For far too long periodicals and conservative organizations have provided legitimate cover for the likes of neo-Nazis and white supremacist like John Derbyshire. Conservatives would be claiming to be holding their noses – but it’s hard to see, after such a long association that they were holding their noses tight enough to affect their breathing the foul miasma drifting from these scumbags.
I think the sudden decision by this conservative periodical and think tanks to alleviate themselves of racists has a lot to do with successful efforts by organizations such as Color of Change to de-finance them by going after their commercial sponsors. The latest victim of that being ALEC, which is the author and promoter of Jim Crow Voter ID Laws, and a number of unpopular laws taken up by Republican legislatures over the past 2 years.
Could National Review be feeling that heat?
Following the uproar over John Derbyshire’s racist rant that led to his firinglast week, National Review ended its relationship with another racist writer today. Robert Weissberg, who was a contributing writer to the magazine for years, was fired for his ties to the white nationalist group American Renaissance.
“Unbeknowst to us, occasional Phi Beta Cons contributor Robert Weissberg (whose book was published a few years ago by Transaction) participated in an American Renaissance conference where he delivered a noxious talk about the future of white nationalism,” National Review editor Rich Lowry said in a post today. Though National Review may not have known, Weissberg’s involvement with the group is clearly statedon his Wikipedia page. And the fact that National Review’s vetting process is so weak that they routinely published two openly racist authors for years raises serious questions about who else they may be publishing and what ideas those writers may share.
Also a retired professor of political science, Weissberg once called for a “politically viable alternative to white nationalism” at American Renaissance conferences, at which Weissberg hasan attendee and been a speaker. He has received extensive praise from the group. A cached copy of the group’s website from shortly after one conference reveals that Weissberg played to the group’s racist tendencies during his speech:
The first speaker Saturday morning was the always stimulating Robert Weissberg, Emeritus professor of University of Illinois at Champagne, who proposed “A Politically Viable Alternative to White Nationalism.” He argued that any movement that is explicitly based on white racial identity is “dead on arrival,” and must be repackaged in order to win successful recognition. The reality—that racial nationalism “is intuitive and written in our genes” […]
Prof. Weissberg argued that an “80 percent solution” would be one that enforced the “First-World” standards of excellence and hard work that attract and reward whites. He pointed out that there are still many “Whitopias” in America and that there are many ways to keep them white, such as zoning that requires large houses, and a cultural ambiance or classical music and refined demeanor that repels undesirables. This approach to maintaining whiteness has the advantage that people can make a living catering to whites in their enclaves.
Prof. Weissberg went on to argue that liberals are beyond reason when it comes to race, that explaining the facts of IQ or the necessity of racial consciousness for whites “is like trying to explain to an eight-year-old why sex is more fun than chocolate ice cream.”
Weissberg’s attendance at the conference was not a one-off occurrence. He’s talked before about “the stupid black” (WARNING: link contains offensive language) in relationship with the Jewish community, and talked about the “shortage” of white males on college campuses.