»  Radio Derb — Transcript

        Saturday, June 20th, 2015

•  Play the sound file (duration 42m44s).

This text will be replaced by the flash music player.

—————————

[Music clip: From Haydn's Derbyshire Marches, organ version]

01 — Intro.    And Radio Derb is on the air! This is your cis-racially genial host John Derbyshire with lowlights from the week's news.

A lot of race items this week. What's up with that? Let's see.

02 — Transracialism, the new frontier.     First off we had the strange, sad story of 35-year-old Rachel Dolezal, President of the NAACP chapter in Spokane, Washington.

Ms Dolezal graduated with a Master of Fine Arts degree from Howard University in 2002. She'd been admitted to the program mainly on the basis of artwork she'd exhibited, artwork on themes from the history and culture of black Americans. Howard University is a Historically Black College.

She then swiftly climbed the ladder of black privilege, getting sinecure jobs at Civil Rights institutions and in Grievance Studies programs at colleges. All the time she was passing herself off as black, darkening her skin and afro-izing her hair. She was in fact trying so hard to be authentically black, she regularly perpetrated hate-crime hoaxes against herself and reported them to police.

By early June this year Ms Dolezal was an instructor in "Africana Education" at Eastern Washington University, a public institution with campuses around Spokane.

What does "Africana Education" encompass? A local TV channel tells us that Ms Dolezal taught courses titled:

  • The Black Woman's Struggle
  • African and African American Art History
  • African History
  • African American Culture, and
  • Intro to Africana Studies

Hey, it's a living.

Ms Dolezal was also at this point Head Negress in Charge at the NAACP Spokane Chapter. She had done pretty well in her career, and could look forward to several more decades of drawing salaries from the public fisc for teaching black kids to hate white people.

Except that, as it turned out, Ms Dolezal is not a Negress at all.

To keep a scam like hers going, it's important to keep your profile low. You really don't want inquisitive journalists looking into your background. Most journalists will of course accept without question whatever an NAACP official tells them; but there's always the occasional rogue reporter who dares speak truth to black power.

So it happened with Ms Dolezal. Those hate crime reports had stirred the attention of local media. Someone did some digging. Earlier this year the Spokane NAACP had posted a picture on their Facebook page showing Ms Dolezal in company with an older black man. The caption suggested, with just a smidgen of ambiguity, that the black man was Rachel's father.

On June 11th a reporter from local TV station KXLY interviewed Ms Dolezal about the hate crime reports. The interview was routinely respectful for the first eight minutes. Then the reporter pulled out the Facebook picture of Ms Dolezal with the black guy, and asked if it was her father. "Yes, that's my Dad," the lady replied. When the reporter pressed her about her parentage, however, Ms Dolezal got flustered, to the point where she turned and ran from the interview, perhaps after saying to herself: "Feets, git movin'!"

The storm then broke. The TV interview escaped from the mists that shroud the top left-hand corner of our nation and, as we say, "went viral." Ms Dolezal's parents went on TV and declared themselves to be of German and Czech heritage, with possibly some American Indian. A subsequent, more thorough investigation by a professional genealogist nixed the Indian element but added Swedish and Dutch. Photographs of Ms Dolezal as a young teenager were produced: She looks like Doris Day.

As I said: a strange, sad little story. It properly belongs in the annals of individual psychopathology. There is, though, a general feeling that Ms Dolezal's story has a message for us. It tells us something, we feel. What, though? What does it tell us?

Short answer: nothing we didn't already know.

Long answer: next segment.

03 — The extremes of ethnomasochism.     What does the Rachel Dolezal story tell us?

The long answer to that question is another question: What does it tell us about what?

As I said, stories like this belong primarily to the realm of individual psychopathology. Human beings are social animals, though, and even our mental ailments are to some degree shaped by society.

So here are two questions we might fairly ask. What does the Rachel Dolezal story tell us about

  1. The individual psyche?
  2. The society we're living in today?

I'll take them one at a time, in order.

The attachment we feel, or don't feel, to our race is a personality characteristic, different for different people. I don't know whether anyone has quantified it, but I don't see why this couldn't be done, with a suitable battery of tests.

Quantifying it would turn up a number you might call RSQ, for "Racial Solidarity Quotient." If you were to measure the RSQ for a few thousand members of some human population, they'd spread out in a distribution. Presumably, as with most complex traits, the distribution would be the familiar normal or Gaussian one — a bell curve.

Out at the positive, right-hand tail of the bell curve you'd have a scattering of intensely ethnocentric persons. At the negative, left-hand tail you'd have really intense ethnomasochists, people who hate their own race. Most of us would pile up in the center, with no very strong feelings either way.

If you were to scale the RSQ so that the white-American norm was 100 with standard deviation 15, as for IQ, I think I'd probably score about 110 — mildly above average ethnocentric.

Obviously Rachel Dolezal is way out in the left-hand tail of the distribution, three or four standard deviations out on the negative side of average — deeply, intensely ethnomasochist.

Why? Well, as a pretty strong genetic determinist, I'm sure there is an underlying innate tendency there. That tendency may have been fortified by childhood experiences: Ms Dolezal's parents were major negrophiles. They adopted four black children, who grew up with their two biological kids. Or this may have made no difference: for all we currently know about human nature, negrophilia may be heritable. Most personality characteristics are.

On the social side, I am much more willing to believe that the society Ms Dolezal grew up in during the eighties and nineties helped drive her to the extremes of ethnomasochism. I've raised two kids myself in modern society, and seen the relentless indoctrination they get in white sinfulness and black victimhood from the schools, the media, popular culture. That must have had some validating and magnifying effect on Ms Dolezal's disposition to ethnomasochism.

Probably some cold opportunism is also in play. This is a society in which, for people with no inclination or ability towards any kind of useful work, there are many opportunities to make a living in the race business — provided of course that you're the right color and say the right things and schmooze the right people. Ms Dolezal was the wrong color; but cosmetic work took care of that, and the other things came naturally to her.

As I said, nothing we didn't know before, but reminders never hurt.

04 — FLOTUS addresses Her People.     Second race story of the week: The First Lady in Britain. In the modern style, the First Lady is referred to as FLOTUS: an acronym from "First Lady Of The United States." I'm not very fond of this style, which seems to me a bit disrespectful, so I'll just say "Mrs Obama," if you don't mind.

Yes, Mrs Obama paid a flying visit to London this week, along with her two daughters and her mother, who I guess, in the aforementioned modern style, would be FMILOTUS, for "First Mother-In-Law Of The United States. FMILOTUS … It doesn't really trip off the tongue, does it? Even worse than FLOTUS, to my ear. I'll refer to the lady just the way I'd address her if we were introduced: Mrs Robinson. [Simon & Garfunkel clip: "Koo koo ka-choo, Mrs Robinson"] … oh, come on.

Apparently this family jaunt was a promotion for Let Girls Learn, a taxpayer-funded boondoggle — I beg its pardon: "a government-wide effort," it says on its website — to bribe — I'm sorry again: to incentivize — Third World despots and their bureaucrats to fake statistics showing more and more of their young women going to school … I'm sorry yet again, really sorry. I should have said: "to encourage and support community-led solutions to reduce barriers that prevent adolescent girls from completing their education."

Why this is any business of American taxpayers is lost on me, though of course I applaud private charitable efforts to improve people's lives anywhere. Well, no, to be perfectly truthful, I don't actually applaud them, but I would never do anything to hinder them. Spend your own money any way you like. I reserve the right to grumble when my money is ripped from my pocket by force of law and sluiced through bogus "aid" programs like this one into the Swiss bank accounts of African dictators.

Anyway, there was Mrs Obama in London on Tuesday. What did she do? Well, there were photo-ops with Prime Minister David Cameron, the person currently responsible for giving away what fifty generations of Englishmen painstakingly built up, and with the Royals, who are fine with the giving-away business so long as it means they don't get loaded into tumbrils and decapitated.

And then there was a speech by Mrs Obama to pupils at a London school. This was Mulberry School for Girls in London's East End, about 2½ miles from where I used to live, also in the East End. My apartment was in the gentrified patch of the East End, though — the Docklands development. Mulberry School for Girls, where Mrs Obama spoke, is in the grittier part of the borough, where the population is pretty solidly immigrant Muslims from Bangladesh.

That borough, named the London borough of Tower Hamlets (because it's near the Tower of London — well-nigh the only substantial structure in the borough that has not yet been turned into a mosque), that borough was for five years, starting in 2010, under the control of a Mayor named Lutfur Rahman, a Bangladeshi Muslim. In April this year Mayor Rahman was removed from office by the British courts for, quote, "corrupt and illegal practices." Ah, the blessings of mass Third World immigration!

Well, back to the Mulberry School for Girls. It's a secondary school, ages 11 to 18, and described by the official schools inspectors as, having, quote, "nearly all students … of Bangladeshi heritage, with a very small minority from other backgrounds, including White British, Pakistani and African," end quote.

And yes, there they were in the news pictures, cheering a beaming First Lady: a mass of brown-faced girls all swaddled up in proper Islamic robes and headscarves. Presumably some number of them had been subjected to genital mutilation, known to be rampant among Bangladeshi immigrants in Tower Hamlets, but Mrs Obama seems not to have inquired about this.

What did she tell them? Oh, the usual victimological blather about her imaginary "struggles"; as if she had not been wafted effortlessly up into Princeton and Harvard on warm gusts of affirmative action. Sample quote:

Those kinds of achievements seemed totally out of reach when I was growing up. I was just a working-class kid. The fact that I was a girl and I was black — that certainly didn't help things, either.

End quote. Oh, sure it didn't.

This event was actually a replay of a previous visit Mrs Obama made to England in 2009. On that occasion the First Lady addressed pupils at a different girls' school, also in London: Elizabeth Garrett Anderson School in Islington, North London.

Is there a Derb connection to that place, too? There certainly is. The first lodgings I ever had in London, fall of 1963, were about a mile and a half away, in Penn Road, Islington. Fact, there's even a Taki connection: Pentonville prison, where Taki was a guest of Her Majesty 1984-85, is nearby. That first landlord of mine was in fact an employee of Pentonville prison, and had many jolly stories about the executions by hanging that had been regular occurrences there until a couple of years previously.

I'm sorry, I'm digressing too much. So six years ago Mrs Obama was addressing girls at a school in London, just as she did this week. What kind of school was that one, six years ago? Quote from the school inspectors' report, quote:

Almost nine tenths of the girls come from minority ethnic backgrounds and over two thirds speak English as an additional language. The proportion of girls eligible for free school meals is higher than is usually found.

So, poor blacks and lots of Muslims. It's almost as if Mrs Obama only wants to talk to nonwhites and Third World immigrants.

Doesn't she have anything to say to native white English schoolgirls, plenty of whom are poor and academically struggling? I bet some of them would be thrilled to get a visit from the First Lady of the United States.

It looks like they're out of luck, though. Perhaps they could exercise their white privilege and lean on the U.S. Embassy to send Mrs Obama their way next time she visits Shakespeare's island.

05 — The Narrative gets a boost.     The week's third race story was the shooting at a black church in Charleston, South Carolina Wednesday night.

We have a pretty good picture of what happened here. Twenty-one-year-old Dylann Roof, a white guy, showed up at a Bible study class in the church. He sat there among the other attendees for an hour, then pulled out a handgun and started shooting people.

There were twelve other people in the church with him. He killed eight of them on the spot, including the church pastor, who was also a South Carolina state senator. A ninth died on the operating table at a local hospital. The other three survived. The nine dead are six women, three men.

Roof was motivated by hatred of blacks. He was shouting out anti-black remarks before he started shooting. One surviving witness reports him saying, quote: "You rape our women and you're taking over our country. And you have to go." On his Facebook page is a picture of him wearing a jacket decorated with the flags of white-ruled South Africa and Rhodesia.

Roof got away, but he was arrested Thursday morning 250 miles away in North Carolina, apparently peacefully, and is now in custody back in South Carolina, having waived extradition.

That's the news story, and a grisly one to be sure. As with Rachel Dolezal, we are in the realm here of individual psychopathology.

Ms Dolezal's psychopathology, however weird we may think it, is at least harmless. This guy's is lethal. In fact there is an interesting question there: Are ethnomasochism and ethnocentrism yin and yang? Is ethnomasochism essentially passive, yielding, female, while ethnocentrism is active, imposing, masculine? I'll leave you to discuss that among yourselves.

Setting aside the horror of the event itself, the worst thing here is that the Charleston killings play right into the anti-white narrative so dear to the hearts of our elites in the media, the culture, and the educational establishment. News of the shootings was barely public before it was drowned out by the clanking of armor as the Social Justice Warriors suited up.

The media couldn't wait to tell us the killer was white. The word "white" was in fact the very first word in the Associated Press headline, quote: White man caught in killing of 9 in historic black church. Black killing of whites is five times more frequent than white killing of blacks, on the Department of Justice statistics,* but I challenge you to find a mainstream-media report of a black-on-white killing that identifies the perp's race in the first word of its headline.

Note added later: That's not quite right. See an elucidating post here.

The media here are sprinkling gasoline around in a smoking lounge. America's black population has low average intelligence and a high tendency to impulsive behavior. Furthermore, as I noted three years ago in a column that got me fifteen minutes of worldwide fame, quote from myself, quote: "A small cohort of blacks — in my experience, around five percent — is ferociously hostile to whites and will go to great lengths to inconvenience or harm us," end quote. Which is of course true.

The other danger here is to our liberties. Even as the perp was being cuffed and read his rights, Barack Obama was holding a press conference saying, quote: "Once again, innocent people were killed because someone who intended harm had no trouble getting hands on a gun."

Permit me to remind you of the case of Omar Thornton, who committed a similar atrocity in August 2010. Thornton, a black man, let loose with firearms at his place of work in Hartford, Connecticut, killing eight and seriously injuring two others. All ten victims were white.

Thornton had just been dismissed by the firm for disciplinary issues. Before killing himself, Thornton called 911. He said the following to the dispatcher, who of course got it on tape, quote:

You probably want to know the reason why I shot this place up. This place is a racist place. They're treating me bad over here. And treat all other black employees bad over here, too. So I took it to my own hands and handled the problem. I wish I could have got more of the people.

End quote. I can find no record of Barack Obama speaking out for gun control on account of what Omar Thornton did. In fact, I can't find any record of Obama saying anything at all about Thornton or his victims. Why is that, I wonder?

So as a result of the Charleston murders, two dangers have been increased, with the willing connivance of the media in both cases. The first danger is to the persons of nonblack citizens. This is the danger that blacks, inflamed by the incident, will seek random revenge against nonblacks.

The second danger is to our liberties: the danger that Obama and his Justice Department will try to leverage the Charleston shootings to further erode our Second Amendment rights.

How should we respond to these two dangers? One: If you have guns, keep them as close by you as laws, and your carry status, allow. Two: If you are an NRA member and have been meaning for months to send them a donation check, send it now.

06 — Trump throws his rug into the ring.     Here's a new entry in the 2016 presidential lists: Property magnate Donald Trump, running as a Republican.

Yes, Tuesday this week the Donald, in a rambunctious 45-minute speech at Trump Tower in midtown Manhattan, threw his rug into the ring, mocking the other Republican hopefuls as tools of special interests.

Well, he's right about that. The charm of Trump, to which I confess I'm rather susceptible, is precisely that he's not a glove-puppet for billionaire donors and foreign despots, as most Republican politicians are. Nor of course is he an America-hating Social Justice Nazi, like most Democrats. He doesn't even need donors: he's got nine billion dollars of his own money, as he proudly told the cheering supporters on Tuesday.

Trump's announcement was greeted with withering scorn from political commentators. Most withering was my old National Review colleague, Kevin Williamson.

Kevin let Trump have it with both barrels. He called him a, quote, "witless ape." He mocked the several bankruptcies in Trump's business portfolio. He mocked Trump's rich-boy upbringing, and insulted his father, quote:

The self-made man who started with nothing but a modest portfolio of 27,000 New York City properties acquired by his millionaire slumlord father …

End quote. And so on.

This is all good fun. One of my personal heroes, the late British journalist Auberon Waugh, defined opinion journalism to be, quote: "the vituperative arts." In the timid, mealy-mouthed world of modern commentary, I'm always glad to see someone pick up that definition and run with it.

I'm also fond of Kevin as a person. He's smart, a good writer, a diligent researcher, and a delightful and witty dinner companion.

This piece, though, cries out for some rebuttal.

First off, when you have as many items in your business portfolio as Trump, it's not unusual for one or two of them to be in bankruptcy. Bankruptcy is a business arrangement — a common recourse, not necessarily evidence of incompetence or moral turpitude. Harry Truman avoided business bankruptcy only by the skin of his teeth, and no-one held that against him when he ran for President. I don't personally think Truman was a great President, but he wasn't a sensationally bad one. We've had worse. We have worse.

And then, what's wrong with starting out in life on inherited wealth? Is National Review now opposed to inherited wealth? I wonder what Bill Buckley would have said about that.

And, excuse me, "millionaire slumlord father"? Here's a quote from the New York Times obituary for Trump's Dad, June 1999. Quote — and please remember this is the New York Times. Quote:

Mr. Trump … helped change the face of Brooklyn and Queens with thousands of homes for the middle class in plain but sturdy brick rental towers, clustered together in immaculately groomed parks.

End quote. Trump Senior's tenants were the post-WW2 young working- and lower-middle classes, who needed cheap, decent city accomodation while they built up wealth to move to the suburbs. By the New York Times' account, Trump Senior was a benefactor of humanity.

But apparently National Review is now to the left of the New York Times on the subject of building and owning private rental property for let to willing tenants.

I'll share a little secret with you, one I learned in thirty years of hanging around with political journalists. Here's the secret: They go native. A kind of Stockholm Syndrome sets in. The journalists start to think that if you're not a professional pol, bought and paid for by the big lobbies and donors, you have no business being in politics. Citizen legislators? Bah, humbug!

I never went native like that. I continue to think of full-time professional politicians as for the most part scum-sucking bottom-feeding psychotics, who would kill, skin, cook, and eat their grandmothers for a nice fat donor check. Call me cynical, but that's how I feel; and yes, I've met a fair number of the reptiles.

I like Trump. Yes, I'd vote for him in a flash over Jeb "Somos una nación de inmigrantes" Bush or Rand "Let's release black felons to get prison numbers down to racial parity" Paul. Go, Donald!

Not that I don't have one or two teeny reservations about Trump. Appearing on ABC television after the announcement, he was asked about a running mate. He replied, quote:

I like Oprah. I think Oprah would be great. I'd love to have Oprah. I think we'd win easily, actually.

End quote. Oprah? Really? Madame Grievance? Come on, Donald, you can do better than that. I'm entirely open to the idea of a Gyno-American as running mate, but there are plenty of better females around than Oprah. How about … Ann Coulter?

Now that's a ticket I'd vote for! Trump-Coulter? I'd crawl naked across a field of broken glass to vote for that ticket.

07 — Miscellany.     And now, our closing miscellany of brief items.

Imprimis:  Wednesday this week marked the beginning of the Muslim festival of Ramadan. The festival goes on for a lunar month, and pious Muslims take no food from sun-up to sundown for the entire month.

This has raised problems for Muslims in Sweden. The far north of that country is above the Arctic Circle; so in the northern hemisphere's midsummer, which is what we're in, the sun never sets.

The European Imams are scrambling to figure out the Divine Will in this matter and come up with some revised rules for the faithful.

Here's my contribution to their lucubrations. Perhaps this is Allah's way of telling you that you don't belong in Northern Europe. Perhaps he'd prefer you to stay home in the forty-odd nations where you are currently dominant.

A great many Europeans would prefer the same thing, with no malice intended. As we say out here on the Dissident Right: This is what separate countries are for.

Item:  Following Bruce Jenner's adventures in transgenderism and Rachel Dolezal's foray into transracialism, what's next in the grand project to erase all boundaries and declare everything equal to everything else?

You wanna know? I'll tell you. Translingualism, that's what's next. No kidding: translingualism. There is actually an article about it in the current issue of Academic Questions, the magazine of the National Association of Scholars. Title of the article: Translingualism: Tongue-Tied in English Composition. The author is Jeffrey Zorn, who lectures in English at Santa Clara University in California.

The topic here is the teaching of English Composition in our colleges. Postmodernists deplore the teaching of Standard English. They think there is, quote, "a human right to use the language of one's nurture" and that favoring Standard English is, quote, "culturally imperialistic."

It's not a totally new idea. Remember the fad for tolerating "ebonics"? That's the kind of thing we're talking about here. Now this nonsense has a name, "translingualism," and a new lease of life. Zorn calls it, quote, "the fastest-rising movement in composition studies today."

Jeffrey Zorn deplores all this, and so do I. He's written a fine scathing piece, which I urge you to read. He points out along the way that these postmodernist promoters of translingualism write their academic articles in good Standard English so that people can, you know, understand them.

Radio Derb listeners rest assured, please, that this podcast will remain unashamedly cis-lingual.

Item:  In March last year I posted a column titled How Can We Get Rid of Puerto Rico?, where the "we" there is of course the citizens of the U.S.A. who are burdened with this worthless territorial millstone.

That got me a lot of hate mail from Puerto Ricans, which I enjoyed very much.

Now I read on the CNN website that the Puerto Rican economy is about to go belly up. Headline: Puerto Rico's terrible economy is causing a population exodus. Opening, quote:

Puerto Rico is on the brink of default — and a massive population drain.

Its economy has been spiraling for years now, and Puerto Ricans of all social classes have had it. They are moving to the mainland United States in rising numbers in search of jobs.

End quote. Yep: totally screw up your own wretched territory, then come over here and screw up ours.

Isn't the U.S.A. supposed to be an anti-colonialist power? Give them their independence, for crying out loud. Alternatively, we could put it to the American people in a referendum that Puerto Rico be admitted as a state of the Union. I wonder how that would go. [Laughter.]

Item:  Finally, the U.S. Treasury is redesigning the $10 bill. They want to replace the picture of Alexander Hamilton with one of a woman.

Which Gyno-American do they have in mind? They haven't yet decided. In fact they tell us they, quote, "will seek the public's input in the selection."

Hey, all right. Here's my input. My personal choice would of course be Ann Coulter. However, the Treasury says they are looking for, quote, "a champion for our inclusive democracy," so I'd guess Ann is unacceptably cis-racial, not to mention cis-lingual.

So, who else have we got? Seems to me the choice is plain here. Step up, Rachel Dolezal!

08 — Signoff.     That's it, I'm afraid, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for listening.

This Thursday having marked the 200th anniversary of the Battle of Waterloo, I had the idea to play out this week's podcast with a regimental march from one of the British regiments on the field that day.

Once I started reviewing them, though, I liked all those old regimental marches so much, I couldn't choose just one. In any case, you get one of the Derbyshire Regiment's marches at the beginning of every Radio Derb podcast — although, true, the Derbyshires, being just a yeomanry regiment, didn't serve at Waterloo.

So at last I just copped out and went for pop music nostalgia instead.

More from Radio Derb next week.

[Music clip: Stonewall Jackson, "Waterloo,"]