National Review fires John Derbyshire over race article


The National Review has fired its contributing editor John Derbyshire after he wrote an article for a website urging white and Asian parents to tell their children to avoid black people.

The National Review’s editor, Rich Lowry, called the article “nasty and indefensible” while defending Derbyshire himself as “deeply literate, funny and incisive”.

He wrote in a statement about the article on the National Review website: “We never would have published it, but the main reason that people noticed it is that it is by a National Review writer. Derb is effectively using our name to get more oxygen for views with which we’d never associate ourselves otherwise. So there has to be a parting of the ways.”

British-born Derbyshire wrote the article for Taki’s Magazine, run by the rightwing Greek socialite Taki Theodoracopulos. He suggested white and Asian parents should give their children a “talk” urging them not to attend events where black Americans might be present in large numbers, to avoid black neighbourhoods and not to be a “good Samaritan” to black people who appear in distress.

Derbyshire wrote: “If accosted by a strange black in the street, smile and say something polite but keep moving.” He added: “If you are white or Asian and have kids, you owe it to them to give them some version of the talk. It will save them a lot of time and trouble spent figuring things out for themselves. It may save their lives.”

The piece, a response to articles written in the wake of the Trayvon Martin case about “the talk” that black parents give their children on how to survive racism in America, sparked fury. Many Twitter users sent messages to the National Review asking them to condemn it.

Lessons from Marion Barry’s anti-Asian comments

Lessons from Marion Barry’s anti-Asian comments

The latest Marion Barrycontroversy burned bright Thursday, but it’s now mostly burnt out.In case you missed it: Barry (D-Ward 8) made comments late Tuesday at his primary night victory party suggesting that the Asian-American owners of businesses in his ward run “dirty shops” that “ought to go.” After the comments were reported late Wednesday, the rebuke was swift, and by Thursday evening, Barry had tendered an apology of sorts.

But the episode — which gave new voice to decades-old tensions between the residents of largely black inner city neighborhoods and the many Asian owners of the businesses that serve them — deserves a coda.

I’m happy to give some space here to Mark L. Keam, a Democrat who represents a portion of Fairfax County in the Virginia House of Delegates. He’s the first Korean-American and the first Asian-born immigrant elected to serve in that body, and he has valuable experience bridging the longstanding divide between Asian businesses and their black customers.


Here’s what he has to share:


As the popular saying goes, I believe the past couple of days provide us with a “teaching moment” in race relations.

There are many ways this episode can be analyzed, but as someone who has personally dealt with these issues before, I want to offer some historical perspectives and suggestions to help our community move forward in a productive and positive way.

First, I want to recognize that Council member Barry did the right thing by acknowledging that his words were offensive and harmful. I hate it, though, when someone who does something offensive decides to apologize but qualifies it by apologizing only to a select group of those who might have been offended.

Here, Mr. Barry goes out of his way to single out the “Asian American community” for being offended. Let’s always remember that anytime anyone denigrates any group of people based on race, ethnicity, gender, religion, sexual orientation, etc., they offend all people, not just the group they target.

Second, regardless of whether or not Mr. Barry apologized to our satisfaction, the real issue here is in trying to understand what drove him to say such racist things in the first place.

Mr. Barry’s original remarks were troubling not only because of the blatant insults he hurled at “Asians” who come to his ward and open “dirty shops,” but what he offered as the solution: Mr. Barry wants these “Asians” to be gone from his ward.

“They ought to go. I’m going to say that right now,” he said.

From a quick review of some comments left below the news articles, it seems that there are plenty of people who agree with Mr. Barry’s assessment that these stores are not in good condition and that the store owners are not showing respect for the local community.

These are grievances I have heard before, not only in D.C. but also in Los Angeles, New York, Chicago and other large urban areas where Asian-American entrepreneurs open stores in predominantly African-American neighborhoods where they themselves do not live.

Exactly 20 years ago this month, on April 29, 1992, I was working in Los Angeles when the largest riot in that city’s history erupted after a jury found that the police officers who beat Rodney King were not guilty.

After several days of complete chaos, riots, looting and burning, Los Angeles suffered 53 deaths, 3,600 fires, 1,100 destroyed buildings, 2,000 damaged businesses and property damages totaling $1 billion.

Much of the physical damage was suffered by Korean Americans who operated stores in predominantly African-American or Hispanic communities. In addition, a young Korean-American man was shot and killed, and countless others were wounded from gun shots, beatings and other injuries.

Although the Rodney King verdict was the spark that lit the flame, there was plenty of underbrush building up in Los Angeles for years that helped keep the April fires burning for days.

A year before the riots in 1991, a surveillance videotape from a South Central liquor store surfaced showing an altercation between a Korean-American store owner and a teenage African-American customer accused of stealing a bottle of orange juice. The scuffle ended in the tragic shooting death of the girl, and the store owner was eventually convicted of voluntary manslaughter. When the judge imposed what was considered to be a light sentence of probation and community service, the African-American community alleged racial injustice.

Hollywood and popular culture didn’t help calm the situation by promoting only the negative stereotype of the rude and greedy Korean merchant in films like Spike Lee’s “Do the Right thing” and rap songs like Ice Cube’s “Black Korea.”

With the sense of mutual mistrust coupled with the economic downturn in the early 1990s, it was only a matter of time before a large-scale racial conflict would occur, and the completely unrelated King case did just that.

In the aftermath of the Los Angeles riots, numerous community-based efforts were established to ensure better race relations as well as to combat the root causes of poverty in inner cities. Efforts were made, for instance, to help African Americans purchase the stores in their neighborhoods that Korean Americans abandoned.

As incidents of violence and boycotts against Korean-American stores spread to other cities, similar race relations efforts were replicated by local Korean-American community groups in New York, New Jersey, Chicago and elsewhere.

Between 1998 and 2001, I volunteered as an unpaid community organizer in D.C., working with a multiethnic coalition of community and faith-based groups and leaders to replicate the lessons learned from Los Angeles to race relations efforts in Washington.

Through a grant from the Community Foundation for the National Capital Region, we launched the “Washington Area Partnership for Immigrants” and also the “Building One Neighborhood” pilot program.

These were volunteer efforts focused on developing local leaders from different ethnic and racial groups within the D.C. communities who could build long-term trust and personal relationships that could help overcome potential future racial conflicts.

In tandem with these projects, the Asian Pacific American Bar Association sponsored a series of training sessions for D.C. police and other local government authorities on the different cultural traditions and customs of Asian immigrants.

The goal of these sessions was to explain the cultural differences that could be mistaken as being rude gestures which could then potentially lead to altercations.

For example, in some Asian cultures, it is considered rude to look at a stranger directly in the eye or to physically touch a stranger in an intentional way. So when a recent immigrant from Asia who is working as a cashier refuses to look at his African-American customer in the eye or to place the change directly in the hands of the customer, it is not because the immigrant wants to be rude.

Instead, the Asian immigrant is actually showing respect to the customer. Yet it is easy to understand how the African-American community at large would perceive such behavior as off-putting.

We also worked with the U.S. attorney’s office in D.C. to set up hate crime training to understand and identify potential racially motivated crimes against Asian-American victims, as well as to educate the Asian immigrant community about these types of laws.

These grassroots projects included door-to-door surveys to measure attitudes of both Asian-American merchants and African-American customers. I joined numerous Asian-American volunteers in visiting dozens of stores throughout the District, many of them “dirty” and with plexiglass barriers. I also spoke with many neighborhood customers, church leaders, police officers and government officials to encourage as broad a base of participation from the African American residents.

A dozen years after our initial programs to build better race relations in D.C., I cannot tell you whether they worked or not. There are no objective set of analytics or results I can point to.

I do know, however, that we have been fortunate in having avoided any large scale racial conflicts like the horrible experience of Los Angeles. We have also established channels for civic communication between residents and merchants.

These results did not happen on their own. Here are some proactive reasons for how D.C. has kept its peace:

• The D.C. mayor’s Office on Asian Pacific Islander Affairs — established during Mr. Barry’s mayoralty — has been diligent in reaching out to Asian-American merchants to encourage them to be better neighbors. They serve as an early warning detector, stomping out any potential sparks of racial tensions.

• Trade associations such as the Korean-American Grocers Association and Dry Cleaners Association have self-policed their members to invest back into the communities where they do business. They hold regular block parties, holiday events, and provide scholarships to give back to the community.

• Commercial and government programs were created to specifically target investments in inner cities and to encourage entrepreneurs from within these communities.

Is there room for improvement? Certainly the Asian-American store owners could be friendlier to their customers, hire more local workers, invest more profits back into the neighborhoods and keep their stores cleaner.

Should they take down plexiglass barriers? That’s up to each merchant and the level of public safety in that particular neighborhood.

Should they offer to sell their stores to African Americans and leave D.C.? If the free enterprise system and the marketplace work as they should, then this question should answer itself.

Can the government do more to combat poverty and dropout rates, fight drugs and other crimes, provide a better social safety net and improve the quality of lives for all residents of inner cities? That’s up to the elected leaders of the government and those who vote their priorities.

Based on my personal experiences of living through the hell of Los Angeles in 1992 and trying to be proactive in D.C. in 1998, I have learned one lesson above all else: You never know when, where or how any one small mistake or incident can spark the flames of prejudice.

That is why it is so critical that everyone who works with other races need to be mindful of their every word and conduct aimed at the other group.


link to article

Texas Woman Tells 13-Year-Old Go Cart Rider “You Don’t Belong In This Neighborhood” After Jumping Curb In Her Jeep To Hit Him Head On!!!

link to news

White Woman Intentionally Drives Vehicle Into Go-Cart Ridden By Two Black Teens In Pearland, TX

Yo what is really hood with these crazy people trying to “detain” young black males because they don’t want them in their neighborhoods??? We just caught wind of this case going in Texas right now of a white woman who intentionally ran off the road to ram into some 13-year-old boys riding go-carts. Is anybody even surprised she hasn’t been arrested???

“You don’t belong in this neighborhood!”

These are the words that Jules Moor, a 13-year old black child, says that Deanna Johnson, a middle-aged white female, said to him after Johnson slammed her 2011 Jeep Wrangler into his go-cart on Tuesday, March 13, 2012.

According to court documents obtained from Jules’ attorney, Sylvester Anderson, Jules went for a ride in his go-cart in his neighborhood with another 13-year old boy who had been spending spring break with the Moor family. A third minor boy, another friend of Jules’, rode a small bicycle behind the go-cart.

Jules saw two cars behind him while driving back home, so he decided to drive his go-cart completely off the road to his right onto the grassy edge of the neighborhood park to avoid being in the way of traffic.

It is then that Jules states that Johnson swung her vehicle across the south-bound lane of the road, ran over the curb onto the grass and deliberately and intentionally rammed her vehicle head-on into the go-cart.

According to Jules, Johnson got out of her vehicle and confronted the boys in a hostile and threatening manner yelling “Where do you live? Who are your parents?” while shaking her finger at the kids. Jules goes on to say, “With all due respect, Ma’am, I live down the street,” to which Johnson allegedly tells him that she didn’t care and that she was calling the police.

Jules called his mother and told her that Johnson had hit his go-cart and didn’t know why.

“He thought he was going to die,” said Theresa Moor, mother of Jules. “All I could do was stop what I was doing, grab my keys and make my way to my child.”

Poor baby, he was just being a kid having fun and this lady wants to physically hate on him and his friends — she could have killed them! Then she probably would have said they threatened to kill her.

But wait — here is more craziness… This broad tried to give Jules’ mom the “talk to the hand” treatment when she arrived on the scene:

As Theresa arrived, she saw that the go-cart had been damaged severely and learned from Jules that Johnson had accused the boys of not living in the neighborhood. As Theresa approached Johnson to find out what happened, Johnson put her palm up to her face in a dismissive manner, refused to talk, went back to her truck and rolled up the windows.

Frustrated at the way things were transpiring, Theresa contacted the police and several Brazoria County Sheriff’s deputies arrived.

According to Theresa, she overheard Johnson claim that she was trying to “detain” the boys because they looked like some kids that they had seen earlier riding bicycles onto the driveways of houses in the neighborhood.

Jules and the other 13-year old boy in the go-cart sustained back and neck injuries as a result of the wreck. The boys had collars placed on their necks, were placed on stretchers and taken by ambulance to the emergency room of Southeast Memorial Hermann Hospital. They were treated and released, but Jules has since been diagnosed with PTSD (Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder) and is seeing a therapist regularly.

Jules Moor’s mother says he’s been traumatized by the incident, and much like George Zimmerman — Deanna Johnson hasn’t been arrested or punished for what she did:

“My son is not the same,” says Theresa. “He doesn’t want to play outside anymore or leave the house alone. I just don’t know why she did this to my child.”

It is still unclear why Johnson decided to do what she did. Johnson never apologized for ramming her truck into the go-cart and jeopardizing the lives of the three children and according to witnesses, was seen laughing as she spoke with the Sheriff’s deputies.

Johnson was not arrested or drug-tested upon the admission of her actions. The Sheriff’s department Captain that came on the scene decided not to arrest Johnson upon consulting with the District Attorney.

Johnson has responded to the Moor family’s claims via the following statement:

“As a mother of two children, I was concerned for the safety of these kids because they were driving their vehicle erratically and at high speeds through the neighborhood and also came dangerously close to a lake. When I saw them driving erratically for the second or third time that evening, I pulled my vehicle over and stopped” she wrote.

“They were still driving fast and because they had driven onto a grass area, when they hit the brakes to stop, they skidded and ran into my vehicle after I had stopped. This is about the safety of children and nothing more.”