Hispanic Consciousness, Part I
| AR Articles on Racial Identity |
|---|
| Ethnic Genetic Interests (Feb. 2003) |
| Is a Multiracial Nation Possible? (Feb. 1992) |
| What Makes a Nation: The Case of Japan (Sep. 1991) |
| Search AmRen.com for Racial Identity |
| More news stories on Racial Identity |
Traditionally, when Americans thought of race, they thought of the often painful history of relations between blacks and whites. This view is out of date; the United States now has several racial fault lines rather than just one. The scarcely noticed handful of Hispanics present in the 1950s has become the largest racial minority in the country.
Like blacks, many Hispanics have identities—racial, ethnic, or national—that prevent full or even primary identification as Americans. Immigrants from Mexico, who account for two thirds of all Hispanics, are especially ambivalent and often even hostile towards the United States. It is part of their national culture to see the United States as an imperialist power that humiliated and dismembered Mexico after the Mexican-American War of 1846 to 1848. Many openly preach reconquista or reconquest—at least culturally, and perhaps even politically—of those regions of the American Southwest that were once Mexican.
There are already parts of the United States in which people live in exclusively Spanish-speaking environments, where they have no need to be part of the larger culture. If Hispanic immigration, both legal and illegal, continues at its current pace, these areas will grow, and become increasingly isolated and alien. At the same time, through sheer force of numbers, Hispanics are imposing their language, politics, and cultural preferences on other Americans.
Blacks have been part of the United States for hundreds of years. Brought involuntarily, they have a historic and moral claim on America. Hispanics, whose presence in large numbers is recent and unplanned, do not have the same claims, but this has not prevented them from making similar demands. They have been quick to assume the mantle of victimhood, to attribute poverty or social failure to racism, and to take advantage of preference programs originally established for descendants of slaves. Even Hispanics who have just arrived in this country do not hesitate to accept advantages in the name of “diversity” or “equal opportunity” that are denied to whites.
Hispanics are therefore very much like blacks in their vivid sense of their own group interests, their tendency to see the world in starkly racial/ethnic terms, and their reluctance to adopt the broader American identity whites think necessary for integration and assimilation. This racial/ethnic identity is kept fresh by the continuous arrival of new immigrants. However, even if immigration were to stop tomorrow, there are now enough Hispanics—especially Mexicans—to maintain a particularist, parochial identity indefinitely. In the space of just a few decades our country has established a second group of Americans with many of the most disturbing characteristics of blacks: racially distinct, with an inward-looking identity, suffering disproportionately from poverty, crime, illegitimacy and school failure.
Who are the Hispanics?
In 2005, there were 42.7 million Hispanics in the United States. They made up 14.4 percent of a population that was 66.9 percent white, 12.3 percent black, 4.2 percent Asian, 1.4 percent Pacific Islander, and 0.8 percent American Indian.
A large majority of Hispanics—66 percent—are of Mexican origin. No less than 20 percent of the population of Mexico now lives in the United States, and one out of every seven Mexican workers has migrated here. Many more would like to come: According to a recent survey, almost half of all Mexicans said that they would move to the United States if they had the chance.
The 33 percent of Hispanics who are not from Mexico have mainly the following origins: 17 percent Latin American, nine percent Puerto Rican, and four percent Cuban. The characteristics of these populations are often quite different, with Cuban immigrants generally more economically successful than those from Mexico, Central America, or Puerto Rico.
Between 2000 and 2005, the Hispanic population increased at an annual rate of 3.7 percent, no less than 14 times the growth rate for whites, and more than three times the black rate. This increase was due both to high birthrates and to immigration of about 800,000 Hispanics every year. Much of this immigration was illegal. The best estimates are that Hispanics account for 78 percent—and Mexicans for 56 percent—of the roughly 11 million illegal immigrants in the United States.
When they become US citizens, Hispanics remain emotionally attached to their countries of origin. In a poll taken by the Pew Hispanic Center only a few months after the Sept. 11 attacks, at a time when most Americans were feeling deeply patriotic, only 33 percent of citizens of Hispanic origin considered themselves first or only American. Forty-four percent still described themselves as their original, pre-immigration nationality (Mexican, Salvadoran, etc.), and another 22 percent considered themselves first or only “Latino or Hispanic.” It is likely that U.S. citizens of Mexican origin have an even weaker American identity than other Hispanics because they are surrounded by compatriots and their country of origin is so close. When citizens and non-citizens of Mexican origin are taken together, 55 percent consider themselves Mexican, 25 percent Latino or Hispanic, and only 18 percent American. For non-Hispanics, it is unsettling to learn that that so many fellow Americans do not feel a primary loyalty to the United States.
Most Americans believe that a willingness to learn English is a prerequisite to assimilation and full participation in American life, but this does not appear to be a high priority for many Hispanics. According to a 2006 poll conducted by Investor’s Business Daily, only 19 percent of Hispanics spoke mostly or only English at home. Eighty-one percent spoke only or mostly Spanish. Even Hispanics who are comfortable in both languages maintain a strong preference for Spanish; according to a poll by P.C. Koch, nearly 90 percent of bilingual Hispanics get their news exclusively from Spanish-language sources.
A Yankelovich survey in 2000 found that 69 percent of Hispanics said Spanish was more important to them than it was five years ago. In 1997 that figure was 63 percent. During the same period the percentage of Hispanics who expressed a desire to fit into American society dropped from 72 to 64 percent.
In 2003, 44 percent of Hispanics did not speak and read English well enough to perform routine tasks, up from 35 percent in 1992. English illiteracy therefore increased for Hispanics during the decade, whereas it declined for every other major population group. Fifty-three percent of working-age residents in Los Angeles County have trouble reading street signs or filling out job applications in English.
Just how firmly rooted the Spanish language has become in parts of America was clear when 200 students demonstrated in front of Miami Senior High in Miami, Florida. They were protesting the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT), which is the official state test students must pass to get a high school diploma. Their complaint? They had to take the test in English. “We are a Hispanic-based society,” explained Gerrter Martin, who had failed the test twice. “My dreams are over,” said Jessica Duran, who had also failed. State Rep. Ralph Arza promised to introduce legislation to offer the FCAT in Spanish.
Hispanic resentment should not be surprising. “In Miami there is no pressure to be American,” explained Cuban-born Lisandra Perez, head of the Cuban Research Institute at Florida International University. “Our parents had to hassle with Anglo society, but we don’t; this is our city,” explained one US-born Cuban. In Miami, this attitude is common. “They’re outsiders,” said one successful Hispanic of non-Hispanics. “Here we are members of the power structure,” boasted another. For people like this, a requirement that high school graduates be able to speak English is an alien and incomprehensible imposition.
The sentiment that Hispanics need no longer adjust to the United States—that the United States will adjust to them—is not limited to cities like Miami and Los Angeles where Hispanics have been present for decades. Salt Lake City, Utah, is hardly a traditional Hispanic stronghold, but it saw its Hispanic population increase 138 percent during the 1990s, from 84,597 to 201,559. Early immigrants tried to learn English and American ways but once there were enough Hispanics to create a parallel society, many gave up the effort. As Archie Archuleta, a city employee who works as an administrator for minority affairs explained, “Most of us don’t push for assimilation. We push for accommodation.”
Dan Pena, an American-born Hispanic who is a chef at a restaurant in Chaska, Minnesota, says it is silly to expect Hispanics to assimilate. “When Europeans came here, home was an ocean apart. For Mexicans, it’s a river, just 60 feet wide.” Jose Salinas, another Mexican immigrant to Minnesota agrees: “I maybe want to stay here. But even if I do, I can’t forget my country, my family, my traditions.”
Dominicans, one of the largest immigrant groups in New York City, feel equally ambivalent about assimilation. As Nelson Diaz who was active in Dominican politics in the city explained: “[W]e are always thinking about going back. The first thing everybody does as soon as they make some money here is to buy a house back home and then a car. Dominicans don’t buy houses here because they don’t think they live here.”
“Rich Latinos remain ambivalent toward America just as much as poor ones,” explains Roberto Suro, formerly of the Washington Post and now at the Pew Hispanic Trust. “In fact, wealth may make it even easier to avoid full engagement with the new land.” Mr. Suro explains the consequences of this sense of detachment. He notes that as many Hispanics as blacks rioted in Los Angeles in 1992 after the verdict in the Rodney King beating trial. Why? “To most [Hispanic] people here, this is still a foreign place that belongs to someone else.”
Some Hispanics insist there is really nothing in America to which immigrants could assimilate anyway. David E. Hayes-Bautista, a sociologist at UCLA, explains that the Hispanic experience shows that “being American simply mans buying a house with a mortgage and getting ahead—there is no agreement anymore on culture, only on economics.” Jorge Ramos, anchorman for the Spanish-language television network Univision explains the absence of anything genuinely American in slightly different terms: “I believe that this country’s two main characteristics are its acceptance of immigrants and its tolerance of diversity… That’s what it means to be American.” In other words, what Americans have in common is nothing more than a willingness to have nothing else in common.
This assertion that there is nothing to assimilate to is disingenuous; Hispanics scorn those among their people who assimilate too far. Just as blacks judge each other according to whether they are “black enough,” some Hispanics keep an eye on who is “brown enough.” At one time Linda Chavez was considered as a possible labor secretary in the George W. Bush administration, but came under sharp attack from Hispanics who mocked her as the “Hispanic who doesn’t speak Spanish.”
Nor can a conservative be truly Hispanic. “It’s kind of like if you are black and conservative, there is no way you are really black,” explained Rosemarie Avila, a trustee on the Santa Ana, California, school board. “If you are going to be Latina, you have to be a Democrat. Otherwise you are not truly Latina.” She should know. Other members of the all-Hispanic school board say she is a fake because of her conservative politics.
Hispanics show typical patterns of ethnic nepotism—living among, voting for, and hiring people like themselves. Three Arab employees successfully sued the Azteca chain of Mexican restaurants found in Oregon and Washington state. “The managers at these Azteca establishments made it very clear, by their verbal abuse and physical actions, that they did not want anyone other than those of Hispanic descent working in their restaurants,” explained lawyer Tony Shapiro after the chain settled for an undisclosed sum.
Likewise, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a federal discrimination suit against a Hispanic grocer, Compare Foods, in Charlotte, North Carolina. The store carried a wide range of Hispanic foods, flew Central and South American flags, and greeted shoppers with Hispanic music. The EEOC accused the store of firing long-term workers simply because they were not Hispanic.
Hispanic groups routinely monitor employers, demanding proportionate hiring of fellow Hispanics. Entirely typical was a report by the National Hispanic Leadership Association, an umbrella organization that represents 40 different Hispanic groups, blasting the federal Office of Personnel Management for “failing to promote more government hiring and retention of Hispanic employees.” The report gave the agency a failing grade for its efforts.
As for racial solidarity in housing, a black woman named Aretha Jackson, who worked for the San Fernando Valley Fair Housing Council tracking racial discrimination in apartment rentals, quit her job in disgust, convinced that Hispanic discrimination against blacks was so widespread nothing could be done about it. Sharon Kinlaw, who is with the same organization, pointed out that Hispanic landlords not only kept out non-Hispanics, they often rented only to people from their own country. “You have the Guatemalans versus the Mexicans versus the Salvadorans,” she said. Chancela Al-Mansour, a lawyer with Neighborhood Legal Services of Los Angeles County reported, “I’ve heard people saying, ‘Well, he’s from another state [within] Mexico.’ And the apartment manager only rents to people from the same state in Mexico. Our fair housing laws haven’t even anticipated that.”
Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez of Orange County, California, quickly learned the importance of Hispanic solidarity. When she campaigned under her married name of Brixey, she lost a bid for a seat on the Anaheim City Council. She found that her maiden name of Sanchez has a much better resonance among the voters she needs to reach.
Like blacks, Hispanics have set up a number of organizations to advance specifically Hispanic interests. The oldest is the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), founded in 1929 in Corpus Christi, Texas. As the word “citizen” in its name suggests, it was originally open only to US citizens, and promoted assimilation and patriotism, stressing that Mexican-Americans were American, not Mexican. It supported President Eisenhower’s “Operation Wetback,” which deported one million illegal aliens back to Mexico. LULAC has since changed dramatically. Membership is now open to illegal aliens. It wants Hispanics to speak Spanish, and fights recognition of the central role of English. It supports preferences for Hispanics in hiring, contracting, and college-admissions, and its attitude toward immigration is summed up in the words of a former director Jose Velez: the Border Patrol is “the enemy of my people and always will be.” Needless to say, “his people,” are not the American people.
One of the reasons LULAC stopped pushing for assimilation is that it had to compete with more radical Hispanic organizations that were robbing it of support. The Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MAL DEF), set up in 1968 by break-away LULAC members, was modeled on the NAACP-Legal Defense Fund. It has litigated in support of social benefits for illegal aliens, for affirmative action for Hispanics, and against border control, but it appears to have larger aspirations. One of its first executives was Mario Obledo, who has also served as California secretary of health and welfare. In an interview on radio station KIEV in Los Angeles on June 17, 1998, he warned listeners: “We’re going to take over all the political institutions of California. California is going to be a Hispanic state and anyone who doesn’t like it should leave. If they [whites] don’t like Mexicans, they ought to go back to Europe.” That same year, President Bill Clinton awarded Mr. Obledo the Medal of Freedom.
The third major national Hispanic organization, also founded in 1968, has the most explicit name: National Council of La Raza (NCLA). La raza means “the race” in Spanish. Hispanic activists often use this term for Hispanics as a group, just as blacks call other blacks “brothers.” Like the other groups, NCLA promotes official recognition of Spanish, increased immigration, preferences for Hispanics, and amnesty for illegal immigrants.
La Raza was delighted when Alberto Gonzalez was appointed the nation’s first Hispanic attorney general, and held a reception for him in 2005. Janet Murguia, former executive vice chancellor for university relations at the University of Kansas, and president and CEO of La Raza, chaired the event, during which she announced, “We are going to put our people [Hispanics] first.”
Hispanics feel the demographic wind in their sails, and routinely boast about their increasing power. They take it for granted that it is only a matter of time before they push aside the old “Anglo” power structure.
Professor Jos” Angel Gutierrez of the University of Texas explained his views to a Hispanic audience in 1995: “We have an aging white America. They are not making babies. They are dying. It’s a matter of time. The explosion is in our population. You must believe that you are entitled to govern… Se estan cagando cabrones de miedo! (They [whites] are sh****** in their pants with fear.) I love it!” In 2004, at a Latino Civil Rights Summit, he added, “We are the future of America. Unlike any prior generation, we now have a critical mass. We’re going to Latinize this country.”
Mike Hernandez of the Los Angeles City Council, echoed the same sentiments in1996: “Somos Mexicanos (we are Mexicans)! Mexico, some of us say, is the country this land used to belong to! . . . We are the future, we will lead the Western hemisphere!”
Armando Navarro, a professor at the University of California at Riverside, made a similar boast in1995: “[T]ime is on our side, as one people as one nation within a nation as the community that we are, the Chicano/Latino community of this nation. What that means is a transfer of power. It means control.”
“We are everywhere, and there is no occupation or activity in this country that escapes our influence,” says Univision anchorman Jorge Ramos. “This century is ours.” Aida Alvarez, who was head of the Small Business Administration for President Bill Clinton, campaigned for Al Gore against George Bush in 1999, proclaiming that “the 21st century will be a Latino century, no doubt about it.” “The long-anticipated Latino majority has arrived,” says David Hayes-Bautista, director of UCLA’s Center for the Study of Latino Health and Culture. “They [Hispanics] will be defining the American dream.”
What do Hispanics means when they talk about transfer of power, of the century belonging to them? Gloria Molina, Los Angeles County Supervisor, explained: “[W]e are politicizing every single one of those new [Hispanic] citizens that are becoming citizens of this country. . . . And our vote is going to be important. But I gotta tell you that a lot of people are saying, ‘I’m going to go out there and vote because I want to pay them back.’”
It is jarring for whites to learn that immigrant groups may want “payback” from America.
Hispanics in power are not likely to “celebrate diversity” the way whites are encouraged to do. John Fernandez is a teacher at Roosevelt High School in Los Angeles and spokesman for the Coalition for Chicano and Chicana Studies. He wants the staff and the curriculum to reflect the new Hispanic majority and nothing else: “Under the guise of diversity comes a disempowerment of the Latino community. I don’t see how people unfamiliar with our language and culture and customs can deal with our problems.” His conclusion: “Educating for diversity is a crock.”
Behind this increasing talk of power and control is the indisputable fact that the Hispanic population is growing rapidly, both in absolute terms and as a percentage of the population. Hispanics see sustained mass immigration as the key to eventual dominance, and many therefore fight desperately against any measure to control even illegal immigration.
These sentiments were clearly on display in the spring of 2006. In response to immigration-control measures voted in the US House of Representatives but rejected in the Senate, hundreds of thousands of demonstrators thronged the streets of American cities, demanding amnesty for illegal immigrants, and an end to border controls. A massive, multi-city demonstration on May 1 was dubbed “A Day Without Immigrants,” in which illegal workers were to walk off their jobs, proving by their absence how vital they are. Despite appeals from organizers that they refrain from doing so, many demonstrators carried Mexican or other Latin American flags. Tens of thousands of demonstrators were, themselves, in the country illegally, leading some observers to wonder whether there had ever been a precedent for open, mass demonstration by law-breakers against the laws they have themselves broken.
Large numbers of Hispanics believe that the United States simply does not have the right to control its southern border, and that it is illegitimate even to try. Beginning in 2000, listeners to KROM, the leading Spanish-language radio station in San Antonio, Texas, began calling in to report where they had seen Border Patrol activity. The on-air hosts then broadcast the information so illegal immigrants and border-crossers could avoid those areas. They called agents limones verdes (green limes), because of their olive-green uniforms and the green stripe on their vehicles. Spanish-language stations in other cities have begun doing the same thing.
Even Hispanics whom one would expect to respect the law take the same position. Congressman Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.), for example, does not like the word “amnesty” to describe legalization of illegal immigrants: “[T]here’s an implication that somehow you did something wrong and you need to be forgiven.” His seems to think that it is the border that is illegal, not crossing it without permission.
American cities with large Hispanic populations commonly refuse to cooperate with federal immigration authorities. In 2006, for example, the predominantly Hispanic Los Angeles suburb of Maywood passed a unanimous resolution to prohibit its police from working with immigration authorities, and rejecting in advance any future federal law that might require such cooperation.
What perhaps best reveals the racial element of Hispanic activism, however, is the reaction to grassroots efforts to stop illegal immigration. The Minuteman Project was founded in 2004 by Californian Jim Gilchrist to help stop illegal border-crossing. In 2005, it gained national attention with “citizens’ border patrols,” which camped out at the border to report illegals. The Minutemen, as they called themselves, did not oppose legal immigrants—who are overwhelmingly non-white—and denounced racism. Their sole aim was to enforce current immigration laws, but Hispanic opponents invariably called them “racist.” The League of United Latin American Citizens, for example, defined the Minutemen on their web site as “racists, cowards, un-Americans (sic), vigilantes, domestic terrorists.”
Juan Maldonado, the Democratic Party Chairman of Hidalgo County, Texas, speaks in equally intemperate terms: “[T]he Minutemen are the epitome of hate, fear and ignorance. We are unified to stop this racist movement from entering our region.”
In October 2006, demonstrators rushed the stage and prevented founder Jim Gilchrist from speaking at Columbia University. They shouted down a black spokesman for the movement, Marvin Stewart, calling him a “black white supremacist.” As police began escorting people out of the auditorium, indicating that the event had been canceled, they began chanting “Si, se pudo. Si, se pudo. (Yes, we could.)”
Hispanics see their interests in openly racial terms, and think of their growing numbers and influence as a triumph for their race. This is why they call a racially neutral group like the Minutemen “racists” and “white supremacists.” This language reveals their own racial/ethnic chauvinism, not that of people who oppose illegal immigration.
The same reflexive racialism was behind a 2006 confrontation at Washington State University between John Streamas, a Hispanic assistant professor of comparative ethnic studies, and a white student named Dan Ryder. The two argued about illegal immigration, and Prof. Steamas called Mr. Ryder a “white shit-bag.” Mr. Ryder complained that someone who teaches in a department that stresses tolerance and diversity should not use such language. Prof. Streams was unapologetic, saying “I don’t care about the hurt feelings of one white person. The feelings of one little hurt white boy who’s got all his white-skinned privilege are nothing. . . .” Prof. Steamas clearly saw an argument about immigration in racial terms.
Some local authorities are desperate to do something about the overcrowding, loitering, and drain on social services often associated with an influx of illegal immigrants. Predictably, Hispanics attack such measures as “racism.” Hazleton, Pennsylvania, was among the first towns to pass an ordinance that would fine landlords or employers who rent to or hire illegal immigrants. Anna Arias, a Hispanic who served from 2003 to 2005 on the Pennsylvania Governor’s Advisory Commission on Latino Affairs, warned that the ordinance would make Hazleton “the first Nazi city in the country.” When other cities have debated similar ordinances, council meetings have been swamped with Hispanic activists making similar charges.
Many Hispanic voters, therefore, support candidates strictly on the basis of their position on Hispanic immigration. Many vote Democratic for other reasons as well, but some who would ordinarily support Republicans have threatened to abandon the party if it takes a stand against illegal immigration. Hispanic pastors have traditionally supported the GOP because of its position on abortion and same-sex marriage, but ethnic identity comes first. Rev. Danny de Leon is pastor of Templo Calvario in Santa Ana, considered the biggest bilingual Hispanic church in America. “A lot of people are saying, ‘Forget being a Republican. I want to go to the Democratic Party,’” he explained. “It’s a shame that one issue [immigration] has divided many of us that have been in the Republican Party for a long time.”
Pastor Luciano Padilla, Jr. of the Bay Ridge Christian Center in Brooklyn used to take the Republican position on social issues, but turned against Republicans when they began to oppose illegal immigration and amnesty. “We will have to look at where we put our allegiance in the future,” he explained. Rev. Luis Cortes, Jr. is a Republican who founded the annual National Hispanic Prayer Breakfast that featured President George Bush every year from 2002 to 2006. His Philadelphia-based Esperanza USA claimed a national affiliate network of more than 10,000 churches. He, too, reconsidered his support for Republicans: “If voting is about personal interest, how are Hispanics to vote? They will vote against those guys [who oppose illegal immigration],” he said. The Republicans may be right about everything else, but what matters most to these men is the racial interest they have in bringing more people like themselves into the country.
Mexico and American Hispanics
The 30 million American residents of Mexican origin show considerable ambiguity about the United States. It will be recalled that according to the Pew Hispanic Center, only 18 percent think of themselves first and foremost as American. The rest show in a variety of ways where their loyalties lie.
The most obvious and widespread way is by sending money outside the country. In 2005, American Hispanics sent an estimated $20 billion to Mexico, making immigrant remittances the second largest source of foreign exchange for Mexico, after oil imports and ahead of tourism. These remittances are so important to the economy that former Mexican president Vicente Fox called Mexicans living in the United States “national heroes.” In 2005, immigrants sent $12 billion to Central America and $22 billion to other South American countries, which means that immigrants sent approximately $55 billion out of the US economy.
A lot of this money goes straight to Mexican governments at various levels. In 2004, there were an estimated 500 Mexican federations or mutual aid societies in the United States that raised money for Mexican home towns or home states. That year, they helped fund 1,435 public works projects in 300 cities and towns. These included installing street lights, paving dirt roads, putting in sewers.
For states like Zacatecas that send a lot of workers to the United States, these citizen groups are a vital source of revenue. When the officers of the Federation of Zacatecas Clubs in North Texas were sworn in in 1997, Zacatecas Lt. Governor Jose Manual Maldonado Romero was on hand to encourage contributions. “You may be here, but your hearts, your blood, part of your spirit is over there with us,” he said.
Seventy-six percent of the population of Santa Ana, California, is Hispanic, and Mexican consul Luis Miguel Ortiz Haro encourages people from all parts of Mexico to form associations to send money home. In 2006, there were associations for at least the states of Michoacan, Sinaloa, and Nayarit. As Nayarit native Dely Delegado explained during a festival that attracted the state’s governor: “It was like Nayarit was here. We saw our people and our governor. They even had dancers doing the estampa, and you can’t find that in another state.”
Many Mexicans send more money home to Mexico than they spend in the United States. As John Herrara of the Latino Community Credit Union, which has five branches in North Carolina, explains, “[T]hese working-class folks are sending real money back home.”
These working-class Hispanics also happen to be the ethnic group least likely to have medical insurance, and to require treatment at public expense. Thirty-three percent of Hispanics are uninsured, vs. 11 percent of whites and 20 percent of blacks. The majority of immigrants from Mexico, Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala lack medical insurance.
Many Americans question the priorities of people who regularly send money outside the United States rather than spend it here. They question the morals of people who then throw themselves on public charity when they go to the hospital. Curiously, the Federal Reserve Bank has established Directo a Mexico, a program in cooperation with the Mexican central bank, to make it easier and cheaper for Mexicans to send money home, regardless of their legal status.
Mexicans show their deepest loyalties in other ways. Immigrants from other countries naturalize after an average of seven years of eligibility, but until recently, Mexicans waited an average of 21 years before renouncing Mexico and becoming American. “For many Mexican natives, it was like you’re giving up your life, your heritage, if you apply to become an American,” said Leonel Castillo, a federal commissioner of immigration and naturalization under President Jimmy Carter.
In 1998, however, Mexico eased the pain, and permitted its citizens to retain Mexican nationality even if they naturalize. Under the new regulations, Mexicans who had already lost their citizenship by naturalizing even had the right to reclaim it by applying at a Mexican consulate. One who took immediate advantage of this offer was 59-year-old Magdalena Flores Gonzalez. She had come to America 33 years earlier, had four children in the United States, and became a citizen in 1992. “We were born in Mexico,” she said, gesturing to others who were in line at the consulate to get their citizenship back. “This is all about going back to a reality, the reality that we are Mexicans.” Ericka Abraham Rodriguez felt the same way. For her, naturalization in 1991 was a betrayal. “When I gave up Mexican nationality, I felt like a lost person. You lose part of your roots, part of your history.” She, too, was glad to become Mexican again in law as well as spirit.
By 2006 nearly 100,000 US citizens had reclaimed Mexican nationality, in a gesture many would think gives the lie to their oath of naturalization, in which they swore “absolutely and entirely [to] renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state or sovereignty.” Since 1998, the vast majority of Mexicans who naturalized also retained Mexican citizenship, which suggests that their first act as an American citizen was perjury.
Spanish-language media encourage Hispanics to become US citizens—but not really become American. Early in 2007, newspapers and television joined church groups and Hispanic activists in a campaign called Ya Es Hora. Ciudadania! (It’s time. Citizenship!) La Opinion, a Los Angeles newspaper, published full-page advertisements explaining how to apply for citizenship, and the Spanish-language network Univision’s KMEX television station in Los Angeles promoted citizenship workshops extensively on the air. A popular radio personality named Eddie Sotelo ran a call-in contest called “Who Wants to be a Citizen?” in which listeners could win prizes by answering questions from the citizenship exam: What are the three branches of the U.S. government? Who signs bills into law? What is the Fourth of July? Legal resident William Ramirez explained to a reporter why he wanted to become a citizen: “I can do better for my people. I can help with my vote.”
In January 2006, Mexican pop singer and actress Thalia (her real name is Ariadna Thalia Sodi) became a naturalized American but reassured her Mexican fans that she didn’t really mean it. Speaking in Spanish, she explained: “This morning I acquired United States citizenship. Nevertheless, under the laws of my country, Mexico, I can also have Mexican citizenship. . . . Just like some of my Latino friends such as Salma Hayek, who is just as Mexican as I, and Gloria and Emilio Estefan, among others, I feel that this step will give me the opportunity to contribute to and support even more the Latin community in the United States. I am of Mexican nationality, and I will always be a proud Mexican in heart and soul.”
There are many like her, who remain Mexican in heart and soul, and some have surprising last names. George P. Bush, nephew of President George W. Bush is only half Mexican—his father, Florida governor Jeb Bush, married a Mexican-born woman—but when he campaigned for his uncle in 2000 he sounded altogether Hispanic. He appeared in a television ad in which he said, in fluent Spanish, “I’m a young Latino in the United States and very proud of my bloodline. I have an uncle that is running for president because he believes in the same thing: opportunity for everyone, for every Latino.”
At a Republican rally he again explained in Spanish that his mother had instilled in him the values of Cesar Chavez, who organized Mexican farm workers. “She told me we have to fight for our race, we have to find the leaders who represent us,” he said. About his uncle the candidate, he said, “This is a president who represents the diversity of our society, who we can count on to change the Republican Party to represent our views.” Needless to say, “our race” was la raza, and “our” views were those of Hispanics.
George P. Bush does not have dual citizenship—not yet, anyway—but some of those who do take what some might consider liberties. In 2003, four Americans living in the United States ran for at-large seats in the Mexican Congress. On July 6, Manuel de la Cruz of Norwalk, California, became the first American citizen to win a seat in the Congreso de la Union. The next year, 2004, he was elected to the legislature of the Mexican state of Zacatecas. When he was naturalized 33 years before that, the Los Angeles resident took the oath of allegiance. Each time he took his seat in a Mexican legislature, Mr. de la Cruz swore an oath of allegiance to Mexico.
In the 2003 elections Jose Jacques Medina of Maywood, California, lost by just a few votes. Mr. Medina, who fled to the US in the 1970s because of alleged “political crimes,” said that if he had won a seat he would keep his home in Maywood. “I am Mexican,” he explained, “but I will always live in California, fighting for the emigrant Mexicans who live here.” Both he and Mr. de la Cruz favored giving Mexicans in the United States formal representation in the Mexican congress. After all, they argued, 20 percent of the country lives in el norte, and they need official representatives.
Because so many Mexicans living in the United States can vote in Mexican elections, politicians routinely cross the border to campaign. There was considerable discussion about making the United States a formal voting district for the presidential election in 2006, but Mexican Foreign Relations Secretary Luis Ernesto Derbez opposed the idea. He was not worried that Americans would be insulted if their country were treated like a Mexican province. He was afraid American authorities might use Mexican election day to identify and catch illegal immigrants who turned out to vote.
Other Mexicans show their loyalties in more visceral ways. On Feb. 15, 1998, the US and Mexican national soccer teams met at the Los Angeles Coliseum. The largely Hispanic crowd was overwhelmingly pro-Mexican. There were boos and catcalls during the National Anthem, and Hispanics threw beer and trash at the American players before and after the match. Anyone in the stands who supported the American team was hooted at, and some were punched or spat on. Hispanics sprayed beer and soda on a Mexican-American man who held a small American flag. The game could have been played in any American city with a large Hispanic population; the Mexican team would have had the home-field advantage.
In another demonstration of loyalty, Hispanic legislators pushed through a bill in 2000 establishing Cesar Chavez Day as a state holiday in California. In 2001, the City Council of Dallas, Texas, nearly did away with Presidents Day to make room for Cesar Chavez Day, but in the end added the farm labor organizer’s name to Labor Day. Likewise in 2001, Hispanic legislators introduced a bill in the New Mexico legislature that would have officially changed the state’s name to Nuevo Mexico. When the bill was defeated in committee, sponsor Miguel Garcia said “covert racism” may explain the defeat. Congressman Joe Baca of California and other Hispanic congressmen have regularly introduced bills in the House that would make the Mexican holiday Cinco de Mayo an American national holiday. These bills have gone nowhere—so far.
Perhaps the quaintest sign of Mexican loyalty is the inextinguishable desire to go home some day, even if it’s in a box. When an illegal immigrant dies in the United States, their families nearly always manage to have the body shipped home, but even the majority of naturalized US citizens report that they want their final resting place to be Mexico. In 2002, more than 1,200 corpses left for Mexico from Los Angeles airport alone, despite the $1,500 fee funeral homes charged for shipping a body. As one Mexican farmer explained, emigrants “don’t want to lose their identity as a Mexican. What they want is to find a way back to be here, even if they come back dead.”
Part II will appear next Friday.
(Posted on November 9, 2007)
Comments
If Mexico is a great country, stay there. If the US is a great country now but you intend to change it, it’s not the same country anymore,it’s Mexico. In that case the free lunch inevitably stops. Why can’t you change the country you live in?
Posted by at 6:53 PM on November 9
I live in South Texas, aka Mexico Del Norte. I didn’t know Mexicans were devoted to anything, much less loyal.
I live in a trashy area with trashy people who always have a handout for something.
Posted by jdavis at 6:55 PM on November 9
God help us against this scourge, and the associated destruction of our country.
Posted by at 6:56 PM on November 9
What a depressing article…
Posted by at 6:57 PM on November 9
Mike Hernandez of the Los Angeles City Council, echoed the same sentiments in 1996: “Somos Mexicanos (we are Mexicans)! Mexico, some of us say, is the country this land used to belong to! … We are the future, we will lead the Western hemisphere!”
He didn’t finish the sentence. It should end “into a trash pile!”
Just go to Mexico and see.
Posted by Jeremy Douglas at 8:10 PM on November 9
“I believe that this country’s two main characteristics are its acceptance of immigrants and its tolerance of diversity… That’s what it means to be American.” In other words, what Americans have in common is nothing more than a willingness to have nothing else in common.
Best line of the whole article. Jared Taylor has a knack for zeroing in on the absurdities of society, distilling them down to their essence, and revealing just exactly why they’re so absurd.
I realized that Hispanics were different as a kid when a Hispanic boy indicated that he was not white and in fact indicating that he considered it “fighting words” to be called that—in other words, declaring a bald threat to anyone who erred in the wrong way.
Posted by Tim in Indiana at 8:21 PM on November 9
That settles it….I will vote REPUBLICAN…ALL THE WAY!!
Posted by lydia at 8:38 PM on November 9
We Whites need to adopt a racial conciousness similar to the one stated here.
Posted by at 9:36 PM on November 9
Mexican migration, legal or illegal, has always worried me. Mexico is emotionally and culturally very hostile to the United States. Mexico has never reconciled itself to the 1848 war and it’s boundary adjustments. Mexicans harbour irredentist views towards the southwest. Mexicans, unlike all other ethnic groups, migrate to a part of the U.S. contiguous to their national country. What the U.S. needs is to stop all illegal immigration, curb legal immigration, pressure the corrupt Mexican elites to make the political and economic reforms that Mexicans must have for it’s ordinary citizens to have a better life and introduce a U.S. version of Quebec’s Bill 101. It’s either this or eventually face the very real prospect of having a Hispanic Quebec on your hands.
Posted by at 11:44 PM on November 9
I don’t know yet, if I agree with the article, because I went to school long ago with many Mexicans who seemed not to care about Mexico one bit. Except that they never wanted to go back there. But the millions who have come here in the last, oh maybe thrity years or so, has me wondering if the article by Mr.Taylor isn’t right on afterall.
Posted by Bobby at 12:24 AM on November 10
Mr. Taylor,
This is an outstanding article.
I just want you to know that we paleoconservatives take our hats off to the fine job you’ve done at attempting to preserve the white race.
Posted by Paleoconservative in TN at 12:32 AM on November 10
Ron Paul 2008!
A smaller federal government will give whites more breathing room to develop a racial consciousness.
Posted by at 12:33 AM on November 10
An excellent summary, Jared Taylor.
What must be clear to anyone who reads this article is what we can expect in the future from the invaders. There is no place to run and no place to hide. We cannot ignore them and they certainly will not ignore us. If we survive as a nation, it will only be because we have prevailed. If we prevail, it will only be because we have recognized the threat and acted in time to defeat it before it grew too large to handle. Either we stay here alive, or we stay here dead. That is really how simple it is, my good friends.
I do not believe in a trembling defense, digging our own graves and waiting to be overrun by the invader. If we prevail, it will be because we seek out the enemy and close with him. Make the enemy try to defend, stay on the move, and don’t allow him any sleep or rest.
They are not so numerous, nor are they so clever, that they have already won in this country. If they thought so, they would stop begging and start taking what they want. Do not wait for the enemy to throw the first punch. That is much too expensive. Do not allow him to pick the time and the place. Make plans to win and act with dispatch. Separate in your mind what is real and what is an illusion.
Posted by Don Reynolds at 12:43 AM on November 10
Dual citizenship denies allegiance to USA. There is NO loyalty to USA when there is dual citizenship. Dual citizenship needs to be repealed away. They are only here to colonize our country…..
I agree that racial consciousness of whites needs to be organized because obviously other racial groups are determined to continue to hate whites and do what ever they can get away with upon whites. I see the Mex/Hispanic crowd everyday at work and no other immigrants are as distainful and hateful towards me than they are. It hurts me to know the USA Federal government has aided their presence and taken my tax money to help them have babies,healthcare, better jobs/education preferences etc, etc. etc. Law, character, & heritage/honor seem not to matter Entropy and Travesty V
Posted by Vickie at 12:53 AM on November 10
I think Mike Hernandez, if I am not mistaken, was the clown who just couldn’t stop watching porn, while in his office in the Los Angeles City hall building. I could be mistaken but I believe it was a guy called Mike Hernandez. Can anyone verify it?
Posted by Bobby at 12:59 AM on November 10
As much as you hate American Blacks for their ignorance, obsessiveness with racial conscience, tedency to boast about whatever little contributions (in your eyes) that they’ve given to this great country, the fact remains, they ARE American.
All they’ve wanted to do (at least in my eyes initially) was integrate. Whatever the problems were as a result to LBJ’s handouts, you had an AMERICAN society. While blacks were angry for “past atrocities”, they simply wanted to be American.
Latinos on the other hand, stick together regardless of color when they’re here; something that could not happen in this country. What’s going to happen? The Latinos are going to keep growing in numbers and change the culture of this country while the American Blacks AND Whites die out.
TOLD YOU SO! As much as you hate us blacks, at least we ALL WERE AMERICAN, took pride in being so and hated each other.
Posted by TOLD YOU SO!! at 8:37 AM on November 10
I worked with a man for a few years that had moved from Mexico when he was 8 years old. He had graduated from a local High School, went to college and attained a degree, served time in the United States Army and married an American woman had two children and then became an American citizen. Yet he stated catagorically that his first loyalty was to Mexico and that in any kind of dispute at all ; it was always Mexico first.
If we ever have any sort of armed conflict with Mexico; there will be approximately 20,000,000 Mexicans here to deal with at the same time we’re dealing with the country.
Posted by at 3:29 PM on November 10
TOLD YOU SO:
You make an interesting point. It is worth noting however about 14% of blacks came to the USA following the 1965 immigration changes.
Posted by at 8:32 PM on November 10
Our nation is done. Mexico is a failure not because of geography, but because it is filled with mexicans. Their character and culture is what ruined the nation and will, undoubtedly, ruin ours. Whites have lost their identity through a decades long onslaught of political correctness and socialistic ideas. Since we sit by and allow our politicians both republicans and democrats sell us out for a few dollars, we deserve what we are getting.
It was a nice experiment while it lasted. Unfortunately, there is no place left on the planet where it is safe to be a white. Europe, our homeland, is overrun by muslims. So I guess we will go quitely into the night. Maybe the blacks and mexicans will not rape and murder all of us in our sleep when they reach majority.
Posted by johannbraun at 9:25 PM on November 10
I think it useful to put the situation into a larger context. What the Hispanics are doing with the U.S. is what many other groups are doing, such as Indians, Pakistanis, Vietnamese, Koreans, Arabs, Africans (imported and domestic). What are they doing? They are colonizing the U.S., just as Europeans colonized the western hemisphere and much of the world in the 16th through 20th centuries. Non-Europeans are also colonizing Europe itself.
The question in my mind is why did this happen. The Western world was not defeated in military, economic, or geopolitical contests, yet it is surrendering its precious territory. Not just a few Western nations, but all of them. So it is not an isolated abberation.
Posted by at 9:26 PM on November 10
“TOLD YOU SO! As much as you hate us blacks, at least we ALL WERE AMERICAN, took pride in being so and hated each other.”
President Fox wasn’t just talking out of his behind when he said that Mexicans were doing jobs that lazy blacks won’t do. The blame rests on your own people’s shoulders for hispanics being here in the first place. I don’t want these Mexicans here either, but if I’m forced to choose between one or the other, it would have to be hispanics. I think alot of America as well as the government has come to the same conclusion. I used to live in the Phoenix area at one time and I wasn’t as uncomfortable walking into an area with a large hispanic population than one with large black one (and I’m from the South!). Maybe they’re not patriotic but blacks are waging a war against us and apparently these people are the solution.
Posted by Al at 9:47 PM on November 10
I am one of those American citizens living in Arizona who is eagerly awaiting the first of next year when the “employer sanctions” law goes into effect, and who is already relishing the news stories about illegal aliens “self-deporting” to Mexico because they are fearful that the new law will make it less comfortable to continue their job-stealing, welfare-mooching, lawless presence in Arizona. Adios illegals!
Posted by at 3:44 AM on November 11
“Mario Obledo, who has also served as California secretary of health and welfare. In an interview on radio station KIEV in Los Angeles on June 17, 1998, he warned listeners: “We’re going to take over all the political institutions of California. California is going to be a Hispanic state and anyone who doesn’t like it should leave. If they [whites] don’t like Mexicans, they ought to go back to Europe.” That same year, President Bill Clinton awarded Mr. Obledo the Medal of Freedom.”
Mr. Obledo’s words sure make me fighting mad (and I don’t even much like California). But I’m an old guy—I don’t know if young whites would feel the same way.
Back to Europe? Maybe for Mr. Obledo himself, in a Solomonic solution: ship his Spanish half back to Europe, and his indigenous half back to Mexico.
May Mr. Obledo’s dreams fulfill the saying: California is where dreams go to die.
Posted by H. Dumpty at 5:14 AM on November 11
“…I think Mike Hernandez, if I am not mistaken, was the clown who just couldn’t stop watching porn, while in his office in the Los Angeles City hall building. I could be mistaken but I believe it was a guy called Mike Hernandez. Can anyone verify it?…”
Posted by Bobby at 12:59 AM on November 10
I don’t recall anything about porn (remember if you’re a non-White in LA, you can DO NO WRONG according to the excuse-making LA Times and every local network affiliate) although given what else this clown did, I wouldn’t be surprised.
Even snorting cocaine off of a desk in City Hall and in a tax-payer funded city-owned car wasn’t enough to get more than a ho-hum from the LA Times.
Mike Hernandez was a boob, totally un-fit for any political office (therefore perfectly suited for political office in the increasingly unlawful, surreal hell-hole of LA, as is the current mayor, a low g-load puppet).
From Wikipedia (which they got right, BTW):
”..Mike Hernández was a Los Angeles, California City Councilman. In 1997 Hernandez was arrested and pleaded guilty to purchasing and possessing cocaine. Because he struck a plea agreement whereby he agreed to seek treatment, the arrest was not in his record, and he was not required to resign his seat [1]. An effort to recall him failed, and he served out his term until 2001…”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Hernandez
From The Free Library:
”.. officers found cocaine residue on the councilman’s desk and marijuana in a candy box in Hernandez’s office at City Hall…”
“…he returned to work, confessing that he had sometimes attended council meetings high on cocaine to counter the effects of a quart-a-night tequila addiction. On Monday, he pleaded guilty to a single felony count..”
”.. In his city-owned car, a tan Chevrolet Blazer, officers reported recovering a red canvas bag with a plastic package of marijuana..”
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.htm
res=9B02E2D81231F93AA15753C1A961958260
And for speaking out, two other LA Council members received this rebuke:
”..I finally decided that I just couldn’t, in my own conscience, stay silent any longer, ’ (Councilwoman) Chick said in a telephone interview today. ‘To refuse to speak out, to refuse to give my opinion publicly, to me was giving a very incorrect and damaging impression that I condone what he had done’…”
But Ms. Chick and Mr. Feuer drew an angry denunciation on Friday from Councilman Nate Holden, who is black and accused his colleagues of acting ‘like West Side Ku Klux Klansmen.’ Councilman Richard Alatorre, one of the body’s most powerful members, also attacked the move by Ms. Chick and Mr. Feuer, saying, ‘I think people could conclude it’s racist.’..”
BTW, Told You So, great action by Nate Holden. Your people are being ethnically cleansed and targed for murder by hispanics in LA precisely because politicians such as Holden are always looking for the Great White Bigot instead of looking at the REAL THREAT.
If you are White (or black) and live in LA, these are YOUR elected officials conducting what is typical city business to this day.
Bon
Posted by BonBon at 1:57 PM on November 11
“I think Mike Hernandez, if I am not mistaken, was the clown who just couldn’t stop watching porn, while in his office in the Los Angeles City hall building. “
I think he was the one the police videotaped many, many times buying cocaine from the downtown skid row drug dealers. He was the one who had cocaine in his house, car, city hall office and on his person when he was finally arrested.
The police videotaped him both buying and snorting cocaine right on the street for months before arresting him because they were so afraid of and “ethnic profiling and discrimination” legal defense and attack on the few White police officers left in LAPD.
Posted by at 2:53 PM on November 11
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Mike Hernandez)
Mike Hernández was a Los Angeles, California City Councilman. In 1997 Hernandez was arrested and pleaded guilty to purchasing and possessing cocaine. Because he struck a plea agreement whereby he agreed to seek treatment, the arrest was not in his record, and he was not required to resign his seat [1]. An effort to recall him failed, and he served out his term until 2001.
The recall failed because his hispanic constitutents felt that hispanic solidarity against Whites was more important than having a useless drug addict representing them on the council.
Chair: Community and Economic Development Committee
Vice-Chair: Governmental Efficiency Committee
Member: Intergovernmental Relations Committee
Posted by margaret at 2:56 PM on November 11
It’s okay, they aren’t muslims. Only muslims are a problem.
Posted by Joe at 4:21 PM on November 11
And they keep on electing Hispanics! Don’t people realize that when you elect someone of Hispanic descent, even if they have been here for generations, their loyalty still resides in Mexico?
Mexico is a failed country and that’s exactly what the US will be until the illegals and all their supporters are gone. We know that GWB isn’t going to do anything, so we have a year to keep fighting until we get a new leader. If it’s a democrat, we might as well throw in the towel. To a person, maybe with the exception of Chris Dodd, they will roll out the welcome wagon. Why isn’t Tom Tancredo doing better? We know he will turn this immigration thing around, but he’s still on the lower tier. Do we really want him in the White House? If so, start playing him up. He, Duncan Hunter and Ron Paul are the only ones who truly belive we need to take out country back. The others are lying. Please don’t vote for Rudy. He’s dangerous.
Posted by June at 4:45 PM on November 11
It’ll be Ron Paul in 2008 alright, with the Hildebeast leading the charge for him. Can’t you people see that Hillary is trying to set up Ron Paul as a third party candidate to drain off votes from the Republicans? The 5% that vote on principal will vote Hillary in, just like Perot got Slick in.
Posted by William Hendershot at 6:06 PM on November 11
“President Fox wasn’t just talking out of his behind when he said that Mexicans were doing jobs that lazy blacks won’t do.”
Damn right! Half of us blacks are either “On Welfare” as you put it, or working Professional white collar jobs which we earned (even if we’re “unqualified” and received it by affirmative action, lol).
Fact is, you whites don’t know WHAT you want. You hate us, and you hate them. While you’re engaging in all of this hate, the Hispanics and Blacks are taking over. Pretty soon, you won’t be in the equations, and AMERICAN Blacks & Hispanics will continue to fight in this soon to be “third world” country.
Remember, the Hispanic Population IS exploding, and Blacks aren’t far behind. Black population estimates put Blacks at 62 million by 2050. Oh yeah, and remember, there are MILLIONS of BLACK Hispanics too.
Whether you like it or not, if you whites wish to remain in power , you need numbers. START having babies, or reinvigorate European immigration, oh YEAH, I forgot, blacks are a problem there too.
Lol, looks like we’re all screwed! Lol.
Posted by TOLD YOU SO at 6:20 AM on November 12
“TOLD YOU SO! As much as you hate us blacks, at least we ALL WERE AMERICAN, took pride in being so and hated each other. “
People don’t hate blacks who are decent and middle class. We do strongly dislike the ghetto behavior of low class blacks and we dislike it when blacks use race to manipulate whites as too many do.
“If they [whites] don’t like Mexicans, they ought to go back to Europe.””
This is hilarious. These stupid mexicans don’t realize it but if whites went back to Europe, what would they have? They’d have another Mexico. They came to the USA BECAUSE whites made it what it was and they couldn’t make a success of Mexico. No whites and the USA would be a 3rd world dump just like Mexico.
Posted by at 7:26 AM on November 12
“Whether you like it or not, if you whites wish to remain in power , you need numbers. START having babies, or reinvigorate European immigration, oh YEAH, I forgot, blacks are a problem there too.
Lol, looks like we’re all screwed! Lol.”
Whites don’t really need to start making babies, the non-whites need to stop reproducing so vigorously and non-white immigration needs to be stopped, along with miscegenation. By 2025 California is doomed if whites continue to just sit back with our finger in our bottom.
Posted by at 4:08 PM on November 12
“Damn right! Half of us blacks are either “On Welfare” as you put it, or working Professional white collar jobs which we earned (even if we’re “unqualified” and received it by affirmative action, lol).”
Whether your trying to be facetious or not, what your saying is the truth. Us Whites are supporting both the lower and middle class blacks in this country.
“Fact is, you whites don’t know WHAT you want. You hate us, and you hate them. While you’re engaging in all of this hate, the Hispanics and Blacks are taking over. Pretty soon, you won’t be in the equations, and AMERICAN Blacks & Hispanics will continue to fight in this soon to be “third world” country.”
I think you know what we want. It’s discussed on websites like this over and over again. Freedom of association and freedom of speech for starters. We want to be able to hire who we want in our companies and live in all White communities without government interference. These are just a few of the things we want.
The truth is, even if projections pan out and there are 62,000,000 blacks by 2050, you’ll still be dwarfed by the much larger non-hispanic White population. Of course, if these predictions hold, there will also be twice as many hispanics as blacks. You have to admit there is a significant caucasian element in the hispanic population. Just because someone uses the word “hispanic” doesn’t mean they’re all brown. I have no doubt that these White hispanics will assimilate into American society the same way Italians did almost a century ago.
If you want to talk about hate, what about the hate that hispanics have for blacks?
Posted by Al at 5:13 PM on November 12
I disagree with TOLD YOU SO - the black population is not exploding, it is under great duress and threatened with possible extinction. So many problems face blacks, almost all created by themselves, whether in America or Africa or anywhere else, that they will be the first to go when the larger biological time bomb of pandemic diseases explodes. Until then, they are not even competing well - in America many black women don’t even want to date black men and visa versa. But I need not mention all the points now, they have been well covered in Amren articles.
However, I do agree that the overpopulation in general world wide and local will bring everyone down eventually. It really doesn’t matter too much who is the majority. The majority includes a high number of people who have bad access to healthcare and food (and water). They will be the first to go and they will go in droves. It is just a matter of time and I am amazed at the signals that we are approaching this human and planetary debacle as quickly as we are. But it is whites who will most likely be last and watching it all go before them. And if any survive, it will likely be whites, by virtue of intelligent self management, which includes self isolation. The latter will be a prime determinate of any surviving group - if any survive at all.
Posted by Whiteplight at 5:34 PM on November 12
TOLD YOU SO: I believe Pat Buchanan has consistently taken the position that (to paraphrase) ‘Blacks are Americans and have been so for most of their history here’.
Al: I disagree that it’s the fault of blacks that the US has a Hispanic problem. The fault, in my view, lies with white liberals, many of whom have no real loyalty to the US and who want a multiracial society on principle. Of course, white liberals are in general far better placed than blacks to direct public policy.
Posted by at 1:39 AM on November 13
re”I told you so”—Do you really think hispanics are going to care one bit about you blacks??? Not hardly. Non-whites (excluding white hispanics) put their OWN people first. They’ll shove you out of the way and go on and not feel one bit of guilt. You better hope whitey stays in charge.
Posted by at 7:38 AM on November 13
7:26 AM:
Exactly! No one is criticizing middle class Blacks who keep their neighborhoods clean, raise their children to respect elderly people and other people in general and pay their taxes… it is the other segment of the Black population (and now Latino)where the disdain lies.
I myself agree with Pat Buchanan, Courtney and others on this board who say whether you like it or not,Blacks were American citizens long before Latinos Asians or other groups arrived here. They do have some claim to American citizenship.
1:39: you are also correct, It is absurd to blame Latino
immigration on Black people. Yes, our Black dominated congress, our current Black president and corporations that are dominated by multi millionaire Black shareholers are financing the spector of illegal immigration. Please! I do not think so! Sorry, can’t blame Blacks for this one!
It is the Latino population that is exploding that is going to cause more trouble for us than we can ever imagine! I remember a few poster saying that Latino’s were going to be more of a problem that Blacks ever were.
They are right. We have to stop it!
Posted by I Love The White Race! at 5:55 PM on November 13
Immigration is an issue which many of us realize has black America by the throat. All the past talk of rainbow alliances between blacks and Mexicans has turned sour and resulted in open warfare in America’s streets. Hispanics are ousting black politicians from office and replacing them with their own or White candidates. Let me make it clear that I’m a White Nationalist and I don’t agree with mass immigration. However, alot of angry people (on the left and the right)see a way to exploit this issue as a way to stomp black people into the ground. Think about it. No one in the black community seems to realize this except for maybe Carolyn Swain who wrote an article about it several months ago. I think she called it passive aggressive racism.
Posted by Al at 8:34 PM on November 13
Al:
I think you are being a little too optimistic about what you see as the soon to be extinction of the Black race.
You can rest assured that liberal Whites, self-hating Whites and a few others have secured the survival of Blacks in this nation. They have done it time and time again through the progressive era, the new deal, the civil rights movement, the great society, affirmative action etc… You can beleive that they are cooking up more schemes to “sock it to us” Whites who actually care about the survival of our people. Blacks will be used, whether wittingly or not as a weapon against us.
I think it was Cassiodorus who stated that “Whites will continue to use their incomes and hard work to subsidize the Black population.”
He is right!
Posted by Disgusted At What I Am Seeing! at 11:20 PM on November 13
Al:
I am not quite sure where you are coming from. You seem to say that you can tolerate Latinos in one breath, then in another you talk about the crime and other trouble they cause.
You seem to be ambivalent. Personally, I have to side with Jared Taylor, Buchanan and some others, if it came down to one group or the other, I would rather deal with Blacks.
First of all, there is a history there. Secondly, Blacks seem to only be concentrated in certain pockets of America. You are not going to see large Black populations in the rocky mountain states, northern New England, the pacific northwesdt , the Dakotas etc… With Latinos that is not going to be the case. In fact, Latinos far outnumber Blacks in almost every region of the nation (except the south) and that is only for the time being! I would say in the next 5-10 years, Latinos will outnumber Blacks in this region as well.
Moreover, you seem to be far too optimistic about Latinos being willing to assimilate into the general White population. Again, I would say that Jared Taylor has accurately demonstrated that Latino’s are even more resistant to adopting American mores and customs than either Blacks or Asians! Just ask the Whites who are linving in what is now “Mexifornia!” And as far as middle and upper class Latinos. Those that are not eurpoean hispanics often allign themselves with middle and upper class Blacks. I remember about two years ago a fellow Amren poster was discussing that at his upscale place of work how the Blacks and Latinos referreed to one another as “brother and sister.” Other posters have mentioned this friendly relationship between upper clsass Blacks and Latinos as well. You can bet your bottom dollar that our White liberal traitors among us will do everything they can to promote such an alliance!
Soory Al, but your hope that “once they have lived in America long enough, everything wil be alrigtht” mindest is (in my opinion) misguided.
My view is that I DO NOT WANT THEM HERE! PERIOD!
Posted by Mitchell at 2:21 AM on November 14
“Let me make it clear that I’m a White Nationalist and I don’t agree with mass immigration. However, alot of angry people (on the left and the right)see a way to exploit this issue as a way to stomp black people into the ground.”
Good.
Posted by at 1:59 PM on November 14
Al:
How do you come to this conclusion? If anything, I see some towns like the mayor of Hazelton, Pennsylvania and other places targeting illegal Lations and forcing them out of their towns. They are not targeting Blacks.
Posted by Richard at 10:01 PM on November 14
“Let me make it clear that I’m a White Nationalist and I don’t agree with mass immigration. However, alot of angry people (on the left and the right)see a way to exploit this issue as a way to stomp black people into the ground.”
So do you agree with it or not?
Posted by at 10:52 PM on November 14
You posters who say you’d rather deal with blacks probably haven’t been around them in a significant way. I believe they’re running our civilization into the ground and as one poster said, there are millions more on the way. Millions of illegitimate unborn criminals that we will end up feeding, clothing and carrying in some capacity. History is offering us an opportunity to deal with this problem once and for all.
If MLK hadn’t been assassinated, today he would be joining hands with Al Sharpton and screaming “Free the Jena 6” or shaking down some corporation for money. Instead, he’s being deified on the Washington Mall alongside real American heroes.
If John Wilkes Booth hadn’t shot Lincoln in the head, the blacks would have been rounded up and shipped to Liberia.
The issue was taken up again by Congress in the 1920s and they passed on it.
Posted by Al at 6:14 PM on November 15
“…if it came down to one group or the other, I would rather deal with Blacks.” Posted by Mitchell at 2:21 AM on November 14
Let’s see:
El Paso Texas, a typical Hispanic city, has a murder rate of 2 per 100,000.
New Orleans, a typical black city, has a murder rate of 54.5 per 100,000. ( 27 TIMES HIGHER THAN EL PASO!!!!)
So you still want to insist you’d rather “deal with Blacks” than Hispanics? You’d rather live in, say New Orleans, than El Paso? GET REAL.
Posted by at 12:25 AM on November 17
Mabybe, but in New Orleans at least you get to eat some decent food and hear some danm Jazz, what the heck is in El Paso?
Posted by at 2:04 PM on November 17
12:25 AM:
I think the point is we HAVE to deal with blacks. They have been here for a very long time. We didn’t HAVE to deal with Hispanics. They are a (relatively) NEW phenomenom.
Posted by at 3:08 PM on November 17
“Mabybe, but in New Orleans at least you get to eat some decent food and hear some danm Jazz, what the heck is in El Paso?”
Do you go into the 9th Ward or some other black dominated areas in New Orleans to enjoy these things? I doubt it. You stick to the Whiter areas.
“I think the point is we HAVE to deal with blacks. They have been here for a very long time. We didn’t HAVE to deal with Hispanics. They are a (relatively) NEW phenomenom.”
Who says we have to deal with blacks? The legal Hispanic population is just as large as the black one. We’ve been dealing with blacks for a very long time and we’ve reached a point where we don’t have to do it anymore. We can forge political ties with Hispanics that can be mutually beneficial to us both. The black community can’t do anything about it but look on with contempt. There’s nothing but silence coming from the self-proclaimed black leaders on immigration. I suspect they have either been threatened or bought off.
This reminds me of a curious thing I saw on a road trip down to FL last year. I was several miles outside of Atlanta when I saw a car full of Hispanics driving an older model car with a Confederate Flag sticker on the bumper. I’m not sure what it means. The car might have been sold to them with it already there. It leaves the mind open to all sorts of possibilities.
Posted by Al at 11:29 PM on November 17
Al:
What makes you think we Whites can forge alliances with Latinos that will “benefit” us?
As far as Black leaders and immigration, a number have made it clear in their rhetoric that they plan to align themselves with Latinos and forge alliances in the future. The mayor of Los Angeles who is Latino and several other prominent Latino candidates including presidential candidate Bill Richardson have made it clear that they look forward to “black and brown” unity and will do “whatever it takes” to achieve it.
Call me paranoid (but I would say I am accurate), but I think every now and the far left media trot out stories of Black and Lation frictions in an effort to try to give the impression to us Whites who are already to naive as it is that they are going to kill one antoher off. Thus, many of us foolishly fall into a state of complacency, feeling that we as Whites will benefit in the long run.
This is outright nonsense! You can rest assured that White liberals and the traitors among us will help them accomplish their goals at our expense! The only people that will be looking on in contempt will be us Whites as we will be so outnumbered that it will be too late to stem the tide! There is no alliance with Whites and latinos that will benefit us!!! Once again, that is a shrwed, thinly, misguided attempt by the leftwing media in an effort to misdirect and deceive us.Jared Taylor, Pat Buchanan and the other more astute Whites among us know this! They are not being fooled by such lies.
Whatever few Latinos you saw riding around with confederate flags, you, I (and other racially conscious Whites)should not assume that such behavior will translate into White/Brown unity.
In fact, if you live in the south, this would not be that unusal anyway. I have seen some Blacks with conferedate flags for that matter. This does not mean that there will be a Black/White alliance with us White nationalists!
I take Mitchell’s stance. Keep them out!!! Period!
Posted by Gordon at 2:07 PM on November 18