Yes, SPLC (And Ayatollah Ahmari), Of Course Stephen Miller Reads—Just Not Enough
Print Friendly and PDF

Southern Poverty Law Center enforcer Michael Edison Hayden (he apparently has an Egyptian mother and an Indian wife, which may explain something) just published an article based on email treacherously leaked by Katie McHugh, a disgruntled ex-Breitbart staffer and former Alt Right groupie, showing that Stephen Miller, Trump's much-hated immigration adviser, reads, which the $PLC has declared anathema or as, it puts it "white nationalist". [Stephen Miller’s Affinity for White Nationalism Revealed in Leaked Emails, by Michael Edison Hayden, SPLC, November 12, 2019]

As a result, Sohrab Ahmari [Tweet him], an Iranian Muslim immigrant (converted to Catholicism in 2016) who now edits the New York Post's Op-Ed page (a job Americans won’t do?), is declaring some kind of fatwa against us and Miller:



Which puts us in good company. Ahmari today also tweeted an attack on Founding Father Thomas Jefferson:

I presume Ahmari, as a “political Catholic” convert, objects to Jefferson's agnosticism, and believes all the myths about Jefferson, slavery and Sally Hemings. Jefferson was a farmer, not a "slaver", and there's actually no evidence that he ever had sex with any of his slaves.

(Funny thing: Ahmari is an immigrant from Iran, which abolished slavery, under international pressure, only in 1929. Latin American colonies with Catholic royalist governments treated black and Indian slaves far worse than the Virginians did. In the sugar colonies, instead of having “slave quarters” where slaves lived with their families, they imported male slaves, worked them to death, and sent back to Africa for more).

But I must let you know what horrifying things Miller included in private emails about immigration subjects—especially since the $PLC refuses to link to them directly, but linked to versions instead. (But we got traffic anyway, so the  $PLC can suck it):

That’s it. That’s all there is.

But In a weird guilt-by-non-association attack, the SPLC’s Hayden says Miller is talking like—or to put it another way, like any normal person who's studied immigration:

In his emails, Miller uses slang and rhetoric about immigration that would be familiar to people who read white nationalists discussing the “great replacement” conspiracy theory. He refers to demographic changes brought about by immigration as “new America” multiple times in the emails. It’s a phrase VDARE sometimes uses.

That's actually a link to an article of mine: Happy Birthday. Virginia Dare! Will Our Children Share Her Fate In The New America?

But, I regret to say, there's no particular evidence Miller ever read my article, much less linked to it. Hayden is just using us as an example of evil people who use the term "New America."

Of course, this is nuts: many people do use this term—including, for example, anti-white Leftist paranoid Roger Cohen of the New York Times: A Court for a New America, December 3, 2008. (What made it a new, more globalist friendly America in Cohen’s view—the election of Barack Obama.)

Also, Hayden repeats the oft-repeated story of how college student Richard Spencer and college student Stephen Miller imported immigration enthusiast Peter Laufer to debate Editor Peter Brimelow at Duke University in 2007.

Miller and Spencer, while serving together as members of Duke’s Conservative Union, a politics-focused club for students, arranged for Brimelow to debate journalist and University of Oregon professor Peter Laufer in March 2007 on Mexican immigration to the United States.

Laufer told Hatewatch he ate dinner at a local restaurant with Brimelow, Miller and Spencer when he visited Duke. He described the atmosphere between him and the men as collegial despite their ideological differences. Laufer also called the interactions “gross,” given the others’ outspoken anti-immigrant beliefs.

Apparently, Laufer has now decided the interactions were “gross.” But at the time he was happy to keep quiet and collect his speaking fee.

Still, at least the $PLC’s Hayden admits the event was a debate. In 2017, Peter Brimelow had to explain:

This is obviously going to become one of those echo-chambered factoids that constitute Leftist political journalism. I used to ignore this sort of thing, but I've found that mud sticks, so I suppose I should try to insert into the record that (1) I'm not a "white nationalist," as painfully explained for example here; (2) the meeting at Duke was actually not a Klan rally but a debate, that's a D-E-B-A-T-E, between me and irreproachably liberal journalist Peter Laufer (who I see is now a professor of journalism at the University of Oregon).

Why did [The Daily Beast's Tim] Mak and the other Leftist hacks he ripped off eliminate poor Laufer from this world-historic occasion? Why do we call them "The Lying Press"?

Laufer is just crazy on the subject of immigration. In the 2007 debate, as reported by the Duke student paper, he discussed the economic problems that America would suffer if illegals were all gone:

"What does it do to our country in terms of our pocketbooks?" he asked. "We don't know, [but] we know the truth of the film 'A Day Without a Mexican.'" [Immigration authors debate border issues, by Cosette Wong, Duke Chronicle March 28 2007]

Well, as I said at the time, no, we don't. A Day Without A Mexican is a science fiction film made with the explicit purpose of spreading pro-immigration propaganda. That's like saying "We all know the truth of The Day The Earth Stood Still."

Laufer [Email him] was probably unwise to answer Hatewatch’s emails. As the author of  Wetback Nation: The Case for Opening the Mexican-American Border  he’s obviously a candidate for “cancellation” at any time, just for using the word “wetback”. It’s not like he’s going to get any credit for saying “I like wetbacks!”

Bottom line: Stephen Miller’s meeting with Peter Brimelow in 2007, and subsequent two (2) emailed links to would not count as “affinity” for any normal person. Michael Edison Hayden, and his $PLC bosses, simply aren’t normal.

Which is also why it’s weird for Dylan Matthews [Tweet him] to say on Twitter that

Amidst the new Stephen Miller stuff, recall that he and Richard Spencer organized an event at Duke together where they hosted Peter Brimelow, the founder of VDARE, which the McHugh emails suggest remained one of his favorite sites for years [Emphasis added]

Our view: considering that the SPLC had every email exchanged between Katie McHugh and Miller, finding only two links to us suggests that Miller doesn’t read us enough.

Here’s another non-link between Miller and us—“Miller also forwarded multiple links to McHugh on Muslims from Refugee Resettlement Watch, an anti-immigrant, far-right website lauded by VDARE’s Brimelow.”

Hayden can’t show multiple links to us—two is not multiple—but we like Refugee Resettlement Watch, so it’s the same thing.

SPLC enforcer Hayden has 10 headings on its hit piece. Life is too short, for both me and our readers, to refute them all in detail. But here they are, with brief answers below

So once again, there’s no there there—no real connection to us.

Many people do read us who are afraid to acknowledge it.  We know that, because Ross Douthat of the New York Times was embarrassed when he and Reihan Salem were caught ripping off Steve Sailer for their book Grand New Party (See Credit Where Credit Is Due, by Ross Douthat, The Atlantic, July 14, 2008.) That prompted what I called an “ astonishing outpouring of hate in the comments” at the Atlantic’s website,  now viewable only through, which explains why people are afraid to link to us or quote us.

In spite of that, Republican Party Animal author David Cole, now of TakiMag, has written that

During my years as a high-profile (and very establishment) conservative writer and activist, every single National Review, FrontPage Mag, and PJ Media guy I worked with read and appreciated American Renaissance and VDARE…they would just never admit it publicly

The Conservative Media Meltdown, April 21, 2016. Emphasis and links added.

Of course, there are some, who like Ayatollah Sohrab Ahmari, who maintain that we should be condemned and ignored. For example, the blogger Zman reported that when he mentioned to Conservatism Inc figure Jonah Goldberg some years ago, Goldberg turned from “jocular dufus” to “serious scold” saying  “You should not talk about that or any of them. Trust me. Don’t even read it.” [The Battle Cry of the Ruling Class, December 11, 2015]

The fundamental point: the Left, and its Conservatism Inc. sock puppet opposition, are actually afraid of the ideas we represent. And they want to anathematize them.

But our ideas are simply common sense—America should be kept American, immigration laws should be enforced, legal immigration should be reduced  (we prefer a moratorium), et cetera.

The Left is right to be afraid of these ideas, because when Trump ran on them—we’re not saying he got them from us, they’re common sense—he won.

And the “jocular dufuses” and “serious scolds” of Conservatism Inc., like Goldberg and Ahmari, should be ignored—they’re just circling the drain of history.

James Fulford [Email him] is a writer and editor for



Print Friendly and PDF