Dr. Gregory Cochran Says It Must Be Said:
Ron Unz has supported The American Conservative, and as a result, had some columns published in that magazine. … Recently he submitted a piece on high crime rates among American blacks … the article was unquestionably correct in its major conclusion. Blacks in the US have very high crime rates, and there is a very high correlation between the local crime rate and the local black percentage. That’s the way it is.
And that article is what got Ron kicked off TAC’s board. No good deed goes unpunished.
Someone I know at TAC opined that everyone knows this stuff, and talking about it is just mean.
I’ve got to say that if some benefactor had given me $600,000 over the past few years, I’d probably sing the virtues of my patron with a bit more honey than Cochran is able to muster.
At any rate, Cochran’s quote offers another piece of corroboration to my theory that Unz is out. He published his “Race and Crime in America” on his own blog on 20-July-2013, only 10 days before that National Review ‘purge’ article appeared detailing that infamous email of several days prior. That’s a stretch, but not impossibly early to get ‘former publisher’ into his IQ2 biography. Still, if he was suddenly putsched back then, why no official announcement even now? American Right Publishing is weird.
It’s not unreasonable to adopt a hybrid explanation of what occurred combining the following elements:
1. Unz’s foundation, the treasury of which he used to help fund TAC, went broke about 18 months ago, and further personal contributions were not predictably forthcoming.
2. Unz was trying everyone’s patience with all his overlong Race-Crime-IQ articles dropped on his editor at the last minute, and he finally ‘crossed the line’ when he ventured into ‘mean’ territory (Deep within foul Mordor, located next to the undead evil bogs of ‘unfairness’).
3. In addition to content, Unz is an eccentric who is just hard to work with / for, and the other folks at TAC finally had enough of his shit.
4. And finally, as in a old, bad marriage, there has been drift and TAC and Unz have grown apart. This is a subject I didn’t touch upon in the last article but which I’ve been thinking about. Unz himself complained that Rod Dreher gets over 50% of TAC’s web traffic. Is that true? Let’s take at the ‘most commented’ graphic:
And, I assure you, for months prior to all this recent Syria talk, Dreher usually dominated the “Most Read” version as well with his other religiously-themed posts.
I’ve already mentioned that TAC was founded as a paleoconservative, anti-military-interventionist publication to protest the alleged neoconservative manipulation of President George W. Bush into prosecuting an unnecessary war with Iraq. And the magazine retains its strong anti-war bonafides as is apparent from their recent Syria coverage.
But what is TAC for the other 99% of the time? The audience has mainly decided that it should be The Dreher Show. And Dreher’s not really very Unz-like. As Foseti says, Dreher occasionally is able to talk about matters of race, gender, crime, and family in a way that is traditional, popular, and not completely retarded – which is a rare accomplishment for a non-excommunicated writer in this day and age.
But lately, and now most of the time, Dreher is writing about the last phase of the war, really now an all-out assault, of the progressives-dominated culture and state power against the last remnants of traditional Christianity. Dreher has remarked favorably upon the idea of embracing a ‘besieged minority’ mentality akin to early Christians in the Roman Empire, as opposed to the tendency of some Christians to take the increasingly false myth of American remaining a (traditionally, revelationist) Christian country’ for granted.
They should instead think of themselves like Jews in old Eastern Europe; never really secure; always maintaining only a precarious hold on normalcy, always vulnerable to the next pogrom. Perhaps the Cherokee facing the Manifest Destiny of the great westward expansion provide another useful analogy to the mindset.
The point is – Dreher’s message and audience are very different from the old, core TAC authorship and readership. Probably closer to Limbaugh than Unz. The magazine’s board needs to decide whether TAC stands for The American Christian or not, because if they do nothing, the audience will decide for them in the affirmative.