VDARE.COM Progressive Asks: Can Eric Muller Comprehend?
Print Friendly and PDF
Law Professor Eric Muller writes:
VDare.com is a site devoted to a particular approach to immigration reform — an approach that would disfavor immigration from certain nations (where skins are brown) and favor it from others (where skins are white). If this sounds familiar to you, it should: it's just another tired recycling of the nativism that has dogged American history nearly from the start.

It's all about maintaining white culture.

Now, my own writings here on VDARE.COM simply aren't about either of these things. Maybe Muller hasn't read my writings or his analytical abilities are so limited he is incapable of comprehending them.

However, neither is that an accurate characterization of the writings of VDARE.COM writer Michelle Malkin with whom Muller has carried on a substantial feud and made rather strange accusations towards. He lacks the excuse of ignorance in the case of Ms. Malkin's writings because of the depth of his feud with her. There is a basic logical fallacy here. Even if some VDARE.COM contributors like the late Sam Francis and Jared Taylor are "all about maintaining white culture", not all of us necessarily are.

In my own writings, I have, for example, suggested serious consideration an auction of available visas and estimated a current market rate of over $100,000 per visa. If such measures were enacted, I would expect that immigration from wealthy non-white countries like Japan would increase compared to its present level.

If Muller wants to make a case that "It's all about maintaining white culture" he needs to do something more than point to a couple of Wikipedia articles. I'm assuming "It" here refers to Vdare.com—since it would be grammatically incorrect to refer to Sailer and Brimelow that way (and although law professors may be capable of extreme delusion and self-serving logical errors, they generally get grammar drilled into them over time).

I had never heard of Muller before the latest round of controversy. His particular hysteria—and tendency towards selective poor reading comprehension—does seem superficially similar to that of Morris Dees who is linked rather strongly with catering to a wealthy constituency.

The UNC law school needs to be aware though—they are hopefully trying to be more than fund raising scam. The tactic of making a provocative accusation with a poorly thought out case behind it may work well for raising large sums of money. It doesn't necessarily earn your institution a lot of respect over time.

Print Friendly and PDF