After all, Khan writes the GNXP blog and is a proponent of the reality of HBD and race realism.
The New York Times has terminated its contract with one of its new online opinion writers after a Gawker article highlighted the writer’s previous association with racist publications, according to that writer’s Twitter account.
Razib Khan, a science blogger and a doctoral candidate in genomics and genetics at the University of California, Davis, was one of 20 writers who signed contracts with the Times to write for the paper’s online opinion section.
The Times announced its new stable of contributors on Wednesday. Hours later, Gawker’s J.K. Trotter reported that Khan had a “history with racist, far-right online publications.” Khan wrote 68 posts for Taki’s Magazine, a publication founded by a “flamboyantly racist Greek journalist,” Trotter wrote. Khan also wrote a letter to VDARE, “a white nationalist website named after the first white child born in America, in which he discussed [an essay] concerning the threat of the United States becoming “more genetically and culturally Mexican.”
Being a PhD candidate in genomics and genetics is cancelled, overridden, nullified, by (gasp)… having written articles for Takimag or VDARE. Now that disqualifies you from elite society.
The Gawker reporter gawks at, and gets his ‘facts’ from… drumroll… the entirely objective (and definitely not Jewish ethnocentric) SPLC:
According to his Times author page, Khan is “a science blogger, a programmer and a doctoral candidate in genomics and genetics at the University of California, Davis.” Omitted from the paper’s biography, as a quick Google search indicates, is Khan’s history with racist, far-right online publications.
Khan wrote for Taki from January through September 2009. A decade earlier, in 2000, Khan wrote a letter to VDARE, a white nationalist website named after the first child born to English settlers in America*, in which he discussed another VDARE essay by Steve Sailer, the openly racist science writer, concerning the threat of the United States becoming “more genetically and culturally Mexican.” According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, VDARE was considered a “relatively mainstream anti-immigration page” after it was founded in 1999; within the next four years, however, it began “regularly publish[ing] articles by prominent white nationalists, race scientists and anti-Semites,” and continues to do so.
VDARE’s racist ideology did not prevent Khan from earnestly linking to an essay published there in 2009. The author of the VDARE piece argued that the “defense of the West against the onslaught of Islam and Third-World immigration” required acknowledging that the State of Israel was part of the West and, by extension, under the very same threat. Khan’s response, published on Taki’s Magazine, consisted of his suggestion that the “West” seemed to be only Christian, not Judeo-Christian, in nature.
Khan’s writing elsewhere hardly rejects the doctrines on which these outlets are based. He merely treats what white racists taken for granted—that non-whites, and especially blacks, are intellectually inferior—as an open question worth exploring in the name of scientific inquiry. Still, Khan is careful with his actual words; he never says black people are less intelligent. But his willingness to treat black intelligence as a matter of debate has not hampered his career in the slightest. He’s written for Slate, The Daily Telegraph, and The Guardian. Indeed, he’s already placed two op-eds, about the evolution of cats and abortion politics, in The New York Times.
Best of all, the Gawker followup column celebrating Khan’s firing contains this seemingly random, Alinsky-ite tee-up for its next crusade:
Berkeley professor Michael Eisen revealed the news on Twitter on Thursday evening:
— Michael Eisen (@mbeisen) March 20, 2015
Yet another page in the annals of leftist HBD suppression, career-thwarting, and their Orwellian ideas toward a ‘dialogue on race’, one that allows just one side.
As this demonstrates yet again, the Left is not interested in having a debate. They are interesting in closing the debate.