The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 James Fulford Archive
Wikipedia’s “Tainted Sources” On VDARE.Com and “White Supremacy”
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

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
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll 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 three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

See also: Is VDARE.COM “White Nationalist”?

One of the things we have to deal with on a regular basis—like taking out the trash—is answering attacks on us. This is our answer to the current Wikipedia item about VDARE.com.

Wikipedia has developed from its earlier wildness to a relatively useful general reference on uncontroversial matters. However, on Right-vs-Left issues, and especially on racial issues, its editors, mostly SWPL types, squash all Wrongthinkful facts. See Nicholas Stix’s attempt to correct them here, and John Derbyshire’s struggles with the “Angry Asian Male” who edited his Wikipedia entry here.

In an infamous attack on Charles Murray and Richard Herrnstein’s unimpeachable book The Bell Curve, journalist Charles Lane wrote a piece called “The Tainted Sources of ‘The Bell Curve’” [December 1, 1994—Full Text] in the far-Left New York Review Of Books, which said that the book was “tainted” because investigation of quoted scientists’ pasts showed that some of them were in favor of white people.

Ever since then, “tainted sources” has been something of a joke on the Dissident Right: VDARE.com Editor Peter Brimelow quipped in 1996 that Michael Lind, a liberal who had reservations about mass immigration, might be attacked by a younger, more vicious journalist with an article called “Michael Lind’s Tainted Sources.” And American Renaissance Editor Jared Taylor actually did publish an article called The ‘Tainted’ Sources of The End of Racism, American Renaissance, November 1995, in response to Dinesh D’Souza’s libels against American Renaissance.

I use Wikipedia mostly as source of links to original sources. (We’re big on links to original sources here.) But Wikipedia’s sources on us are seriously “tainted”.

The Wikipedia article on VDARE.com [Current Revision, January 6, 2020, last edited November 15, 2019] says we’re associated with white supremacy,[2][3] white nationalism,[4][5][6]” and the Alt Right and that we have been “described as white supremacist.[2]

Those little superscripts go to these notes:

  1. Sam Frizell, GOP Shows White Supremacist’s Tweet During Trump’s Speech, Time, July 21, 2016
  2. Arnold, Kathleen (2011). Anti-Immigration in the United States: A Historical Encyclopedia. ABC-CLIO. p. 89. Retrieved August 30, 2017.
  3. Holly Folk, The Religion of Chiropractic: Populist Healing from the American Heartland (University of North Carolina Press, 2017), p. 64: “the white nationalist website VDARE.com.”
  4. Robert W. Sussman, The Myth of Race: The Troubling Persistence of an Unscientific Idea (Harvard University Press, 2014), p. 299.
  5. Kristine Phillips, Resort cancels ‘white nationalist’ organization’s first-ever conference over the group’s views, Washington Post (January 26, 2017).

Well, let’s factcheck those.

[2], The Sam Frizell headline is about some other group’s Tweet being displayed in the Cleveland Arena where the RNC was being held—because the tweet included the hashtag #RNCinCLE, which also why our Tweet was appeared on the RNC Jumbotron, causing Leftists to swoon—but Frizell does casually refer to us as white supremacist.

Kathleen Arnold’s main entry on VDARE on page 481 of her Encyclopedia does not say we’re white supremacist, but the cited page 81 note[3]on Peter Brimelow says that in 2003 the SPLC “labeled” us as a hate site. Of course, the SPLC was employing what we call the “Ransom Note Racism” technique—quotes with no context, pasted together without proper sourcing to so label us.

Holly Folk’s anti-chiropractic book[4]apparently disagrees with Pastor Chuck Baldwin about “The Right to Determine One’s Own Healthcare” in a column of his that we posted in 2010.

Skipping over[5], the Washington Post story,[6], which recounts the story of our Colorado conference being cancelled as result of the post-Charlottesville pogrom against the Alt Right, also doesn’t say that we’re white nationalist. It includes statements by Peter and Lydia Brimelow to the effect that we’re not, and the usual libels from the SPLC.

When a headline says “Resort cancels ‘white nationalist’ organization’s first-ever conference” the little quote marks around “white nationalist” mean that someone else is saying it, not the reporter.

Finally, footnote[5] which I saved for last, is the most “tainted source” of all. It’s The Myth of Race: The Troubling Persistence of an Unscientific Idea, by the late Robert W. Sussman, which I debunked here extensively when it was published five years ago.

In Robert Sussman’s “Tainted Sources”—Playing The Telephone Game Against AMERICAN RENAISSANCE’s Jared Taylor and Robert Sussman’s “Tainted Sources” Continued: Plagiarizing Brian Tashman, I showed that Sussman, who died in 2016 after being hospitalized following a stroke, was guilty both in his book, and the excerpt from it that still appears on Salon.com, of serious, checkable factual errors, and of a degree of plagiarism that would have gotten him in trouble with his university if they cared about Leftists committing plagiarism..

Wikipedia is relying on page 299 of Sussman’s book, which said

“Besides this session, [then Pro-English head Robert] Vandervoort also hosted the panel at the Conservative Political Action Conference entitled “The Failure of Multiculturalism: How the Pursuit of Diversity Is Weakening the American Identity.” Peter Brimelow, founder and head of the White nationalist website VDARE, participated in this panel. Brimelow reflected during the panel that after “Obama’s racial-socialist coup,” he feared that the United States was doomed to face a “minority occupation government.” He called on the Republican Party to focus on becoming the party of white voters by attacking “ethnic lobbies,” affirmative action, bilingual education, and “taxpayer subsidies to illegal aliens.” Earlier in the session, Vandervoort delivered a rambling presentation from Serge Trifkovic (a conservative commentator who was unable to attend the conference). This paper focused on how the “cult of non-white, non-male, non-heterosexual victimhood” and “multiculturalist indoctrination” was ruining the West and predicted that “the native Western majorities will melt away.” [Emphases added]

That was the piece I dealt with in my Plagiarizing Brian Tashman post. Sussman’s book has appendices, an index, and a lengthy list of sources, but no footnotes.

The first thing is that I found the source Sussman was using, which was Steve King and White Nationalist CPAC Panel Warn that America’s Greatest Threat is its Diversity, rightwingwatch.org, Brian Tashman, February 9, 2012. No reference to this source appears in his book, but I was able to find it by Googling on “rambling” “Trifkovic” and Brimelow. I just didn’t believe Sussman was in the audience to hear it the talk. I knew he must have ripped off some source which called Trifkovic‘s speech “rambling.”

By the plagiarism standards of St. Louis University, where Sussman was a professor, the done thing in a case like this is to say “What Brian Tashman characterized as a “rambling presentation” from Serge Trifkovic.” (I have no idea if it actually rambled—Tashman may have not been paying attention). However, the name Tashman doesn’t appear in Sussman’s book when I search for it.

Sussman was stealing, but he was also getting it wrong.

This is yet another example of Sussman playing what I called the “Telephone Game,” whereby Leftist True Believers endlessly repeat each other’s smears, improving them in the process.

Thus, Sussman, above, says

“Brimelow reflected during the panel that after “Obama’s racial-socialist coup,” he feared that the United States was doomed to face a “minority occupation government.”” (Emphasis added)

However, Tashman, above, says

In 2009, Brimelow reflected on CPAC after “Obama’s racial-socialist coup” and expressed his fear that the U.S. is doomed to face a “minority occupation government.” (Emphasis added, links in original).

Brimelow’s actual 2012 speech was, as Tashman, who attended it, wrote, about something completely different: the Public Choice consequences of institutional bilingualism: “Canadian Bilingualism & Multiculturalism as it Relates to America“—sort of a non-racially inflammatory subject, especially since in Canada, we’re talking about “two nations” (French and English) which are basically the same white race.

So all of Wikipedia’s evidence for us being either “white supremacist” or “white nationalist” is either inaccurate or tainted.

You have to suspect that the editors, who skew very far Left, especially on race, are more interested in fighting what they think of as “white nationalism” than in factual accuracy [Wikipedia wars: inside the fight against far-right editors, vandals and sock puppets, by Justin Ward, SPLC, March 12, 2018]

Whatever Wikipedia’s motivation, it lowers whatever credibility Wikipedia had.

Twenty-five years ago, VDARE.com Editor Peter Brimelow wrote that the modern definition of “racist” is

anyone who is winning an argument with a liberal. Or, too often, a libertarian. And, on the immigration issue, even some confused conservatives.

The modern definition of both “white nationalist” and “white supremacist” is the same person, still winning the argument—after calling him racist didn’t work.

At least, that’s the answer you’d get from Wikipedia.

James Fulford [Email him] is a writer and editor for VDARE.com.

(Republished from VDare by permission of author or representative)
 
Hide 8 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. The alleged ‘founder’ and supremo of Wikipedia is arch-Zionist Jimmy ‘Jimbo’ Wales, who attends intimate birthday parties of Presidents of Israel … and received a $1 million ‘prize’ from Tel Aviv University. Wales was ‘selected’ for this role after being in the pornography-selling business.

    EU police agencies and the European Commission, have a detailed report on how Wikipedia is a criminally-involved tool for intelligence agencies, using ‘Twenty major techniques of CIA – Wikipedia deception’
    EU Police Agency and Prosecutor Report on Wikipedia, an Intel Agency Fraud
    http://pastebin.com/BeppgiMJ

    Israelis and Jewish figures often boast of how Wikipedia is one of their major ‘assets’ in the world.

    Wikipedia, a fabrication of Israel’s intelligence services. They control Wikipedia and use it to provide cover for war crimes, smear campaigns and as cover for espionage operations … Many Wikipedia “editors” are, in fact, terrorists, spies or highly disturbed persons.

    Wikipedia is hailed by Zionist Israel as “…the major source of information in the world.” They even advertise, with standard Zionist chutzpah, that Wikipedia is “…under constant, paid review of Zionist assets.”

    The above quote from Gordon Duff and Veterans Today, also citing
    http://www.ascertainthetruth.com/att/index.php/the-media/who-controls-the-media/429-zionist-control-of-wikipedia

    For example, Wikipedia has at times edited Epstein’s biography to delete the USA Democrats connected with Epstein … and also to delete any references that Epstein is Jewish
    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-07-09/jeffrey-epsteins-wikipedia-page-stealth-edited-remove-ties-democrats

  2. White nationalists want normal white people to flourish securely in their own countries. This makes white nationalism a kind of humanist philosophy, according to Steven Pinker’s own definition of humanism as the promotion of human flourishing.

    I would like for the Woke enemies of white nationalism to state explicitly why they oppose this perfectly reasonable goal.

  3. anon[123] • Disclaimer says:

    The deepstate and various ethnic lobbies have been waging a campaign for the last year to alter the Wikipedia descriptions of their enemies. They’ve changed Vox Day’s introduction description to include attacks from his political opponents; he’s only one of many. Since when is this appropriate, regardless of what you think of the man? That belongs in another section all together. Wikipedia is more propaganda than news. No wonder China bans it.

    They’ve also successfully zionized Breitbart. The difference in their coverage from 2016 to 2020 is incredible. Back then, there were signs of them being red pilled on the JQ. Now? It’s nothing but warmongering for Israel by Jewish writers. They deplatformed 2016 Breitbart’s advertisers, forcing them to rely on wealthy Jewish donors who then turned it into an Israel Lobby rag. Same for YouTube. They, in co-ordination with the ADL, banned guys like James Alsup who told the truth about Israel, despite no TOS violations. The purpose was to drive the youth to Ben Shapiro, a dork who stole his act — college campus confrontations and anti-SJW rhetoric — from legitimate complains white gentiles had (ex: racist Evergreen State chasing whites off campus). Like good gatekeepers, these people tell you what the old guy did (which they don’t organically care anything about), but then also infuse it with Conservative Inc. and Israel Lobby boomerfeed propaganda. Rinse, wash, repeat across other platforms.

    Further example: Amazon. Under ADL pressure, they’ve taken the extraordinary act of banning several non-violent books criticizing the Israel lobby. However, lots of books attacking other groups remain. Why exactly can’t I order the NOI’s book on Leo Frank? Jewish perpetuation of that myth was one of the great historical blood libels of twentieth century America. It also has historical significance in regards to the civil rights movement. So, again — why can’t I order it?

    • Replies: @Just passing through
  4. Great article!

    Twenty-five years ago, VDARE.com Editor Peter Brimelow wrote that the modern definition of “racist” is

    anyone who is winning an argument with a liberal. Or, too often, a libertarian. And, on the immigration issue, even some confused conservatives.

    The modern definition of both “white nationalist” and “white supremacist” is the same person, still winning the argument—after calling him racist didn’t work.

    At least, that’s the answer you’d get from Wikipedia.

    Lord Ralf Dahrendorf, former head of the LSE used to say – the ones who beat liberals are called populist.

  5. anarchyst says:

    You can order the books directly from the NOI website, bypassing Amazon’s “filters”.

  6. Svevlad says:

    All depends I guess. Smaller-language wikipedia leans more on the based side

  7. vhrm says:

    Pieces like this one are important as a record of what’s going on.

    But what outsider or non-believer will ever try to tease out the truth and who’s lying when there’s a bunch of two sentence tweets and some cat videos to be looked at?

    (^ unconstructive statement of frustration)

  8. @anon

    They’ve also successfully zionized Breitbart. The difference in their coverage from 2016 to 2020 is incredible. Back then, there were signs of them being red pilled on the JQ. Now? It’s nothing but warmongering for Israel by Jewish writers.

    You might want to look up the background of the founder of Breitbart News…

    Also;

    This was in 2015, one year before they were, according to you, ‘redpilled on the JQ’.

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 James Fulford Comments via RSS