going to happen is it you free speech hating crypto bolshevik! How's it feel being a part of the establishment asshole? Its your ideology that is getting OLD and it is the right who are the new revolutionaries.
    , @Anonymous
    Relax jonny,

    We like the term Cultural Marxist, that's the term we'll use. We are aware it doesn't have a lot to do with Karl.

    If they can say gay 'marriage ', we can say cultural. 'Marxist'

    It has a nice ring to it. And the Marxist term has a suitably sinister connotation, to the American ear anyway.

    Thanks for your input all the same.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. @David
    The "flavor" of Razib's style and erudition we are offered in this piece is indeed a typical windbag paragraph of his. First, it's about what his post is not about. Second, he is not attempting to convey understanding to the reader, but to allude to the understanding Razib could share with us if only we were worth the trouble. Third, at least half of any paragraph of his could be removed leaving it, at least, not more meaningless.

    ...this missense mutation is important in a functional sense. It is likely to make a difference in outcomes.
     
    If the mutation is important, it's likely to be important functionally. And if it's important functionally, it's likely to have an impact on outcomes.

    ...the derived mutation is found at variable frequencies all across the world. There’s probably a evolutionary and biomedical story here to be told about some sort of balancing selection.
     
    Wait. There is a mutation whose frequency varies around the world? Must be a story in there. When you find it, don't forget that Razib one of the 57 PhD candidates credited with the discovery.

    Being pleased with himself for knowing Steven Pinker and Razib is a rare example of poor judgement on John Derbyshire's part.

    he is not attempting to convey understanding to the reader, but to allude to the understanding Razib could share with us if only we were worth the trouble

    Although some of Asimov’s books on science are now out-of-date, if you have had occasion to read a few of them, you would be impressed by how well Asimov could explain relatively complex scientific theories to an audience that ranged from school-boys to retired business executives. Razib may be a nice guy, but his exposition tends to glaze the eyes.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. @John Jeremiah Smith

    Neither do you or other neo-McCarthyite paranoids when you throw around “Marxist/Cultural Marxist” labels that don’t apply.
     
    Um, "Rifleman", for a year or so, I have endeavored to dissuade the so-called "race realists" from their rather comical habit of using the pathetically mis-coined term "Cultural Marxism". However, my personal amusement at their insistence on looking like stupid, uneducated jackasses who understand neither the dynamics of culture, nor the simple economic theory of Karl Marx, has resulted in a stubborn doubling-down on looking dumb.

    They mean well, but until they adjust their preferred terminology so as to target what intelligence might yet lurk in the propaganda-fogged brains of Millenials ... well, so be it. It doesn't matter what they know or how they know it, if they refuse to communicate it in terms their target audience can accept and understand ... might as well dig a hole in the ground and bark into it.

    "Neo-McCarthyite" is a bit harsh, but has elements of truth.

    Um, “Rifleman”, for a year or so, I have endeavored to dissuade the so-called “race realists” from their rather comical habit of using the pathetically mis-coined term “Cultural Marxism”. However, my personal amusement at their insistence on looking like stupid, uneducated jackasses who understand neither the dynamics of culture, nor the simple economic theory of Karl Marx, has resulted in a stubborn doubling-down on looking dumb.

    Cultural marxists themselves have been known to use it to describe their views.

    Read More
    • Replies: @John Jeremiah Smith
    Point go ZOOOOOOM!!!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. @Gregorios
    Talking about sloppiness, Virginia was not English. She was a colonist born to English parents.

    talk about sloppiness yourself, asswipe. If Virginia Dare was not English, what was she? Japanese? Zulu?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stranger Is Danger
    She was AMERICAN!!!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. Wyrd says:
    @Rifleman

    is that Gawker.com, a Cultural Marxist website
     
    No it isn't.

    These Marxists of course don’t deal in facts, data, and accuracy.
     
    Neither do you or other neo-McCarthyite paranoids when you throw around "Marxist/Cultural Marxist" labels that don't apply.

    Gawker media is pro fag, racistly anti-White, shallow and vindictive.

    They have no interesting in or respect for Old White Guy ideas like Marxism, Cultural or otherwise.

    Gawker media is pro fag, racistly anti-White, shallow and vindictive.

    In other words, Cultural Marxism.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. @silviosilver

    Um, “Rifleman”, for a year or so, I have endeavored to dissuade the so-called “race realists” from their rather comical habit of using the pathetically mis-coined term “Cultural Marxism”. However, my personal amusement at their insistence on looking like stupid, uneducated jackasses who understand neither the dynamics of culture, nor the simple economic theory of Karl Marx, has resulted in a stubborn doubling-down on looking dumb.
     
    Cultural marxists themselves have been known to use it to describe their views.

    Point go ZOOOOOOM!!!

    Read More
    • Replies: @silviosilver
    I suppose that's one way to save face. A more comprehensive method would involve admitting to yourself you don't know nearly as much as you think you do, which hopefully would result in you listening more and speaking less.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factor"] says:

    “Razib does not suffer fools gladly.”

    He’s just thin-skinned.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  19. D. K. says:
    @John Jeremiah Smith

    Let me get this straight: People around the country, in recent years, have lost their livelihoods, and become de facto victims of blacklisting, for failing to toe the new party line, even when it is disproved by science itself; but it is right-wingers like Mr. Derbyshire who are now “neo-McCarthyites” for pointing out the process, rather than the left-wing “social-justice warriors” who are the ones actually enforcing the blacklist?!?
     
    No, D.K., you did not get that straight. Is "cultural marxism" one of your preferred phrases, perchance? It is unfortunate that you are incapable of reading and understanding simple declarative sentences in the English language.

    No, I do not use the term “Cultural Marxism”– other than to point out that many others choose to use it for what I call “Neobolshevism.” The term that I took issue with, in my previous reply, was “neo-McCarthyite,” not “Cultural Marxism,” however; so, apparently, I am not the one deficient in English-language comprehension.

    ‘Rifleman’ was the one to bring up “neo-McCarthyite,” above, and applied it to Mr. Derbyshire and his ilk of contemporary right-wingers– rather than to the contemporary left-wingers who are administering the new blacklist. Even as someone who is neither a left-winger nor a right-winger, I found that very odd.

    You then said that the term “neo-McCarthyite” was “a bit harsh, but has elements of truth.” I saw nothing in your reply to ‘Rifleman’ that either stated or implied that it was partially true, to whatever extent, of the neobols (which is how I prefer to refer to those whom Mr. Derbyshire et al. call “Cultural Marxists”) who are actually engaging in latter-day witch hunts, rather than of neo-reactionaries like Mr. Derbyshire, who merely are pointing out the hunts and hunters, and decrying them.

    So, what did my previous reply (which was actually a query, rather than a statement, and therefore incapable of being wrong per se) allegedly not get straight, Mr. Smith, and which declarative statement by whom did I supposedly not understand? [Perhaps, with your help, I will be able to get a partial refund on my B.A. in English (and History), or even on some of my three advanced university degrees!?!]

    Regardless, your reply to my own previous reply to you failed to answer my question; so, I will rephrase it: Why are those complaining about the new blacklisting craze the new McCarthyites, rather than those demanding and enforcing the blacklist?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. razor says:
    @John Jeremiah Smith

    Let me get this straight: People around the country, in recent years, have lost their livelihoods, and become de facto victims of blacklisting, for failing to toe the new party line, even when it is disproved by science itself; but it is right-wingers like Mr. Derbyshire who are now “neo-McCarthyites” for pointing out the process, rather than the left-wing “social-justice warriors” who are the ones actually enforcing the blacklist?!?
     
    No, D.K., you did not get that straight. Is "cultural marxism" one of your preferred phrases, perchance? It is unfortunate that you are incapable of reading and understanding simple declarative sentences in the English language.

    Tell you what johnny…when you stop calling White people racist,nazi,and anti-semite for giving their opinions that are not deemed politically correct or speaking for their collective White interest and want to ruin them financially for having done so…then we will stop calling you leftist cultural marxist…but thats not going to happen is it you free speech hating crypto bolshevik! How’s it feel being a part of the establishment asshole? Its your ideology that is getting OLD and it is the right who are the new revolutionaries.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. KA says:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/18/opinion/go-ahead-ruin-my-day.html?_r=0

    Tom Friedman could have helped Razib Khan with some ideas of how to survive the emptiness of the wide hollow ground that NYT has been turned into .One doesnt have to say sorry for being intellectually dishonest,ethically challenged ,cognitively impaired ,and factually ignorant or for not revisiting his own earlier columns despite new and contradicting evidences as long as the pose doesn’t resonate discordant in the echo chamber .NYT will still support him .

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  22. Maybe Derbyshire has a yen for diminutive Asians; he married one.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  23. @John Cunningham
    @Gregorios talk about sloppiness yourself, asswipe. If Virginia Dare was not English, what was she? Japanese? Zulu?

    She was AMERICAN!!!

    Read More
    • Replies: @random observer
    "American" in the geographic sense, born on the [or an] American continent, the same way her parents born in England were European, part of European culture.

    But by that definition she was in no sense the first "American"- and I don't just mean the Indians. Plenty of Spanish and Portuguese and other descendants of the Old world born in America by then.

    And Virginia Dare cannot be considered an American in the modern sense, since there was no American state, nation, identity, people or culture, let alone ethnicity. As a matter of what we would now call nationality or citizenship, she was an English girl and a subject of the English king, born in an English possession in America rather than in England or in an English possession in the Old World. The United States does not stand outside time and space.
    , @Mark Caplan
    If Virginia Dare and her ilk weren't English but American, what was all that unpleasantness about in 1776? I thought 1776 was when one people dissolved the political bands which had connected them with another and assumed a separate and equal status.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. RW says:

    The real question here is how did Razib get invited in the first place to blog with the New York Times?

    There’s got to be a story there.

    Read More
    • Replies: @KA
    How does anybody get in NYT? Skin color as a reason will satisfy some incurious minds on this site.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. @John Jeremiah Smith
    Point go ZOOOOOOM!!!

    I suppose that’s one way to save face. A more comprehensive method would involve admitting to yourself you don’t know nearly as much as you think you do, which hopefully would result in you listening more and speaking less.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. Sean says:

    And why should they be concerned with facts? Without might, the facts may as well be evil lies.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  27. Immigrant from former USSR [AKA "Florida Resident"] says:
    @Anahita
    So Razib is the victim of other people's idealogical bias?

    Get their Social Issues (TM) out of science journalism. This is about ethics in journalism. End ideological collusion.

    I remember a joke told to me by a person from Odessa (Ukraine.) Sure, it is Communist Party and life in USSR that joke tells the story about.

    Rabinovich (apparently, typical last name of a person of specific ethnicity in jokes)
    was just expelled from the Party.
    That night in his sleep he sees this dream:
    Anti-communist revolution just took place in Odessa. People gathered to the central square of Odessa, and the leader of the crowd asks through his bull-horn:
    — Citizens of free Odessa! What would be our first claim in free Odessa?
    And the crowd, as one person, shouts synchronously:
    “We require the re-installment of Rabinovich’s Party membership!”

    I have good feelings towards Razib Khan and towards his young family of 4.
    But, dear commentators, please,
    do not require his re-installment as NYT contributor.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. @rifleman

    Uh-huh. They think Karl Marx is Groucho’s dad and

    ‘Das Capital’ is what Germans call Washington..

    Kudos to Khan for getting fired – shame for being hired in the first place by a junk ship like the NYT.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  29. KA says:
    @RW
    The real question here is how did Razib get invited in the first place to blog with the New York Times?

    There's got to be a story there.

    How does anybody get in NYT? Skin color as a reason will satisfy some incurious minds on this site.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. J1234 says:

    I’m guessing the NYT figured they had nothing to worry about in hiring Razib Khan because they looked at his picture and made certain assumptions about his racial views based on his skin color.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sean
    My impression it was not his views and actually he does not think political conclusions can be drawn from scientific investigation. (I don't think he is someone who wants to base policy on IQ differences, or even investigate them) Razib probably communicated with a WN site thinking a purely scientific contribution could mediate between political viewpoints. Any white aspiring to become a Phd and NYT Op Ed science writer in the future would have intuitively avoided doing what he did.
    , @Bliss

    I’m guessing the NYT figured they had nothing to worry about in hiring Razib Khan because they looked at his picture and made certain assumptions about his racial views based on his skin color
     
    .

    They must know about the not-so-uncommon phenomenon of racial self-loathing. They were lazy. Just the fact that Derbyshire and his ilk see Razib as a friend and fellow-traveler should raise red flags.

    Btw Derbyshire, how does your race realist buddy from bangladesh fit into your Arctic Alliance?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. Sean says:
    @J1234
    I'm guessing the NYT figured they had nothing to worry about in hiring Razib Khan because they looked at his picture and made certain assumptions about his racial views based on his skin color.

    My impression it was not his views and actually he does not think political conclusions can be drawn from scientific investigation. (I don’t think he is someone who wants to base policy on IQ differences, or even investigate them) Razib probably communicated with a WN site thinking a purely scientific contribution could mediate between political viewpoints. Any white aspiring to become a Phd and NYT Op Ed science writer in the future would have intuitively avoided doing what he did.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. First white child born in America? Seems an odd slip for a group that values diversity.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guadalajara_Cathedral

    The Spanish were already building cathedrals near the Pacific a generation earlier.
    A very impressive work BTW. I highly recommend seeing it sometime.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  33. What happened to the photo of Razib flashing gang signs?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  34. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @John Jeremiah Smith

    Let me get this straight: People around the country, in recent years, have lost their livelihoods, and become de facto victims of blacklisting, for failing to toe the new party line, even when it is disproved by science itself; but it is right-wingers like Mr. Derbyshire who are now “neo-McCarthyites” for pointing out the process, rather than the left-wing “social-justice warriors” who are the ones actually enforcing the blacklist?!?
     
    No, D.K., you did not get that straight. Is "cultural marxism" one of your preferred phrases, perchance? It is unfortunate that you are incapable of reading and understanding simple declarative sentences in the English language.

    Relax jonny,

    We like the term Cultural Marxist, that’s the term we’ll use. We are aware it doesn’t have a lot to do with Karl.

    If they can say gay ‘marriage ‘, we can say cultural. ‘Marxist’

    It has a nice ring to it. And the Marxist term has a suitably sinister connotation, to the American ear anyway.

    Thanks for your input all the same.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    We like the term Cultural Marxist, that’s the term we’ll use. We are aware it doesn’t have a lot to do with Karl.

     

    "Cultural Leninist" is better. Who, whom.

    "Gramscian" would be best ("cultural" is redundant), but how many know who Gramsci is nowadays?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. @Anonymous
    Relax jonny,

    We like the term Cultural Marxist, that's the term we'll use. We are aware it doesn't have a lot to do with Karl.

    If they can say gay 'marriage ', we can say cultural. 'Marxist'

    It has a nice ring to it. And the Marxist term has a suitably sinister connotation, to the American ear anyway.

    Thanks for your input all the same.

    We like the term Cultural Marxist, that’s the term we’ll use. We are aware it doesn’t have a lot to do with Karl.

    “Cultural Leninist” is better. Who, whom.

    “Gramscian” would be best (“cultural” is redundant), but how many know who Gramsci is nowadays?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. Bliss says:
    @J1234
    I'm guessing the NYT figured they had nothing to worry about in hiring Razib Khan because they looked at his picture and made certain assumptions about his racial views based on his skin color.

    I’m guessing the NYT figured they had nothing to worry about in hiring Razib Khan because they looked at his picture and made certain assumptions about his racial views based on his skin color

    .

    They must know about the not-so-uncommon phenomenon of racial self-loathing. They were lazy. Just the fact that Derbyshire and his ilk see Razib as a friend and fellow-traveler should raise red flags.

    Btw Derbyshire, how does your race realist buddy from bangladesh fit into your Arctic Alliance?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sean
    But why aren't there any whites terminated from their contract at the NYT for not denouncing science as invalid when it relates to race. Could it be that whites of Razib's intellectual and professional level instinctively know the way to get on in a white society? In other words, it is failure to exercise cognitive dissonance that characterises those who get fired from the NYT and National Review.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. @Rifleman

    is that Gawker.com, a Cultural Marxist website
     
    No it isn't.

    These Marxists of course don’t deal in facts, data, and accuracy.
     
    Neither do you or other neo-McCarthyite paranoids when you throw around "Marxist/Cultural Marxist" labels that don't apply.

    Gawker media is pro fag, racistly anti-White, shallow and vindictive.

    They have no interesting in or respect for Old White Guy ideas like Marxism, Cultural or otherwise.

    The left dropped Marx and “vulgar Marxism” back in the 50′s and 60′s. They mostly follow Gyorgy Lukacs’ philosophy and Gramsci’s tactics. Even so, they still labeled themselves as Marxist for the most part, so it’s kind of fitting we use the term as well.
    Heck, I thought everybody in the alt-right knew as much…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. Sean says:
    @Bliss

    I’m guessing the NYT figured they had nothing to worry about in hiring Razib Khan because they looked at his picture and made certain assumptions about his racial views based on his skin color
     
    .

    They must know about the not-so-uncommon phenomenon of racial self-loathing. They were lazy. Just the fact that Derbyshire and his ilk see Razib as a friend and fellow-traveler should raise red flags.

    Btw Derbyshire, how does your race realist buddy from bangladesh fit into your Arctic Alliance?

    But why aren’t there any whites terminated from their contract at the NYT for not denouncing science as invalid when it relates to race. Could it be that whites of Razib’s intellectual and professional level instinctively know the way to get on in a white society? In other words, it is failure to exercise cognitive dissonance that characterises those who get fired from the NYT and National Review.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. @Stranger Is Danger
    She was AMERICAN!!!

    “American” in the geographic sense, born on the [or an] American continent, the same way her parents born in England were European, part of European culture.

    But by that definition she was in no sense the first “American”- and I don’t just mean the Indians. Plenty of Spanish and Portuguese and other descendants of the Old world born in America by then.

    And Virginia Dare cannot be considered an American in the modern sense, since there was no American state, nation, identity, people or culture, let alone ethnicity. As a matter of what we would now call nationality or citizenship, she was an English girl and a subject of the English king, born in an English possession in America rather than in England or in an English possession in the Old World. The United States does not stand outside time and space.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. Razib will still qualify for the Christmas bonus, right?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  41. Tregon says:

    That’s the kind of stuff Razib writes…

    Yes. Prolix, plodding, platitudinous and painful to read. He owes such prominence as he has to Brown privilege. There are dozens, if not hundreds, of more intelligent and more interesting white HBDers who won’t get the platform he’s enjoyed to date. And that’s not counting Greg Cochran, HBD-Chick or Steve Sailer. Maybe they should start throwing gang-signs and listening to rap too.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Enrique Cardova
    I found the liberal hit piece excessive, but have to agree with you above. Khan is nothing special as a writer, and can be convoluted. Better white HBD writers have not been given the same opportunity. Khan is somewhat like Dinesh D'souza, who gets a pass because he is brown. D'souza was appointed scholar at the prestigious Hoover Institute at Stanford for example, despite having no serious scholarly publication, or peer reviewed article published, and only having a BA in English. He was appointed president of prestigious private Kings College despite no experience in academic administration, or ministry. On top of that he marries outside his group to a white female and then divorces her. A true white conservative would not get away with this.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. @Tregon
    That’s the kind of stuff Razib writes...

    Yes. Prolix, plodding, platitudinous and painful to read. He owes such prominence as he has to Brown privilege. There are dozens, if not hundreds, of more intelligent and more interesting white HBDers who won't get the platform he's enjoyed to date. And that's not counting Greg Cochran, HBD-Chick or Steve Sailer. Maybe they should start throwing gang-signs and listening to rap too.

    I found the liberal hit piece excessive, but have to agree with you above. Khan is nothing special as a writer, and can be convoluted. Better white HBD writers have not been given the same opportunity. Khan is somewhat like Dinesh D’souza, who gets a pass because he is brown. D’souza was appointed scholar at the prestigious Hoover Institute at Stanford for example, despite having no serious scholarly publication, or peer reviewed article published, and only having a BA in English. He was appointed president of prestigious private Kings College despite no experience in academic administration, or ministry. On top of that he marries outside his group to a white female and then divorces her. A true white conservative would not get away with this.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. Truth says:

    “Yes. Prolix, plodding, platitudinous and painful to read. He owes such prominence as he has to Brown privilege. There are dozens, if not hundreds, of more intelligent and more interesting white HBDers who won’t get the platform he’s enjoyed to date. And that’s not counting Greg Cochran, HBD-Chick or Steve Sailer. Maybe they should start throwing gang-signs and listening to rap too.”

    OK, now R-Keezy, you understand HBD.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  44. Mark Caplan says: • Website
    @Stranger Is Danger
    She was AMERICAN!!!

    If Virginia Dare and her ilk weren’t English but American, what was all that unpleasantness about in 1776? I thought 1776 was when one people dissolved the political bands which had connected them with another and assumed a separate and equal status.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. In the future, everyone will be employed for fifteen minutes.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  46. Seems like an apt enough term to me. It’s basically the application of marxist theory and revolution against the entirety of a civilization, not simply an economic critique of that civilization. Wasn’t this what the Frankfurt-New School Marxists–Adorno, Marcuse, Horkheimer et al–were doing? Seems like quibbling to me.

    An example from the world of comedy or humor: A phrase the left likes to use to evaluate what kind of comedy is funny (i.e. ideologically sound) and what is not is: punching up (good) vs. punching down (bad). Who/Whom? What group does X belong to? And do they have “the power”? Funny as an ideological concept. At any rate, I would even drop the “Cultural” and simply call it Marxism or even Leftism.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  47. Currahee says:
    @Gregorios
    Talking about sloppiness, Virginia was not English. She was a colonist born to English parents.

    um, ….ah, what?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All John Derbyshire Comments via RSS