Defunct Newspapers Journals TV channels Websites Other Congressional caucuses Economics Gun rights Identity politics Nativist Religion Watchdog groups Youth/student groups Miscellaneous Other Ernest van den Haag (September 15, 1914 – March 21, 2002) was a Dutch-born American sociologist, social critic, and author.

After release, fearing re-imprisonment, van den Haag drifted between European countries in an attempt to evade Italy and Mussolini.

Living in New York, van den Haag worked as a bus boy and sold vegetables; eventually he was able to secure admission to the University at Iowa, where a group of faculty members recognized his intellectual gifts and agreed to pay for his tuition.

His book Punishing Criminals: Concerning a Very Old and Painful Question (1975) developed his reputation on being one of the foremost thinkers and proponents on the death penalty.

In a National Review cover-page article, van den Haag dismissed recent research undermining the notion of innate ethnic differences in intelligence, stating that he believed such differences existed and accounted for "much" of the poorer academic performance of black students, thus necessitating separate schooling.

[4] This article caused controversy among readers of the National Review, several of whom wrote angry letters against the decision to print such "bigotry".

He also expressly defended the practice of fashioning immigration policies in favor of European ethnicity, arguing that "The wish to preserve... the identity of one's nation requires no justification."

[8] On Firing Line, he joined a programme dedicated to the death penalty debate on December 13, 1976, after the Gregg v. Georgia ruling (but weeks before the resumption of executions with Gary Gilmore, who was a subject of the deterrence argument) and was cited in a previous programme with Truman Capote in 1968, regarding an off-cam argument with regard to the efficiency of the punishment, which Capote challenged.

"[10] Van den Haag believed the paramount duty of government is to "provide legal order in which citizens can be secure in their lives, their liberties, and their pursuit of happiness.

Van den Haag believes people look at committing the crime the same way they would view an opportunity; they would weigh the profits versus the punishment.

"[16] The threat of severe punishment diminishes temptation, which van den Haag argued is to be the greatest use of the death penalty, deterrence.

In his book The Death Penalty : A Debate, he argues that "the state must teach that killing anyone deliberately, for whatever reason, is needless and wrong.

Overall, van den Haag directed his argument toward the fact that the death penalty ought only to exist to protect innocent lives.

To sum up his entire argument against his opposition in one quote, van den Haag contends, "I'd rather execute a man convicted of having murdered others than put the lives of innocents at risk.

[22][23] Throughout his life, Ernest van den Haag wrote many books and articles about society, and more specifically about capital punishment.