In a characteristically disingenuous, misrepresentation-festooned posting, the Is That Legal ? blog has admitted what Peter Brimelow suspected: that it was the intervention of the blog’s proprietor Eric Muller of UNC Law School that caused Brad Krantz of Burlington N.C's WZTK-FM to cut short a planned interview and call-in session last June:
…I contacted Brad Krantz, one of the show’s hosts, to ask whether he knew much about Brimelow’s VDARE site and some of its writers. Here’s the text of the email I sent him: Brad Read this stuff, and check out some of the linked material… http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Brimelow “Brimelow is a paleoconservative and maintains that America's culture and way of life is threatened by unrestricted immigration from Latin America and the Third World” It’s all about maintaining white culture. There’s *lots* more if you dig —Eric
Muller advances one main reason for this act of repression: he quotes several writers posted on VDARE .COM . That is it. Apparently the fact that he disagrees with them is enough to give him the right to repress their publisher. The obvious question: if Muller was so offended by Peter Brimelow’s appearance on a local call-in show, why didn’t he pick up the phone and challenge him? Judging from his blog, his immigration views are rather primitive, but no doubt his friend Krantz would have protected "Eric". Or is that beneath the grandeur of UNC Law Professors – unlike secret phone call assassinations?
Fundamentally, though, there is a serious issue of general principle here. Several hundred years ago, basically in England, the tradition grew up of answering political opponents with argument, rather than by force. That is where the traditions imbued in the American Constitution came from (and also Peter Brimelow, apparently to Muller’s xenophobic annoyance). Points further east in Europe and beyond retain to this day the view that force is an adequate argument, and repression a perogative of the powerful. Clearly Eric Muller belongs to this tradition, no doubt imported with his forbears. Defending the pre - eminence of the first tradition in America was a central reason for the founding of VDARE .COM. Tellingly, Muller scatters around his expostulation the familiar smears of “nativist” and “white nationalist”. (Reality check: As Brimelow has pointed out repeatedly, VDARE.COM is not a "white nationalist" site but an immigration reform coalition, including non-whites and purely political nationalists .)
In any case, Muller's own site is highly judeo-centric and much pre-occuped with scoring debating points against the founding culture. But, of course, different rules apply to Professor Muller and his friends. They are allowed to operate ethnically competitive sites. However, there is an easy way for Eric Muller to make amends for his squalid and illiberal act of repression. Let him persuade Brad Krantz to host a debate between himself and Peter Brimelow on these issues. If he dares. Encourage Muller here and here. Ask Krantz why not? (Krantz chose not to reply to any of Peter Brimelow's efforts to find out what happened after last June. He may need encouragement.)