Quantcast

«

»

Oct 31 2013

Hasn’t the National Review Learned Its Lesson Yet?

Having already had to fire two writers — John Derbyshire and Robert Weissberg, both of which have close ties to white nationalist movements — for their racially inflammatory writings, the National Review now has Jason Richwine, who says Hispanics are inherently less intelligent than whites, blogging for them.

Jason Richwine, who parted ways with the Heritage Foundation over his research arguing Hispanics are intellectually inferior to whites, has quietly begun writing semi-regularly for the flagship conservative publication National Review.

Before May 2013, Richwine had written seven items for National Review, five full articles and two blog posts on The Corner, National Review’s catchall blog. In May, when The Washington Post’s Dylan Matthews dug up Richwine’s Harvard dissertation on race and IQ, Richwine responded in National Review. The next Richwine piece appears in The Corner in August, where he has published 14 posts between August and October.

Richwine “blogs occasionally” for National Review, Rich Lowry, the publication’s editor, told ThinkProgress via email.

Lowry, presumably, is too blinded by those starbursts emanating from Sarah Palin, to notice that Richwine is every bit as racist as Derbyshire and Weissberg.

22 comments

Skip to comment form

  1. 1
    Steven

    Richwine’s dissertation earned him a degree from Harvard. If there are flaws in the dissertation making his findings invalid, how about bringing them up? Simply slapping the word racist on him for his findings is just lazy.

  2. 2
    Raging Bee

    Yet another data-point indicating the “conservative” movement is nothing but an empty shell, letting the extremists call the shots because there’s no one and nothing else left in it.

  3. 3
    Raging Bee

    Besides, wasn’t NR’s sainted founder a bit of a racist himself? How much of a change is this really?

  4. 4
    tbp1

    @#3: More than a bit. The NR in the 50s read like a Klan magazine, just with correct syntax and a snooty vocabulary.

  5. 5
    alanb

    I have seen no evidence that National Review is opposed to racism. Rather they are opposed to being embarrassed by writers who are inept at using code words and phrases that fall short of blatant.

  6. 6
    StevoR : Free West Papua, free Tibet, let the Chagossians return!

    Hasn’t the National Review Learned Its Lesson Yet?

    It clearly hasn’t.

  7. 7
    StevoR : Free West Papua, free Tibet, let the Chagossians return!

    Wonder just how far and just what it will take before they do.

  8. 8
    aaronbaker

    No.

    This has been today’s installment of Questions with Really Easy Answers.

  9. 9
    arakasi

    Steven

    Richwine’s dissertation is crap, in part, because in an analysis of Hispanic IQ, he completely fails to define “Hispanic” and IQ” with any rigor, which allowed him to cherry pick his populations to an ill-defined target. Furthermore, he ignores the contribution of socio-economic class on mental development, attributing the entire difference to genetic factors. I will grant that he had an excellent statistical analysis of his data, but this just glosses over the fact that the data he input did not was not representative of the population (i.e Hispanics) as a whole.

    The only conclusion that can be legitimately drawn from his work is that poor immigrants from Central and South America will do worse on standardized tests than the typical USian

  10. 10
    Modusoperandi

    National Review: Home of the Classy Dogwhistles.

  11. 11
    Raging Bee

    The NR in the 50s read like a Klan magazine, just with correct syntax and a snooty vocabulary.

    Yeah, that’s pretty much the sum-total of Bill Buckley’s contribution to Western civilization.

  12. 12
    Michael Brew

    Noy only what arakasi said, Steven, but also the paper is making the assertion that one race is categorically inferior to another race. This is literally the definition of racism, so calling it racist is no different than calling a “research” paper which argues that all the species in the world were created fully formed creationist, even if it was methodologically sound.

  13. 13
    matty1

    Is Hispanic a race? The United States government seems to think not.

    U.S. federal government agencies must adhere to standards issued by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in October 1997, which specify that race and Hispanic origin (also known as ethnicity) are two separate and distinct concepts.

    Persons who report themselves as Hispanic can be of any race and are identified as such in our data tables.

    Elsewhere on the census.gov site it seems that in 2012 over 34 million people in America were estimate to be identifying as both “Hispanic or Latino” and as “white only”. What is their IQ like?

  14. 14
    democommie

    Wake the fuck UP, people!

    First you’re saying that he’s a racist for PROVING that them beaners ain’t smart. Next you’ll be denying that, as part of their takeover plans, they haven’t been calling this place,Estados Unidos de América, for years. And you know who ELSE has the initials EU? Well do ya, chico?

  15. 15
    democommie

    Theodor Cruz and Mario Rubio must be a couple of the “good” Hispanics.

  16. 16
    hunter

    matty1 @ 13: Bingo.

    And given that the genetic difference between races is too small to measure (after all, there’s less than 2% genetic difference between us and chimpanzees, for the love of pete), how can you ascribe a genetic basis to IQ?

    And why am I reminded of Andrew Sullivan’s periodic forays into studies that “prove” that blacks are less intelligent than whites?

  17. 17
    colnago80

    Re hunter @ #16

    Without attempting to pontificate as to what it is that IQ measures (it almost certainly depends on what test or battery of tests one is talking about), the notion that there is no genetic component to IQ is unsupported. AFAIK, studies have shown that there is such a component but the question as to its relative importance is, as we sit here today, unknown. Unfortunately, abortions such as The Bell Curve have tended to discredit such studies. As for Andrew Sullivan, he doesn’t seem to be blogging on the subject as of late, probably a good thing as previous evaluations of his blog posts on the subject reveal incredible naivete.

  18. 18
    hunter

    colnago @ #17:

    Not arguing that there is no genetic component to IQ — there seems to be a genetic component to just about everything. Arguing that, given the miniscule genetic differences between races, it’s a real stretch to ascribe differences in intelligence between groups to genetic differences between races rather than socio-cultural and economic factors.

    I’d like to see someone like Sullivan or Richwine react to a study of IQ differences between people of the same race from different social and economic backgrounds.

  19. 19
    matty1

    I’m not convinced of the usefulness of group measures of IQ anyway. The mean or median IQ of a group of people however selected doesn’t tell you what the IQ of any particular member of that group is going to be, nor more importantly does it tell you how you should act towards them.

    Not to mention IQ is not a direct proxy for intellectual ability in every area of life.

    How about rather than assuming someone lacks the intelligence to do a job or learn a subject based on what group they fit it and how other members of that group did on an IQ test we test that persons ability to deal with the relevant subject individually?

  20. 20
    eric

    How about rather than assuming someone lacks the intelligence to do a job or learn a subject based on what group they fit it and how other members of that group did on an IQ test we test that persons ability to deal with the relevant subject individually?

    AFAIK, most places do just that. Its not like corporate America requires or uses IQ testing. Its not water cooler talk. I’ll make a gross generalization here, but outside of panning it when it comes up in the news (which most of us seem to do), IQ testing seems prmarily of interest to (1) social scientists looking to improve the usefulness of standardized testing, (2) MENSA members, and (3) bigots.

  21. 21
    ursamajor

    The National Review staff are genetically incapable of learning lessons.

  22. 22
    Thumper: Who Presents Boxes Which Are Not Opened

    Lowry, presumably, is too blinded by those starbursts emanating from Sarah Palin, to notice that Richwine is every bit as racist as Derbyshire and Weissberg.

    He knows full well that they’re all racist, he just doesn’t care as long as they’re not too blatant about it in his publication. When they are, he has to be seen to be doing something, but he doesn’t care that they hold those opinions.

Leave a Reply

Switch to our mobile site