February 6, 2009

The New York Times attacks VDARE.com again

Apparently, the New York Times Editorial Board was surprised to receive a lot of email laughing at their editorial last weekend that furiously denounced Marcus Epstein as a "white supremacist" for calling for moderation.

So, now the NYT is denouncing VDARE.com again. Peter Brimelow responds here, Marcus Epstein here, and Patrick Cleburne here.

Pat Buchanan responds here.

My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

26 comments:

Svigor said...

So Kyrgyzstan kicked us out and invited the Russians back in. Everything that happened under Bush was Bush's fault, so this is Obama's fault, right? Ha! No, the press isn't characterizing the Krygy bum's rush as a failure, but as an early foreign policy challenge. Se how that works?

High Stakes for Obama at Weekend Security Conference

It's not about the game, folks, it's about who gets to keep score, who gets to play, etc.

tomregan said...

It's editorials like that in the NYT that encourage me to believe that we are witnessing the hegemony of bourgeois bolshevism in its death throes.
Its ever-increasing stridency and censoriousness is not evidence of strength but weakness.
They know they are losing the battle. The only concern is whether it is replaced by ever more insane leftism or a movement back to the right.

Anonymous said...

Well, it’s obvious now. Slim climbs in with 250 m. and soon after the war begins. Amazing how editorials can just be bought. Puts to shame all that s. about the independence of papers. Remember all the fuss at the WSJ when Murdoch bought in? And our saintly NYT, the guardian of independent-mindedness is mute when Slim climbs into bed? Sheesh, gotta love the hypocrisy.

ben tillman said...

The comments were discouraging. This one was especially disturbing:

This was one of the most intellectually dishonest pieces I’ve ever seen in a major newspaper. You essentially pick the far end of the political spectrum’s views on immigration and then brand all anti-illegal supporters as essentially racist. That’s unfair, dishonest, and insulting.

No, it's intellectually dishonest because it presupposes there's something wrong with opposing immigration on the grounds of self-interest. And it's intellectually dishonest because the NYT uses the same standard to oppose or support everything under the sun.

But that's too much for "Karen" to grasp.

Anonymous said...

The NYT is starting to froth. The criticism must really be starting to hurt. Plus the financial losses....

klaos oldanburg said...

They're afraid.

The current crisis represents not only a failure of economic theory, but also a failure of sociological theory.

The EU is losing it's grip on the public, the popularity of the nationalist parties is surging, and even some of the leftist parties, like the Dutch Socialists, are adopting 'nativist' ideas.

The US has done a much better job of stifling dissent, but it seems like the political polarization is shifting from left-right to gloablist-nativist.

It would be interesting to compare the DOW, or maybe consumer confidence, with public opinion about immigration and/or multiculturalism.

Anonymous said...

looking at the comments section- the NYT may realize why they are in dire straits- 3 to 1 against their own paper.

Mark said...

Ah, they're just lobbying for a job with the SPLC and the ACLU after the Times goes belly up.

kurt9 said...

The fact that the NYT feels compelled to devote editorial space to denouncing VDare is indicative of the attention that VDare is attracting of late. If the NYT editors thought that VDare was one of these flaky fringe sites, they would not feel it necessary to devote attention to it.

Anonymous said...

Not to mention

http://theboard.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/04/the-nativist-lobby/

and

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/06/opinion/06fri2.html

The Times has really been freaking out over immigration recently. I wonder if it starting to dawn on them that, with the economy being this bad, it's possible that even with a Democratic president they might not get their precious "comprehensive immigration reform" any time soon!

simon said...

They seem to have really shot themselves in the foot here by providing actual links to the ever-moderate Vdare, Amcon et al. They're making themselves look ridiculous to all but fellow kool-aid drinkers, and they don't realise it. Immigration is not a good battle for the Gramscians to fight on - it's too direct, too visceral. European leftists solved this by making opposition to immigration a criminal offence.

David said...

Steve, time to blast them with "hate facts" and "hate numbers" - and don't leave out the KMac perspective. (They are thinking only of their grandfather fleeing the authorities and waiting at Ellis Island - cue the violins.)

Anonymous said...

Accept Carlos Slim's coin, play Carlos Slim's tune.

--Senor Doug

Anonymous said...

"The Borrower is Servant to the Lender"..............Proverbs.



NYT is the borrower, and Carlos Slim is the 250 MILLION dollar lender.


14% interest on that 250 million? Priceless.




Really, if the Traditional Right wants to WIN, they need to name names and instruct their followers to STOP BUYING ESTABLISHMENT MEDIA PRODUCTS. Don't buy the Times. Dont watch NBC or MSNBC (furthest left at the moment), dont buy Gannett-owned newspapers that publish NYT opinion journalist like Bob Herbert, Maureen Down, Paul Krugman, Thomas Whatshisface, et al. Dont buy WaPo, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Miami Herald, or any left-leaning newspaper. Get your news online, search for bloggers that are newsjunkies in your area if you have to. The right has to stop underwriting the left's propaganda organs (heretofore knows as news organizations) because they've been the only game in town for so long. The net gives you a way to circumvent them on your laptop or even your phone.

curt said...

NYT is just giving VDARE free publicity they could not have bought with any marketing campaign. It will just help VDARE, as NYT losed even more credibility with Slim loan. NYT is now officially bought and paid for.

Anonymous said...

The NYT bet on the wrong horse. As they make the final turn the NYT might be wishing that they had been an honest broker regarding immigration rather than a cheerleader. They probably thought that all the Mexicans that have come here would be loyal readers but instead all they got was one, Carlos Slim.

Mark said...

So when did VDare hire the NYT to do their PR blitz? I expect VDare to start giving us updates on the number of monthly page views, because I expect they're getting ready to soar. Time to start taking ads.

So Kyrgyzstan kicked us out and invited the Russians back in. Everything that happened under Bush was Bush's fault, so this is Obama's fault, right? Ha! No, the press isn't characterizing the Krygy bum's rush as a failure, but as an early foreign policy challenge. Se how that works?

Idiot savant Iowahawk had a great one on that.


Well, it’s obvious now. Slim climbs in with 250 m. and soon after the war begins. Amazing how editorials can just be bought.

Tell me about it. Soon after a Utah homebuilding zillionaire became chairman of my state's LDS Church-owned paper, The Deseret News, they published 8 pro-illegal editorials in as many weeks.

I eagerly await news of the homebuilder's demise.

even some of the leftist parties, like the Dutch Socialists, are adopting 'nativist' ideas.

Bullshit. They're not adopting the ideas; they're "adopting" them - laying claim to them for long enough to get re-elected, like Rick Perry in Texas or my own state senator here in Utah.

The nativist parties are the only parties reliable enough to actually implement immigration enforcement/reduction. By the time we emerge from this current depression the word nativist may have become a positive appellation.

Anonymous said...

They're giving VDare a PR boost at a time when more and more of the public is amenable to its message. Thanks, NYT - and we didn't even have to pay for an ad!

Anonymous said...

The US has done a much better job of stifling dissent,

The US has had a much better economic run since the 1980's than Europe has. The backlash against immigration here was delayed because our economy was more prosperous. The nativists in Europe sure as heck aren't taking off because the Euromedia is any less leftwing than the Slimes is.

Anonymous said...

carlos slim is getting a pretty quick ROI

Anonymous said...

The nativists in Europe sure as heck aren't taking off because the Euromedia is any less leftwing than the Slimes is.

OK, that's a great coinage. "The Slimes" deserves to be as big a hit as "NAMs" has become.

Svigor said...

I don't think the way to characterize this is as "ROI" for Slim. When you approve of an institution, and it shows signs of failure, and you prop it up and it goes on its merry way, "ROI" isn't the first characterization that springs to mind, is it?

Technically I guess "ROI" fits, but all you've really done is fund business as usual.

Anonymous said...

OK, so we are all cavemen now. WTF. As long as I get my beer and sausage, what do I care?

headache said...

"Really, if the Traditional Right wants to WIN, they need to name names and instruct their followers to STOP BUYING ESTABLISHMENT MEDIA PRODUCTS."

Exactly. When you look carefully, you realise their tentacles are all over the place. But with some intelligence you can cut yourself loose. Only put money where it makes a difference, even for entertainment.

Anonymous said...

""The Slimes" deserves to be as big a hit as "NAMs" has become."

You meacn "The Slims"?

rob said...

I was wrong, the Times could indeed have become more in favor of unskilled Mexican immigration.