More White Supremacists in the Closet
Sadly, it gets worse.
If American Renaissance is a viciously racist publication, the Occidental Quarterly makes it look almost wishy-washy by comparison.
Within the last five years, the Occidental Quarterly has run articles like, “Eugenics: Past, Present and Future,” and “Is Race a Valid Taxonomic Construct,” an incendiary tome by the British-born “scholar” J. Philippe Rushton. (Occidental Quarterly, Vol. 2, No. 1, Spring 2002).
In his “research” findings, Rushton claims that socio-biological factors have compelled blacks to adopt a different reproductive strategy from whites. Instead of nurturing a few offspring, like white men, black men are compelled by genetic forces (and by their naturally greater sexual appetites) to impregnate multiple women. Rushton also insists that blacks tend to have smaller craniums but larger genitals. “More brain or more penis,” he explained in an interview, “You can’t have both.” (Sunday Telegraph, November 19, 2000, p.26).
Another occasional contributor to the Occidental Quarterly is Paul Gottfried, a humanities professor at Elizabethtown College.
Have conservative intellectuals repudiated J. Philippe Rushton and Paul Gottfried? No. In recent years, Gottfried’s articles have appeared in American Enterprise, the official organ of the American Enterprise Institute (here and here), and American Outlook, the magazine of the Hudson Institute (here, and here). At present, Gottfried sits on the editorial board of the eminently respectable conservative journal, Humanitas.
It gets worse. Remember the Washington Times, which rightly fired Samuel Francis in 1996? Within the last four years, a magazine published by the newspaper, Insight on the News, has showcased the writings of Paul Gottfried and J. Philippe Rushton.
The National Review, America’s leading conservative journal of opinion, has also given aid and comfort to this merry band of white supremacists. In 1995 the National Review published an article by Jared Taylor about the slaying of a civil rights activist (Taylor, “The many deaths of Viola Liuzzo,” National Review, 7/10/95). Importantly, this article appeared five years after the debut of American Renaissance. By then, no reasonably intelligent editor could have mistaken Taylor for anything but an incendiary racist.
The connections between the National Review and white supremacists do not end there. In September 1997 the magazine published a book review by J. Philippe Rushton ("The mismeasures of Gould," National Review, 9/15/97).
More recently, John Derbyshire, a National Review columnist, defended Jared Taylor in an online editorial. Although Derbyshire takes exception to some of Tayor’s work, he describes him as a “true American gentleman,” “thoughtful, erudite and humorous.” Derbyshire also heaps praise on American Renaissance, calling it “a useful corrective to the distortions, evasions and downright lies of the mainstream media on matters of race.” (click here for a glowing review of Derbyshire's column in American Renaissance.)
Surpassing the National Review in moral bankruptcy is the conservative journal Human Events. Its former managing editor, Kevin Lamb, also edits the Occidental Quarterly. Among those who have appeared on the Human Events masthead alongside the white supremacist Kevin Lamb are Anne Coulter, the best-selling author, and Robert Novak, the conservative gadfly.
Lamb was recently sacked by his boss at Human Events, who was shocked -- shocked! -- to learn that his managing editor was a white supremacist. But that’s hard to believe. I suspect that my six-year-old niece can figure out how to run a Google search.
To paraphrase Bob Dole, where’s the outrage?
Conservatives talk a good line on “values.” Why don’t we hold them to it?
They can start by explaining why it’s okay to consort with white supremacists.
Comments for this entry are currently under maintenance but will be restored soon.
