0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

Roger Kimball Goes Birther

by Paddy Johnson on April 10, 2012 · 7 comments

Paul Gauguin, Spirit of the Dead Watching

New Criterion publisher and editor Roger Kimball would like to say what he really thinks, but the left is so insidious they’ve rendered subjects he wants to discuss taboo. Take “the genetic basis of human intelligence” or the real birthplace of Barack Obama; public figures bravely wanting to discuss these matters are so consistently persecuted by the liberal press that only the few brave souls will speak out. “The most effective form of censorship is also the quietest.” Kimball gravely tells us:

It's not simply that, in many walks of life, you cannot express certain opinions about [the genetic basis of human intelligence]; you are not even allowed to raise any questions about it.  Questions admit doubts; and about certain subjects doubts are tantamount to heresy.  This is something that Larry Summers discovered when he had the temerity to suggest that maybe, just possibly, there were fewer women than men at the pinnacle of mathematical achievement because women as a group were less adept at mathematics than men. Mr. Summers asserted nothing: he merely raised it as one hypothesis among many. That was his tort, for which he paid, and continues to pay, dearly.

Another example concerns the nativity of Barack Hussein Obama.  It's not just that you are not allowed to express certain opinions about the subject. You are not even allowed to publicly entertain any questions about it.

Forgive me if I’m not particularly sympathetic to conspiracy theorists who don’t have a large enough platform to shout their demands that Obama show his papers, and accept that he’s genetically inferior. Of course, Kimball doesn’t actually say black people are stupid—John Derbyshire already made that case—he’s just wondering why he and genetics expert Larry Summers aren’t allowed to be curious about facts supporting the biological superiority of certain groups.

Let Kimball express these thoughts on a message board along with all the other internet trolls. Publicly funded publications like the New Criterion do not serve the greater good when they publish material that encourages sexist and racist views, a line that publication and their for-profit partner PJMedia too often walk. Kimball goes too far. His words aren’t just politically incorrect, they’re morally reprehensible and taking a stand against them isn’t censorship. It’s acting responsibly.

Tagged as: barack obama, Larry Summers, Roger Kimball

Pentagram Ecology: Frieze Art Fair, 2013 Intro to The Art World: A Beginners Reading List “Palm Reader,” A Show About Touch

Powered by Facebook Comments

  • Robert Boyd

    He keeps saying “allowed” as if there is some governing board that issues licenses to hold opinions. The thing is, Kimball is “allowed” to say, write and publish anything he wants. And other people are equally allowed to disdain, ridicule and otherwise express contempt for his opinions. The fact that he feels so intimidated by this makes me think he doesn’t have much conviction in his opinions. Deep down, he must realize how ridiculous and hateful Birtherism is. Either that or he’s just a coward, too cowed by polite opinion to state what he really believes.

  • Anonymous

    I hear
    you, but a bigger platform to shout from might also be a longer rope to hang
    by. I mean, sexist and racist views are already out there—they don’t require much
    encouragement—and a public figure to point at might be more useful in the long
    run.

    • http://www.artfagcity.com Paddy Johnson

      Yeah, I was talking about that yesterday with my boyfriend. His thought was that a better strategy would have been: You know all those horrible things we were worried conservatives thought? They actually think them.

      That’s a good position to take, but mostly as a community builder amongst those who already share liberal values. The truth is, these ideas are corrosive to a functioning society. It’s much easier to be racist, sexist and prejudiced than not, and so these ideas can and will spread if our only response is to hope others share our gawks. 

      • ss

        Hey, I’m not saying that Kimball is a hateful racist, and that all his lengthy polemics about the corrosive effects of multiculturalism are merely thinly-veiled attempts to intellectualize his own visceral disdain for black people.

        I’m just wondering why we’re not allowed to ask if that might be the case.

  • http://twitter.com/Reid_Singer Reid Singer

    This sort of reminds me of the stand off between Georgia Sagri and Ann Liv Young at PS 1, or just Ann Liv Young’s attitude in general about how the value of her work can only be gauged by how much she unsettles people.
    http://www.artfagcity.com/2010/03/01/how-much-pee-in-pan-will-prompt-museum-intervention/

    Like RK, she seems to confuse discussions about what isn’t worth an audience because it’s unwelcome in polite society with what isn’t worth an audience because it’s truly void of merit. When that distinction is blurred, either by ALY’s “art” or RK’s “criticism,” they give themselves the license to brush off their critics as not sufficiently open minded.

  • mattf

    On the other hand, NC does publish the work of James Panero, a critical voice well worth reading. And the perpetually aggrieved, resentful, and even paranoid tone of the magazine is strikingly similar to the “little magazines” of the left. 

  • http://twitter.com/blackfeminism Sapphire Sister

    Wow, yeah, I see what he means about Larry Summers paying dearly for his sexist hypothesis: a presidential appointment in the Obama administration! Oh, there’s no cause for correlation between the two? Just like there’s no correlation between having a vagina and being able to do math? Fascinating.

Previous post:

Next post: