His firing from MSNBC official at last, Pat recorded an interview with Juan Williams the other day for the Fox Latino website. If your preferred Internet viewing is Fox Euro, Fox Sino, Fox Islamo, Fox Indo, Fox Lesbo, or one of the other group-identity Fox outlets, you may have missed the interview. It can be seen in its entirety here.
I’m offering some edited highlights with my own commentaries added. Mostly I’m giving my own answers to questions Juan Williams was asking Pat. The first question is about 6:20 into the interview, with the others scattered through the remainder.
JW: Let me ask you: Are you a racist, Pat?
PJB: Do I hate black folks? That’s what racism means. I hate black folks, I want ’em discriminated against.…No!
[JD: I honestly have no idea what that word means, and I no longer use it. Since you just did use it, Juan, presumably you do know what it means. So here’s a deal: I will truthfully answer any question you care to ask me about my own attitudes, beliefs, and behavior in the matter of race. Then you tell me if I am a racist.]
JW: You say things like “Mexico is moving north.” Do you see those folks as a threat to the American dream?
PJB: (Boilerplate tribute to Mexicans as “hard-working” and “friendly.” Easy with the stereotypes there, Pat!)
[JD: Threat to the American Dream? Yes. The Mexicans we’re getting are a low-mean-IQ population, from the bottom SES levels of a nation that has accomplished nothing in its 500 years of existence. This is bound to degrade the USA’s human capital. Further, Mexican society is rigidly stratified by race. These low SES levels are disproportionately Indian and mestizo, so by admitting them in quantity we are acquiring a new race problem while we continue struggling with the old one. This is dumb. No, it’s beyond dumb; it’s insane.]
JW: Don’t you think that the history of discrimination, particularly in the area of education, but continuing disparities in terms of educational outcomes—in terms of things like income, families, all the rest—the terrible history of slavery and all its consequences—you don’t think that’s a legitimate factor?
PJB: I think with African Americans it was…but did we enslave Puerto Rican Americans? Did we enslave Mexican Americans? No!...
[JD: The outcome disparities are a natural and predictable result of racial differences. Races are big old inbred local branches of the human stock, like dog breeds. They are bound to exhibit different statistical profiles on all kinds of traits, including behavior, intelligence, and personality. That’s Biology 101. Those different profiles cause the observed differences in outcome. They are observed in all multiracial societies, even where no history of slavery or oppression has been present: in Malaysia, for example.]
JW: But I’m saying….If you’re from Central America, Latin America, and…you find that there are, given our history, preferences for people who are white in the society….
PJB: Do you think they really loved the Polish folks that came, and the Greeks who came, and the Portuguese—they were all privileged?
[JD: “…preferences for people who are white in the society?” Which the heck society are you talking about, Juan? All of current American society, from billboard and TV advertisements to affirmative-action programs and “diversity” browbeating, from crime reporters telling us that a gang of raceless “teens” trashed a convenience store, to the media swooning over a dramatically under-qualified presidential candidate because of you-know-what, to the hysteria over “racial profiling” and the incoherent, reality-defying judicial doctrine of “disparate impact,” to immigration officers waving in welfare-hungry Somalis, Haitians, Salvadorans, and Mexicans while slamming the door in the face of white South Africans fleeing torture and murder, the entire society has for decades been giving nonwhites every possible break, and then some, all at whites’ expense. “Preferences for people who are white?” Hoo hoo hoo hoo!]
JW: Didn’t LBJ say that if you have one guy who’s been in chains and held in a dark place and not fed good food, and then you bring him to that starting line, that is not a fair race, Pat?
PJB: Tell me why, then, African Americans have succeeded. They succeed in Hollywood, they succeed as writers, as journalists, on TV, and they succeed in athletics, obviously disproportionately….
[JD: “…been in chains and held in a dark place and not fed good food….” For crying out loud, man, LBJ was speaking half a century ago. Slavery ended a century before that. How long will this excuse keep its charm? It’s not as though American blacks have been the only people ever to labor under legal disabilities. Europe’s Jews did so until the 18th century; women did so all over the Western world until the mid-20th. Once the legal disabilities were removed, those groups asserted themselves in a single generation. Slavery was commonplace in the ancient world. Epictetus had been a slave, as had Saint Patrick. Once given their freedom, slaves quickly assumed normal lives. Many American blacks did likewise. That the overall social, educational, criminological, etc. profile of American blacks as a group has remained so distinctive after so many decades in spite of massive legal favoritism, preferences, and the institutionalization of white guilt bespeaks intrinsic race differences.]
JW: And you think that if we look at American business, at the top of the American structure for law, for medicine, and we see an absence of people of color, that there’s no problem?
PJB: Let’s take the biochemistry class….
[JD: If there’s a problem, Juan, it’s a problem with reality. Because of race differences, meritocratic filtering will never deliver equal group outcomes: not in business, not in medicine, not in the NBA, not in homicide statistics. Carve it on a board and hang it on the wall: MERITOCRATIC FILTERING WILL NEVER DELIVER EQUAL GROUP OUTCOMES. You can have meritocracy or you can have equal group outcomes, but you can’t have both. Which one do we want?]
JW: But you know, Pat, that historically, people of color were kept out of schools.
PJB: Who was discriminated in the 19th century…? [T]he Irish…but also the Japanese and Chinese on the West Coast were brutalized….
[JD: And now “people of color” are preferentially admitted, with much lower test scores than whites and East Asians, leaving them to struggle in classes where they are out of their depth. How about we try the one thing we have not yet tried: race-blind meritocratic admissions?]
JW: People who are concerned about [immigration] are oftentimes labeled as xenophobic, as racist, as nativist, when in fact you think they have a legitimate concern.
PJB: Well, sure… (Proceeds to mention legal immigration! On a website accessible to impressionable young minds! Oh my God!)
[JD: Immigration is an aspect of national public policy, like defense, interstate highways, or air-traffic control. It is a legitimate concern of all participating citizens. Why should it not be a legitimate concern? Immigration policy determines, among other things, the demographics our children and grandchildren will inherit. How is that not a legitimate concern of all citizens?]
JW: You don’t think that the immigrants, legal and illegal, who are here are valued by their employers…?
PJB: The businessmen…let’s say they bring ‘em to a car wash. These illegal immigrants, they’ll work for less, you don’t need to pay all this other stuff and they work off the books…sure businessmen love that, Juan!
[JD: For once I can’t improve on Pat’s answer. Immigration, legal and illegal, is mainly a cheap-labor racket, with immigration practice and the enforcement, or more often non-enforcement, of immigration laws mainly dictated by powerful business lobbies—such as Microsoft Corp. and Big Agriculture—with the anti-white race-favoritism claques cheering from the sidelines. Both major political parties are paid whores for these lobbies. Current US immigration policy, as implemented, is nothing but a continuous assault on American citizens’ livelihood and rights.]
Copyright 2013 TakiMag.com and the author. This copy is for your personal, noncommercial use only. You can order reprints for distribution by contacting us at firstname.lastname@example.org.