Wednesday, April 11, 2012

Are we so worried about right vs. left that we have forgotten right and wrong?

I am beginning to think so.  Much has been made about National Review's Rich Lowry firing John Derbyshire.  I would think it was a pretty simple clear-cut case.  Derbyshire wrote an article about his version of "The Talk" you have with your children.  His version was for people of white and Asian backgrounds.  It was in a word, disgusting.  He flat-out says that black should be judged by a different standard as whites, especially in terms of politicians.  I don't know about you, but I will take Tim Scott over Nancy Pelosi any day of the week and twice on Sundays.

He also went to try to demonstrate that blacks are stupid and violent.  He used some "evidence" to back up his claims, but what he didn't do was talk about how socio-economics factor into those numbers.  Take a good hard look at any poor performing school district anywhere in the country and the standardized test results are lower.  Not all poor performing schools are in predominately black areas.

He also said to tell your white children to stay out of mostly black neighborhoods.  Does he include the neighborhoods of Prince George's County Maryland as well?  That is the most affluent black community in the country, or did he just mean instruct your children to stay out of neighborhoods that have high crime rates?  Of course, any parent that isn't living in one of those areas will tell their children that.  But again, not all high crime areas across the country are black communities.

This man is free to think and feel what ever he so chooses to.  That isn't the issue.  The issue becomes does National Review have to employ someone who so blatantly demonstrates those views?  I don't think they do.

I have read different things across the conservative blogosphere in regards to his firing.  Many are upset about the fact that he was let go and say that Lowry has no right to fire him.  Why exactly is that?  Stacy McCain has explained it that since Derbyshire has been expressing these types of views for quite sometime the only difference is that the left complained about it.  While there is truth to that in part, it isn't the whole truth.  Derbyshire has always been  provocative in his writings, but he has never gone this far before.  This was an outing of his racist views.
— n
1.the belief that races have distinctive cultural characteristics determined by hereditary factors and that this endows some races with an intrinsic superiority over others
There can be no doubt that his little rant is racist by the true definition of the word.

Now, the right spends a great deal of time pointing out the racist views of those on the left.  Pointing out that the likes of Al Sharpton is considered a hero by many on the left and is allowed to spew his views on television.  There is currently an online petition going around asking MSNBC to fire him.  There are all sorts of things being said about how Eric Holder is doing nothing about the threats made against George Zimmerman, the man who shot and killed a black teenager in what he claims to be self-defense.  The truth is that the Eric Holder has no power over what the black panthers are currently doing.  That is a state issue.  The person that should be answering the question of why nothing is being done is AG Pam Bondi or the local police departments.  Not Eric Holder.  It is easy to make him a target, but in this case he shouldn't be one.  But AG Bondi is a conservative republican so the questions are not forthcoming.

If you think that it the right thing to do to take Al Sharpton off the air for his views, then how can it be wrong that Lowry fired Derbyshire?  What Derbyshire said was equally offensive.

I have heard others say that Lowry should have used this as way to disprove him.  Others have said the answer to bad speech is more speech.  I don't disagree with either of those statements.  But neither justifies keeping him employed.  You can actually do both things; fire him and prove him wrong.

There is right and wrong in the world.  Derbyshire can be as racist as he wants to be.  That is his business.  But Rick Lowry has a responsibility to National Review and to its readers to give fair and accurate accounts of the happenings in the world.  Giving a platform to a man who holds the views that blacks are stupid and violent by nature is neither of those things.  Good riddens, Mr. Derbyshire.

It is time that we admit that racism is neither right nor left.  It is a human condition.  Racism knows no boundaries when it comes to politics or to social strata.  It will rear its ugly head in just about any place and by people of any color or background.


Z said...

super piece...and I wholeheartedly agree with your last paragraph, sadly. We're having quite a talk about race at my place, I hope you can come by; some of it's pretty upsetting, but there are some super thoughts there in comments.

I think Derbyshire painted too broad a stroke and he deserves to go for that.

net observer said...

Just for the record, "Bravo!" to an excellent post here and an even more insightful one on Z's blog.

Like they say in Jamaica, "MAXIMIUM Respect!" =)

Related Posts with Thumbnails
Google Analytics Alternative