Public-Sphere Networks & Þe SubStack Bosses' Latest Pratfall-Flirtation
Nazi-adjacent genocidaire Richard Hanania, who used to call—under the cloak of anonymity—for depriving women of the vote, driving all Hispanics south of the Rio Grande, and sterilizing low-IQ Blacks:
Richard Hanania: My Journey Out of Extremism: ‘It’s important to discuss the nature of the recent journalistic attack [on me] and what it is trying to accomplish…. My initial instinct was to either ignore the story or simply denounce the source and its methods. The journalist behind the piece is a supporter of antifa… is now leading a mob on Twitter….
Fifteen years… If that’s not a long enough time to be beyond the statute of limitations for holding repugnant views… there’s really no hope for us ever moving beyond cancel culture…. [This] entire journalistic endeavor revolves around the goal of “unpersoning.“…
How I came to the positions that I once held, and why I now find many of them so repugnant…. The desire to just adopt a posture that was the polar opposite of those I considered political enemies… speak “harsh truths” without much careful thinking…. It’s really that stupid…. Around 2008, I had few friends or romantic successes and no real career prospects. Naturally, this led me to look around, and come to the only logical conclusion, which was that I was naturally superior to everyone else and women in particular shouldn’t have any rights…. Such ideas don’t appeal to me anymore…..
What ideas did Hanania put forward a decade ago that he now regards as “repugnant”? He does not say. But let me list a few candidates:
“There doesn’t seem to be a way to deal with low IQ breeding that doesn’t include coercion.… In the same way we lock up criminals and the mentally ill in the interests of society at large, one could argue that we could on the exact same principle sterilize those who are bound to harm future generations through giving birth…”
Latinos “do not have the requisite IQ to be a productive part of a first world nation…”
“The ultimate goal should be to get all the post-1965 non-White migrants from Latin America to leave…”
“The biggest enemies of the Black Man are not Klansmen or multinational corporations, but the liberals who have prevented an honest appraisal of his abilities and filled his head with myths about equality and national autarky…”
Sarah Palin, “the attractive, religious and fertile White woman, drove the ugly, secular and barren White self-hating and Jewish elite absolutely mad…”
Rather than talk about how he thinks differently, Hanania claims that:
The reason I’m the target of a cancellation effort is because left-wing journalists dislike anyone acknowledging statistical differences between races.… Leftist suppression on these issues has clearly backfired, and we have to work towards… neither deny[ing the] reality [of racial differences] like much of the political establishment… [nor] adopting a mirror image of woke ideology and its doctrine of collective guilt….
What are the chances that he means any of this? That if he had access now to the anonymous identities he loved so much a decade ago, he would not be still saying that low-IQ Blacks needed to be sterilized, Hispanics all driven across the Rio Grande, and women deprived of the vote?
Well, let’s take his claim to to reject the “mirror image of woke ideology and its doctrine of collective guilt”?
Consider this from May:
Richard Hanania: ‘I don’t have much hope that we’ll solve crime in any meaningful way. It would require a revolution in our culture or form of government. We need more policing, incarceration, and surveillance of black people. Blacks won’t appreciate it, whites don’t have the stomach for it…
Collective guilt, much?
Thus I don’t have any reason to believe that he finds any of his old views about dangerous, criminal, and rightly subordinated races, ethnicities, and sexes “repugnant”.
I do think that he finds openly expressing them as he believes them impolitic—in large part, because of the “cancel culture” that is his main bugbear.
And yet, and yet, David Frum says:
David Frum: ‘A way back is vital, not only for the sake of the repentant extremist, but for the security of normal society. We want to reduce, not multiply, the ranks of the radically disaffected. We want to recall them to democratic constitutionality, not cast them as enemies forever…
Ooh boy!