academiccompositionab
Empowerment Equalizer
SSaragian
Antony Sammeroff
Ann Sterzinger
Rodney
RJ
busterjames
cainusmaxus
Craig FitzGerald
David Heleniak
Caity & Dan Greene
keirmartland
Keith Preston
Bill the Butcher
ljp711
MRDA
Jack Donovan
Rachel Haywire
comrade hermit
Michael
Vince
robertstark2014
Noonan
S E Pearson
Rachel Haywire
Nexus X HumectressFrom the Daily Mail. Whether one’s feelings about this projected demographic future are positive, negative, or indifferent, the question for our readers is this: What are the implications of this projected radical demographic change for our own movement? What does this mean for ideologies like anarcho-pluralism, pan-secessionism, national-anarchism, whatever we are? Is there anything to be learned, good or bad, from the present situation in Nepal?
—————————————————————————————————
Whites in America will be outnumbered by 2050 by rising numbers of ethnic minorities, according to official figures.
Hispanic, black and Asian people accounted for 90 per cent of all births in the U.S. between 2000 and 2010.
In 40 years’ time they will comprise more than half the population due to their higher birth rates and immigration.
In ten states – Mississippi, Georgia, Maryland, Florida, Arizona, Nevada, Texas, California, New Mexico and Hawaii – more than half of children are already non-white.
The figures come from the U.S. Census Bureau, which last year carried out its first survey of America for a decade.
It found that in 2010 whites were still the nation’s largest group, comprising 64 per cent of the population, down from 69 per cent in 2000.
Hispanics went from 13 to 16 per cent and were the second largest group whilst blacks remained stable at around 12 per cent.
The Hispanic population surpassed the 50million mark after adding 15million to their numbers.
‘This is a group that’s young, whose growth is driven increasingly by births and not immigration,’ said D’Vera Cohn, of the Pew Research Center, which has analysed data from the census.
Attack the System
Categories: Uncategorized
“Whether one’s feelings about this projected demographic future are positive, negative, or indifferent”
Are you afraid of being called racist, Keith? If there’s someone who has the moral strength to get rid of the cultural programming from the cultural marxists, then you are that guy. Why do we have to be “indifferent” (or even positive!) to the demise of white people (i.e. euroamericans)? Hate against whites? Endophobia? White Guilt? Jewish-Christian masochism? It seems like the only way to avoid the
totalitarian humanists from labeling a white person as racist is to enjoy the prospective of white ethnocide all over the world. The only way for a white person of not being racist (whatever it may be) is to wish that his/her own people turns into a 5% of the world population, only to eventually get diluted and subsumed in the other 95% by means of demographic substitution and massive race mixing. If you have the slightest objection to that fate then, I guess, you are a racist.
Well, then I’m a racist, I got no choice. And very proud of it indeed. Racist and Proud. So what? What are they going to make me that they haven tried yet? To jail me?
P.S.: please, excuse my english. It’s evident it is not my mothern language.
“Are you afraid of being called racist, Keith?”
Well, even if I were, I would have still gotten used to it by now.
I was just throwing out a general question for the readers. We have all kinds of people who come here, many different ideologies and cultural backgrounds. If you review the full body of my work, you’ll know that I’ve put a great deal of energy into attacking the double standards the totalitarian humanist Left promotes concerning race and a number of other matters.
“If there’s someone who has the moral strength to get rid of the cultural programming from the cultural marxists, then you are that guy.”
Thanks.
If you want to know more about how I approach these kinds of issues watch this video:
I’m all three (positive, negative, AND indifferent) as it depends to the geographic area in America. Those on the left and right are both extraordinarily guilty of lumping the non-white races together as “the minorities.” Racial clashes get even more complex at the urban level.
While my hometown (Montgomery County/Prince George’s County/DC suburbs) didn’t have much strife between the Black and Hispanic communities, (though before I left, some of my fellow co-workers began to complain about the cheap labor brought on by illegal immigration) areas like Los Angeles have erupted into “see X race, shoot them.” Also, in many urban areas, employment of Blacks is frowned upon by those in the Asian/Arab community yet their primary consuming base is African Americans.
Even though I’ve met many Blacks who identify as Africans within the Black radical and academic circles, there is still serious strife between “new” Africans and the indigenous Black community over the laundry list of jobs, access to education, culture, language, etc. These type of situations are beyond comprehension for those adhering to the typical Humanitarian ideology who lump us all together as “people of color.” There are those of the economic left (worker cooperative organizations, local self reliance advocacy groups, etc.) who seem to address the issues at its core who I feel are key to solutions, but the atypical affirmative action agenda just isn’t going to cut it anymore.
The Harvest Institute, a somewhat nationalist African American think tank, has produced some interesting work on these issues despite their really annoying advertisements in their newsletters.
“I’m all three (positive, negative, AND indifferent) as it depends to the geographic area in America.”
I feel the same way. As an anarchist, libertarian socialist, and atheist, obviously I’m not sad to see the old bourgeoisie WASP elite meet its demise, however much I may object to the rising multicultural upper middle class with its totalitarian humanist ideology that is set to replace it. I view that conflict the same way I view the conflict between the aristocracies of the ancien’ regime and the classical bourgeois revolutionaries or the traditional Third World elites and the Marxist revolutionaries who overthrew so many of them in the 20th century: a pox on all their houses.
As I’ve written before, I do think the “far right” is correct that this rising new elite wishes to use mass immigration as a means of consolidating its own position politically, economically, and ideologically, and that the kind of totalitarian humanist political order they’re trying to create does involve “reverse discrimination” or whatever one wishes to call it against whites in a lot of institutional and policy areas, even though such discrimination at present is moderate in nature when compared with things like massacres, mass imprisonment, and full-scale economic dispossession the kind that’s been inflicted on other populations.
But ideologies like white nationalism and left-wing egalitarianism alike seem to me to completely fly in the face of meritocratic individualism. I reject the idea that someone deserves recognition or sympathy simply for unchosen genetic endowments regardless of individual character or behavior, which is what both Left and Right seem to believe.
“These type of situations are beyond comprehension for those adhering to the typical Humanitarian ideology who lump us all together as “people of color.” ”
Right! That’s the problem with both racial nationalists and left-wing “anti-racists” or “multiculturalists.” They assume that all people of the same race have the same interests or that all non-whites are on same side of the fence against whitey and other kinds of absurd generalizations. The present day “culture wars” are mostly a conflict within the white middle class, and it’s as bitter a conflict as anything to do with race. In many societies, religious, economic, ideological or cultural conflict between people of very similar ethnicities is just as much a reality as conflicts between races originating from different continents. As good an example as any is the civil war in the former Yugoslavia in the 90s.
The examples you give of Black/Hispanic conflict in L.A. and of conflict between African immigrants and indigenous American Blacks are perfect examples of where the analysis of both the Left and white nationalists alike goes wrong. Another good illustration is the conflict between different nationalities of Asian immigrants.I think the National-Anarchist and ENR ideas of “tribe” and “communitarianism” are much closer to the reality of how these things actually work. I agree with those who say humans are tribal by nature, but the borders of the “tribe” don’t begin and end at the geographical boundaries of Africa, Europe, and China like old-fashioned racial determinism argues.
Speaking only for myself, I dislike conventional white bread suburbanites much more than any non-white ethnic or racial populations I’ve ever encountered. As a white dude from an upper middle class background, obviously I wouldn’t be comfortable living in an inner-city African-American housing project. But I’d rather live closer to a black ghetto than a Soccer Mom Utopia, and indeed I have for almost a quarter century now. My city is majority black, with a growing Hispanic immigrant population, and it has all the standard urban proplems with crime and poverty associated with cities like Detroit. I live in an ethnically mixed bohemian district with a healthy mixture of students, artist types, blue collar workers, professionals, and homeless people. I much prefer my city to the white bread Republican counties that surround it. I deal with those people regularly in my job and when I’m around them I always think “Thank God my life didn’t turn out like this!”
These kinds of questions are in many ways the foundation of my whole ideological and strategic outlook. I view dying upper class traditional WASP elite as the equivalent of the dying and decadent aristocracies of the ancien’ regime, and I view the rising totalitarian humanist upper middle class as the equivalent of the bourgeois revolutionaries of the 18th and 19th centuries or the Communist revolutionaries of the 20th century. I view ATS and allied tendencies as the equivalent of anti-Jacobin and anti-Marxist anarchist revolutionaries agitating for revolutions against emerging authoritarian leftist regimes. We are Condorcet against their Robespierre, Charlotte Corday against their Marat, Proudhon against their Blanc, Bakunin against their Marx, Kropotkin against their Lenin.
Incidentally, I think the kinds of conflicts we’re discussing here will be the totalitarian humanist’s. Their coalition will fracture when its member groups start turning on each other and the likely triggering effect of this will in part be demographic change brought on by large scale immigration.
“Their coalition willlfracture when its member groups start turning on each other and the likely triggering effect of this will in part be demographic change brought on by large scale immigration.”
Their coalition will last all of 15 years. Hispanics are going to be the new WASPs. Their style of catholicism is old, fundamentalist even, their bishops barely acknowledge the vatican I council, let alone vatican II. Once hispanics are a powerful enough voting block
that they can dispense with any laws they feel negatively effect their community the left is in for one hell of a shock. Because the religious amongst the hispanics will be the new conservative base. The liberals/democrats are not ready for it, their authoritarian multiculturalism has blinded them to the notion that rednecks exist outside of amurika.
As an avid supporter of multiculturalism and reality as theater, I’m looking forward to the next 40 years. People are in for a damn shock.
“Because the religious amongst the hispanics will be the new conservative base. The liberals/democrats are not ready for it, their authoritarian multiculturalism has blinded them to the notion that rednecks exist outside of amurika.”
That’s one of the major disconnects I see on the Left and one of the most puzzling. If there’s one thing the Left values above multiculturalism it’s the sexual revolution. I find it incredible that the Left seems to believe that unlimited immigration from 3rd World societies is compatible with their broader ideas like secular humanism, feminism, gay liberation, transgendered rights, abortion rights, sex education in schools, easy divorce, same-sex marriage, etc. They think the Christian Right or America’s fundamentalist/evangelical subculture is the scourge of the earth but, as you say, they ain’t seen nothing yet when it comes to Islamic fundamentalism or Latin American Catholic traditionalism. If they think American Christian conservatives are homophobic, wait until they see what Ugandans have to say about gay rights. Even the comparatively secular Asian societies are socially conservative in many ways compared to the West and would certainly be considered “sexist” or “homophobic” when compared with many Western countries.
The Christian Right is actually declining as a movement. The evangelical subculture hasn’t shown any growth in 20 years, and the mainline religious denominations have actually lost membership in that time. Socially conservative immigrant populations may well become the “new religious right” at some point in the future.
“As an avid supporter of multiculturalism and reality as theater, I’m looking forward to the next 40 years. People are in for a damn shock.”
Yeah, it’s going to be interesting. I actually think the Left will be dominant for the next few decades, and then start to fracture as its coalition becomes increasingly unstable and as class divisions start to widen.
“I agree with those who say humans are tribal by nature, but the borders of the “tribe” don’t begin and end at the geographical boundaries of Africa, Europe, and China like old-fashioned racial determinism argues.”
Amen! This is my main issue with some of my Black nationalist peers. While I have NO issue, whatsoever, with identifying with Africa and calling ourselves “Africans,” (I even have some Afrocentric beliefs myself) an agenda that demands all Blacks across the country embrace the same ideology is not only unnecessary, but undesirable. Diversity is natural given our individual experiences, (Someone forgot to give that memo to the mainstream left) “revolutionary” does not have to mean completely erasing our indigenous American culture.
I think the dialogue on the Hispanic Question could use a conceptual and terminological upgrade. Contrary to common usage, “Hispanic” is not a racial or ethnic signifier but an umbrella term denoting a wide range of unrelated peoples, the only factor they share being Spanish as their first language and a former Spanish colony as their place of origin. (The misnomer “Latin” and its derivatives should also be jettisoned in regards to this issue, as the only connection these peoples have to that dead langauge is their speaking a modern variant of one that is derived from it; other than that, they have no connection to Greco-Roman civilization whatsoever.)
We need to realize that in discussing “Hispanics” and related issues that we are discussing a non-entity, as this could reder to anything from dirt-poor Mestizos filtering in from Mexico, to middle class Spanish descended Cubans in Florida, to even Latin American models in posh New York and L.A. neighborhoods, none of which have anything to do with each other. As such, I don’t see any of them congealing into a unified demographic with a coherent set of grievances and demands like others discussed.
That said, I find it inexplicable that the Left mistakes the coming demographic transformation as a boon in the making for America’s indigeneous minorities. This kind of apriori assumption ignores the fact that much of the white middle and upper middle classes retain a sense of atavistic guilt and paternalistic responsibility towards blacks and Amerindians, something that is lacking entirely in Third World immigrants. I see the latter two groups remaining minorities, with the newly displaced and socially sinking white minority joining them, all three now contending with a new Third World majority.
Seeing this absolutely destroy the Left will amuse me to pieces, but I worry about my own prospects.
Positive, negative, or indifferent , well I for one am about as concerned about massive immigration as I am about peak oil, global warming, droughts, earthquakes, super storms, epidemics, societal breakdown and a whole host of other things that could happen. As an aside, I am actually in favour of the immigration trends where I live for my own reason. I see this concern about an influx of foreigners in the same vein as conservatives worrying about societal breakdown, that’s why they are always against new freedoms, they worry for example, if drugs were legalized, everyone would turn into crazed addicts and murder each other in an orgy of death and destruction. I say that it really does not matter to me anymore one way or the other. I would say that in the past I was concerned about letting the little liberalism that exists survive, but I have my doubts that it will even if North America was inhabited by only those of northern European descent. The majority of whites in my view if not that much more inherently liberal in their nature than other races and if deprived of the material affluence of modern western society, they would revert to their illiberaism. That would be of course a cause for celebration among many of those in the new right.
On that note, I would make a point responding to what Keith said about the Left and third world cultures in relation to how the left views them despite the fact that the left holds views that are not ones shared by such cultures. I certainly agree with him that there is a certain degree of silliness in seeing these leftists champion these groups which have values so hostile to their own. I would go on, however and point out the reverse position of white nationalists, paleos, and others who hold up the ideal of an all white society while at the same time championing reactionary social values. The thing is that the countries that are the most “Aryan” (Sweden, Norway, Holland) are the most far removed form the sort of conservative values that these people champion. They don’t favour “secular humanism, feminism, gay liberation, transgendered rights, abortion rights, sex education in schools, easy divorce, same-sex marriage, etc.” so perhaps they should favour the influx of immigrants, perhaps in such circumstances whites will rally around their own out of fear and return to their “tribal roots.” Awhile ago a youtube video of Tom Metzger addressing Black Panthers was posted here and described as surreal. I had seen video before, and I did not find it odd at all because at bottom, white nationalists like Metzger share the same authoritarian, bigoted world view that extremist black nationalists do, they really just mirror one another. Btw, I do not feel any kind of affinity with my own race and some sort of hostility to others and it is not (as some idiot paleos seem to think) because I have been brainwashed by the media, the schools etc. that’s their simplistic explanation for anyone that goes against their ideology.
Returning to my feelings about this statistic, Michael said that well the collapse of the left would be amusing, he worried about “[his] own prospects.” Well as I said before, I sure as hell do not. I have no future generations to worry about and unless scientists figure out how to actually cure aging, I’m not sure I want to be around in 2050
Miles,
“This is my main issue with some of my Black nationalist peers. While I have NO issue, whatsoever, with identifying with Africa and calling ourselves “Africans,” (I even have some Afrocentric beliefs myself) an agenda that demands all Blacks across the country embrace the same ideology is not only unnecessary, but undesirable. Diversity is natural given our individual experiences, (Someone forgot to give that memo to the mainstream left) “revolutionary” does not have to mean completely erasing our indigenous American culture.”
That’s the first problem I have with racial nationalist ideologies in general. They tend towards the crude one-dimensional determinism also found in economic determinists like Marxists or orthodox libertarians. Look at how many different variations there are among black and white nationalists alike. What do Marxists like the Republic of New Afrika have in common with the Nation of Islam? What does Christian Identity have in common with Asatru? What do Nazis have in common with constitutionalists? These kinds of irreconcilable differences will exist in any kind of civilization, regardless of its wider cultural, religious, or racial composition. That’s why I believe that a pluralistic anarchism is the best possible means to civil peace and the avoidance of oppression.
Michael,
“We need to realize that in discussing “Hispanics” and related issues that we are discussing a non-entity, as this could reder to anything from dirt-poor Mestizos filtering in from Mexico, to middle class Spanish descended Cubans in Florida, to even Latin American models in posh New York and L.A. neighborhoods, none of which have anything to do with each other. As such, I don’t see any of them congealing into a unified demographic with a coherent set of grievances and demands like others discussed. ”
I agree, of course. As the non-white populations grow and the white populations shrink in North America, I think we’ll see all the same sorts of divisions emerge among non-whites that we see among whites today. They’re already there, just not as obvious in some instances. As Miles pointed out, we’ll see growing divisions between Blacks and Hispanics and Asians and so forth, so far as the broader racial categories are concerned. But we’ll also see a growing class division between elite non-white members of the newly emerging multicultural ruling class and between the growing ranks of poor non-whites whose numbers will be fueled by immigration. We’ll also see all of the usual divisions over issues like religion, gender roles, homosexuality,abortion, cultural values, crime, the respectable vs non-respectable poor, and so many other things.
“This kind of apriori assumption ignores the fact that much of the white middle and upper middle classes retain a sense of atavistic guilt and paternalistic responsibility towards blacks and Amerindians, something that is lacking entirely in Third World immigrants. I see the latter two groups remaining minorities, with the newly displaced and socially sinking white minority joining them, all three now contending with a new Third World majority.”
Well, I think the day where Third World immigrants collectively outnumber the indigenous racial and ethnic groups in North America (blacks, whites, American Indians, traditional Mexican-Americans) is still pretty far off. I think 2050 will be more like Nepal, where there’s still an ethnic group that’s much larger than the others individually, but still doesn’t constitute an actual majority. But I agree that immigrant populations are arguably going to be just as hostile to the traditional minority groups in the U.S. as they will be to whites, if not more so.
Jared,
“I would go on, however and point out the reverse position of white nationalists, paleos, and others who hold up the ideal of an all white society while at the same time championing reactionary social values. The thing is that the countries that are the most “Aryan” (Sweden, Norway, Holland) are the most far removed form the sort of conservative values that these people champion. They don’t favour “secular humanism, feminism, gay liberation, transgendered rights, abortion rights, sex education in schools, easy divorce, same-sex marriage, etc.” so perhaps they should favour the influx of immigrants, perhaps in such circumstances whites will rally around their own out of fear and return to their “tribal roots.”
Touche’. It would be rather ironic that if the white separatist ethno-states in a post-America became bastions of Scandinavian style cultural liberalism.