The Fear of White Decline
| More news stories on Elections |
|---|
Gregory Rodriguez, Los Angeles Times, May 19, 2008
Hillary Rodham Clinton is right. She has the broader and whiter political coalition, so she should, by all rights, be the Democratic presidential nominee.
After all, in other realms of the political process, we routinely refer to “black districts” or “Latino districts” and speak of the necessity of those jurisdictions to be represented by black or Latino elected officials. Well, then, because the American population is 66% white, maybe the United States is a de facto white district that should be represented accordingly.
Don’t scoff at the idea. Ethnic and racial self-determination have been underlying factors in the formation of modern nations. Israel is one example, along with anti-colonial revolutions and states in the Third World. The principle of ethnic self-determination made its way into the United Nations Charter, and it lurks in contemporary domestic discussions about the political and cultural rights of every kind of minority.
The Clinton campaign’s assertion of her electability based on “hardworking white American” voters {snip} isn’t a sign of the resurgence of white supremacy in America. Rather, it is a formal re-articulation of whiteness as a social category and a racial interest group.
{snip}
Since the civil rights movement, though, it’s also been taboo to speak of the collective interests of white people in polite company. To mention whites as an interest group—in the way we do minority groups—hearkens back to segregation and worse.
{snip}
But the Obama-Clinton rivalry seems to have changed all that, and we’re now openly discussing white working-class voters in ways that make clear that their racial interests play a role in their political preferences. {snip}
Is this white supremacy? No, in fact it might be its opposite, an acknowledgment that white privilege has its limits. With immigration and globalization reformulating who we are as a nation, it isn’t the white elites that are threatened by the changes; rather, it’s the nearly 70% of whites who are not college educated who figure among the most insecure of Americans. Many feel that their jobs are being outsourced or taken by immigrants—legal or otherwise—and that their culture is being subsumed. When Clinton promises to make their voices heard, she’s appealing not to Anglo-Saxon racial triumphalism but to the fear of white decline.
{snip}
Like black or Latino activists who insist that a particular congressional district should be represented by one of their own, the disgruntled white working-class, non-college-educated voters might be demanding that their majority status still translate into something at least symbolically meaningful to them.
But that doesn’t make it right. {snip}
Romantic notions of ethnic self-determination and multiculturalism may have once served to dismantle empires and garner attention for forgotten minorities. But today they are more likely to nurture the kind of white nationalism on which Clinton has placed her last political hopes.
Email Gregory Rodriguez at grodriguez@latimescolumnists.com.
(Posted on May 20, 2008)
Comments
Who knew? Hillary in the white house would simply allay white fears. Thank you LA Times.
Posted by Just another AmRener at 4:35 PM on May 20
“Romantic notions of ethnic self-determination and multiculturalism may have once served to dismantle empires and garner attention for forgotten minorities. But today they are more likely to nurture the kind of white nationalism on which Clinton has placed her last political hopes.”
Rubbish! Clinton isn’t appealing to any kind of white nationalism; she’s simply making a last-ditch effort to recognize the new minority she’s helped to create.
Posted by at 4:41 PM on May 20
White decline is a reality, thanks to the politicians who can’t wait to get rid of us and welcome unproductive crime-ridden masses who will tear this country down.
Posted by at 4:59 PM on May 20
“Romantic notions of ethnic self-determination and multiculturalism may have once served to dismantle empires and garner attention for forgotten minorities. But today they are more likely to nurture the kind of white nationalism on which Clinton has placed her last political hopes.”
> So Hillary Clinton went to bed a liberal feminist and woke up a white nationalist? I wonder if she realizes it?
Posted by Whiteplight at 5:06 PM on May 20
It is what I, Jared Taylor and others have been saying for quite a while. We better be concerned about Latinos instead of getting all tizzied up about Blacks.
Posted by Seth at 5:31 PM on May 20
“Romantic notions of ethnic self-determination and multiculturalism may have once served to dismantle empires and garner attention for forgotten minorities. But today they are more likely to nurture the kind of white nationalism on which Clinton has placed her last political hopes.”
Let’s hope so.
Posted by Howard Fezell at 5:34 PM on May 20
“Well, then, because the American population is 66% white, maybe the United States is a de facto white district that should be represented accordingly.”
Our decline is alot more serious than people might think. We need to stop using the term “White” because the definition is too broad. Americans of European descent are only 60% of the population or about 175,000,000. In this population there are roughly 76,000,000 baby boomers between the ages of 44 and 63 or about 43% of the White population past their fertile years!
Posted by at 5:39 PM on May 20
“Like black or Latino activists who insist that a particular congressional district should be represented by one of their own, the disgruntled white working-class, non-college-educated voters might be demanding that their majority status still translate into something at least symbolically meaningful to them.”
Another reminder that only non-Whites can be “activists” and Whites “racists.”
Posted by Sensitivity Trainer at 6:25 PM on May 20
“But that doesn’t make it right.”
How can anyone determine what is “right” and what is “wrong” in a “nation” made up of so many competing interests?
It’s impossible. You can’t do it.
Amorality rules this society; it’s only the rabble who are expected to be moral.
No.
In postmodern America, moral people are hopeless people.
People who either wittingly or unwittingly (which is more often the case) help clear the road for “our” amoral, de-nationalized elites.
Examples of these people include: academics, most journalists, politicians in general, neo-liberal and progressive NGOs, religious leaders, and celebrities.
In other words, anybody to the “left” of Pat Buchanan.
Posted by Cecil Rhodes at 6:33 PM on May 20
.
America doesn’t need immigration. Mexico needs Revolution.
Stop Mexican welfare, start Mexican warfare.
.
Posted by MICHAEL DEAN MILLER at 6:37 PM on May 20
Another attempt at re-writing history. White people, thourgh working like oxen, practically built this nation from the ground up. It’s all in the archives and easy to verify. I object to Mr. Rodriguez making it sound as if whites had some minor or subsidiary role in this nation. This however, is to borrow a phrase from a well known liberal,”an inconvenient truth” for many people.
Posted by Bobby at 6:40 PM on May 20
This hearkens back to a debate earlier this decade between Sam Francis and former San Francisco Police Department Detective Lou Calabro. The latter was (and still is) lobbying for the adoption of European-American history and heritage months/events, while the former thought that doing so would mean that white America would be accepting a demotion from being synonymous with America to being merely one of many racial groups within America.
I sided with Sam at first, but is now leaning toward Calabro’s mindset, because we need to have something that legitimizes whiteness, all whiteness, and whiteness alone, and something that gets white people thinking about whites. Also, it’s not as if we weren’t demoted anyway; adopting Calabro’s idea means that our demoted selves realize that we are a people and have been demoted; Sam’s ideas would mean that our demoted selves would still wander around deracinated and oblivious.
Posted by Question Diversity at 6:50 PM on May 20
While many here may take an angry or even pessimistic line in interpreting this article, I for one do not. I take the very opposite track, in fact!
Please consider the following two excerpts from Comrade Rodriguez’s anti-white screed, in juxtaposition:
1.) “No, in fact it might be its opposite, an acknowledgment that white privilege has its limits….When Clinton promises to make their voices heard, she’s appealing not to Anglo-Saxon racial triumphalism but to the fear of white decline.”
2.) “Romantic notions of ethnic self-determination and multiculturalism may have once served to dismantle empires and garner attention for forgotten minorities. But today they are more likely to nurture the kind of white nationalism on which Clinton has placed her last political hopes.”
Analyzing both unemotionally, one does not sense a feeling of triumphant nonwhite ascendancy either; quite the contrary, what one senses from this Latino “editorialist” is an urgently growing fear. The arrogant tone of the piece, while designed to simultaneously shame and dishearten whites, when stripped away really boils down to a nonwhite interloper “whistling” a mariachi tune in a potential graveyard.
Why might this be?
It must be with no small amount of horror to Comrade Rodriguez here, that he realizes that the white racial awareness Hillary is desperately attempting to tape into, is a far more potent force than he or any of his kind (nonwhites and “educated” white elitist fools) would like to admit. Moreover, if this emerging white racial awareness should ever be tapped into fully by a passionately likeminded political figure, it could become a super tsunami-like force that would likely sweep away the crumbling multicultural pigpen.
Just consider this: Hillary is being very halfhearted about these “racial” entreaties of hers, and in a party were even “conservative” blue-collar whites can be gushingly idiotic at times, when it comes to the issue of race. Her statements are not a thunderous call to white racial awareness, but an almost apologetic breezy appeal to white “insecurities” only.
Yet, it does seem to be working for her to a point; she has hung on repeatedly, where she “should” have been given an expected Obama “knockout.” Laughably, it may very well also tear asunder the party of the jackass at their convention along: gender, generational, socioeconomic, and racial lines?
But there, I digress slightly.
Cast your mind to the years 2012 or 2016. Just what might those years be like, when the strategists and politicians from both parties begin to assess the changing demographics of the country where whites make up about 64% or 62% of the population, but still make up between 81% to 78% of all registered voters? If the 70% of “uneducated” working class whites vote by 90% based on racial awareness, and the 30% of “educated” professional whites vote even 50% on the same grounds, just what might those elections look like? More important, just what might the socioeconomic and policy ramifications of such election outcomes evolve into overtime?
It might very well end, the “colonization” of the United States of America (and hopefully all of the West via example) by the Third World, one way or another!
I say, God let it be so!!!
Posted by John PM at 7:30 PM on May 20
“America is a de-facto white district and should be represented accordingly.” Gregory Rodriguez is the only MSM source I have heard stand up for the principle that racial voting by whites is a legitimate political expression, just as it is for non-whites. He may not be on our side, but he is honest, and that is more than white MSM reporters can claim.
Posted by PBL at 7:36 PM on May 20
Hillary addressing the issue illustrates the degree to which the democratic party is once again becoming openly fascist. They’ve always been fascist but have been underground since WWII. Obama is quite openly fascist. Fascism with an obvious bent of black nationalism. Democrats support him BECAUSE he is fascist and withhold their support because he is a black nationalist. This is why he’ll lose the election. He’s a black nationalist in a country of white people. But Clinton, and by extension, the rest of the democratic party, are testing out WHITE nationalism.
What they will discover is the time is ripe for the democrats to adopt white nationalism. The current election has the probability of purging their party of blacks, and maybe hispanics. But there is a FAR larger voting block that could replace them….white people awakening to racial consciousness. I think that is the flavor the democrats will use to challenge McCain’s second term (does anyone reasonably think that Obama could ever win or that Clinton has any chance this cycle). If not in 2012, then 2016, for certain.
White nationalism is a movement that will become mainstream in this country and will result in the purging of blacks and mexicans from the US. And the democrats will be the ones to adopt it. Or face political irrelevancy.
Posted by at 7:38 PM on May 20
Thank you Michael Dean Miller…I agree with you a hundred percent….but add this…keep their warfare across the Rio Grande..if they don’t the revolution will spill over our borders just like that gaggle of lice has for the last few decades
Posted by lydia at 7:43 PM on May 20
Look at some more false info spewed by another arm of our corrupt government. Look under demographics - white is 81% of population - they include Hispanics. I will agree some Hispanics are white but the vast majority are Mestizos which are not white:
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/us.html
Posted by GetBackJack at 8:43 PM on May 20
I thought Bill was the first “black” president? The only thing Hillary cares about is getting elected. If she could, she would gladly take 20 million votes from our little brown guests over a few mad white boys. McCain would too. White pride is racist, anything else is justifiable activism. Uncle Jehrimiah couldn’t really be a racist, could he?
Posted by chickenman at 9:04 PM on May 20
A great many Whites think in racial terms but will never say it out loud, not even anonymously to a polltaker. They will vote White however, which is why Black politicians in general elections often do worse that predicted at the ballot box. Anything that allows Whites to publicly speak of White interests strengthens us. Just as Glastnost, openly speaking the truth, destroyed the Soviet Union, our rulers cannot withstand our arguments for White nationalism. The fact is, most healthy Whites try to live separated from the darker peoples, but speak of it in coded phrases. Once we are free to speak our minds and keep our jobs, liberalism will collapse. They have no answers.
Posted by Schoolteacher at 9:53 PM on May 20
Just the fact that a piece in a major newspaper(such as it is) like the LA Times can, and with straight face, would even suggest that Hillary Clinton is some sort of stealth White Nationalist, or a representative thereof, is proof positive of the depth and breadth of the political insanity that grips America. This also shows how terrified those like Mr. Rodriguez are of even the most tepid, abstract, even utterly fantastic display of White solidarity.
Posted by HH at 9:53 PM on May 20
Look to South Africa for an analogy. SA and Zim. prospered with the White race governments. The masses of uneducated, undocumented immigrants are sucking the oxygen out of the USA economy. The USA will be another South Africa with no real employment to regenerate the country. White retirees will take there money with them to other countries that will not be in the turmoil that is going to occur after this pathetic presidential election is over.
Posted by Moving On at 10:20 PM on May 20
While I regard Clinton as marginally better than Obama, she is a big advocate of affirmative action and amnesty for illegal immigrants.
Posted by WR the elder at 10:39 PM on May 20
“the disgruntled white working-class, non-college-educated voters”
Ah yes, so many people unconsciously rank the socially hierarchy in their minds, and in their imagination the ‘enlightened’ people at the top believe in color-blind pan-humanism, open to all.
God forbid the unwashed white working class should crash the party.
Posted by at 10:43 PM on May 20
Could we expect anything else from a nobody with a surname that ends in a z?
Posted by at 10:47 PM on May 20
If you check the FBI Most Wanted website and see the list for violent crimes, the people shown who Americans would ordinarily consider to be mestizos (that is, short in stature, brown skinned, brown eyed, brown haired, often from Mexico, with Spanish names, who look mostly South American Indian) are listed by our government as “Hispanic (White).” Now, what the heck is that? These people are probably 80% Aztec Indian and 20% Spanish and Other.
North and South American Indians are a subgroup of Oriental peoples who crossed the Bering Strait eons ago into the Americas. Isn’t that what scientists currently believe? So, why does the FBI consider people 80% or so South American Indian who also look very Indian to be white?
ANSWER: Because our government does not want its citizenry to become alarmed at how quickly the European American numbers are fading away and being replaced with huge numbers of mestizos and other non-whites. Mestizos know they are not white (they consider themselves to be “brown,”) so they must be quite surprised that the FBI thinks they are!
Shouldn’t a quickly diminishing racial group be correctly defined, if only for sociological reasons? Maybe the government wants American whites to just fade away and/or blend with all the other races, so it isn’t considered important to protect our identity as a distinct people.
Posted by European American Lass at 11:45 PM on May 20
Here are the friendly New Rules for the New Millenium: Yes, we are being replaced. No, we are not supposed to notice. However, if we notice, we are not supposed to care. If we notice, and we care, we will be called the “R” word and compared to Hitler.
Whites in the U.S.A. who organize as whites are automatically and without question labeled as “hate groups.” All other races are allowed to organize for their own racial/ethnic interests. Any questions?
Thank you, and don’t forget to pay your taxes!
Posted by Friendly Friend at 12:26 AM on May 21
True, real white people(Europeans)are a little over 60% of the population. The census counts people whose ancestors came from South West and Central Asia and North Africa as white. Most of these people consider themselves as separate from and in some cases are very hostile to Americans of European ancestry.
Posted by Joe at 1:04 AM on May 21
As much as I hate Obama (and of course I’ll never vote for him), if he were elected, there may be a silver lining:
A black President will so clearly draw the racial lines in the USA it may help to wake up white America that we are losing out to minorities, we are being smothered by non-whites… once white Americans wake up, they may rally around OUR INTERESTS, ie. WHITE INTERESTS.
Posted by Mark Davidson at 1:07 AM on May 21
Isn’t great how this mestizo persistently tries to drive a wedge between Whites by referring (very snobbishly) to the 30% of college educated Whites and the 70% of non-college educated Whites, as if there was a significant difference between them (which is his earnest hope), and somehow that he is ‘better’ than the non-college educated Whites?
Posted by Kenelm Digby at 6:54 AM on May 21
“A black President will so clearly draw the racial lines in the USA it may help to wake up white America…”
That’s what I see as the silver lining in an Obama presidency.
It might also be useful at this time because whites are still the majority so IF they do wake up, they have the numbers on their side to actually do something. If a black or hispanic became president after whites are a projected minority, whites would be helpless.
It’s difficult, if not impossible, to predict the consequences. Although Obama is racially aware, he’s savvy enough to keep his deeper loyalties and alliances in check. Naturally, blacks will expect him to hire blacks and favor blacks at every turn. The fact that he won’t or can’t will cause many blacks to quickly abandon him as an ‘uncle Tom’. Black resentment will quickly grow. They will resent Obama for not being ‘black enough’ and they will resent whites for having rigged a system of ‘white supremacy’ that prevents them from seizing power and doing things their way, the way they should be done.
Blacks always believe once their guy is in power, everything is magically going to get better overnight. They believe their guy is going to stick it to the white man the way the white man stuck it to them. But the US presidency is not yet a dictatorship (though that’s what many blacks believe and hope for). Regardless of what Obama may want to do to radically change the US, we still have a great many checks and balances and one of those checks, at least for now, is a slim white majority.
Posted by sbuffalonaitve at 9:00 AM on May 21
The best analogy I can think of is the gas station employee who was fired for defending his co-worker from a robber by engaging the robber in a tussle. The White is the one being attacked. No one will come to Whites defense except other Whites, the others will stand back and wait for the opportune time to strike again. Only by breaking the new rules will we thrive.
Posted by Lars at 9:58 AM on May 21
“But that doesn’t make it right.”
He’s Hispanic so he has no right to speak for oppressed whites. Does he know what it’s like to be passed over for a job/promotion in favor of an inferior affirmative action candidate? Does he know what it’s like to be threated/beaten up by thugs because of the color of his skin? Does he know what it’s like to be subject to constant belittling and abuse at the hands of the mainstream media? Does he know what it’s like to have his own group ridiculed and attacked during “diversity training”? Does he know what it’s like to be excluding from safely entering many urban areas in his country? Does he know what it’s like to be forbidden from expressing any pride in his own ethnic group under penalty of being condemned as a “racist”? Does he know what it’s like to have hurdles placed in front of him for college admission just because of his race? When he visits a Spanish speaking country, does he have to listen to “for English, press one”?
Posted by jewamongyou at 11:06 AM on May 21
Because the American population is 66% white, maybe the United States is a de facto white district that should be represented accordingly…
TRUER WORDS were never spoken!…I’m TRULY COMFORTABLE and in COMPLETE AGREEMENT with that statement!
“Hardworking white American” voters {snip} isn’t a sign of the resurgence of white supremacy in America. Rather, it is a formal re-articulation of whiteness as a social category and a racial interest group…
They are ALSO the people that keep this country RUNNING!…they are also the people paying THROUGH THE NOSE in the form of HIGHER and HIGHER TAXES to PAY for the WELFARE, MEDICAL, EDUCATIONAL and HOUSING BENEFITS for the “minorities” to live comfortably…MORE comfortably than a lot of these “hardworking white Americans”!…as far as being a social category and racial interest group?…WHY THE HELL NOT?…every OTHER racial and ethnic group are social categories and racial interest groups…it’s OUR TURN…if we want to save our country…it’s ABOUT TIME!
Since the civil rights movement, though, it’s also been taboo to speak of the collective interests of white people in polite company. To mention whites as an interest group—in the way we do minority groups—hearkens back to segregation and worse…
ONLY in the minds of the groups who have BENEFITTED from the civil rights movement…the movement that WHITES were RESPONSIBLE for…NOT the minority groups and their leaders!…IF whites were as racist as they believe…blacks, Hispanics and OTHER minority groups would NOT have the civil, and OTHER, rights they enjoy today!…I wish we COULD go back in time once more and change the outcome of this monstrosity known as the “Civil Rights Movement”!
But the Obama-Clinton rivalry seems to have changed all that, and we’re now openly discussing white working-class voters in ways that make clear that their racial interests play a role in their political preferences…
While, at the SAME TIME, the BLACKS are being given a FREE PASS when THEIR racial interests play a role in THEIR political preferences!…a WHITE who would NOT vote for OBAMA…or any BLACK is a “racist”…yet, a BLACK who ONLY votes for OBAMA or any BLACK…BECAUSE the candidate is BLACK…is NOT a “racist”…for when WHITES vote WHITE…WE are “racist”…and when BLACKS vote BLACK…THAT is “black PRIDE”…ONLY the BLACKS are ALLOWED the LUXURY of PRIDE in THEIR race…WHITE PRIDE is NOT ALLOWED for WHITE PRIDE is RACISM and WHITE SUPREMACY…something that is NOT allowed…ONLY the BLACKS are allowed BLACK SUPREMACY (or BLACK POWER)…in this country!
Is this white supremacy? No, in fact it might be its opposite, an acknowledgment that white privilege has its limits…
Yes…white “privilege” DOES have it’s limits…UNLIKE the BLACK PRIVILEGE and HISPANIC PRIVILEGE…which seems to be LIMITLESS these days!
With immigration and globalization reformulating who we are as a nation, it isn’t the white elites that are threatened by the changes; rather, it’s the nearly 70% of whites who are not college educated who figure among the most insecure of Americans. Many feel that their jobs are being outsourced or taken by immigrants—legal or otherwise—and that their culture is being subsumed. When Clinton promises to make their voices heard, she’s appealing not to Anglo-Saxon racial triumphalism but to the fear of white decline…
Globalization and immigration is being FORCED upon this country…is FORCING the “reformulation” of who we are as a nation!…it’s the nearly 70% of whites who are not college educated who figure among the most insecure of Americans…with GOOD REASON we ARE insecure!…OUR rights are being eroded…OUR standard of living is being eroded…OUR quality of LIFE is being eroded!…YES!…we ARE in fear!
Many feel that their jobs are being outsourced or taken by immigrants—legal or otherwise—and that their culture is being subsumed…
We don’t “feel” this way…we KNOW this is going on!
When Clinton promises to make their voices heard, she’s appealing not to Anglo-Saxon racial triumphalism but to the fear of white decline…
WHITE DECLINE is NOT a FEAR…it’s the FACT that we are being FORCED to KNUCKLE UNDER, LIVE WITH and FORCED INTO!
Like black or Latino activists who insist that a particular congressional district should be represented by one of their own, the disgruntled white working-class, non-college-educated voters might be demanding that their majority status still translate into something at least symbolically meaningful to the
But that doesn’t make it right…
Of course it’s “not right” when WHITES are of this mindset yet it’s perfectly OKAY when BLACKS and HISPANICS have the SAME mindset!
Romantic notions of ethnic self-determination and multiculturalism may have once served to dismantle empires and garner attention for forgotten minorities…
Just wait until OBAMA…IF he is elected…the minorities of today will be REPLACED, in importance, with NEW minorities!…soon we will ALL be living under the weight of the controlling forces of MUSLIMS!…soon, the HISPANICS and BLACKS who consider themselves as AMERICANS first will lose out too!…to those of LIKENESS…in APPEARANCE ONLY!
Original article
Posted by Suzan Donoghue at 11:58 AM on May 21
The white community in Los Angeles don’t have grounds for worry, they’re already vastly outnumbered. There are no “official” numbers verifying this because illegals hide and are uncounted.
Following the old saying “possession is nine-tenths of the law,”
California is slated to be the first (and certainly not the last)American state to become a de facto appendage of Mexico.
Posted by Gary at 1:10 PM on May 21
To Mark Davidson…I think you are right…only if obama the muslim is elected….those whites who voted for him will finally open those eyes and come out of their coma’s….but it will be much too late….lopping off of heads will begin in this country as soon as possible, that means, not only white heads,,,,but blacks, asians, ect ect…who are not muslim and will not bow down to this ….I must say it…anti Christ….cause he is as evil as God is good….a sign of the end times for all of us!!!
Posted by lydia at 2:10 PM on May 21
California, the Golden State. A beautiful state. To lose that to illegal aliens is a crime against humanity! These hard working white people were never protected from invasion, as it states in the Constitution, by our government. Whoever had a hand in its demise should be rounded up and, well, fill in the blank.
Posted by Ray M. at 2:15 PM on May 21
To Joe: Yes whites are 60% of the country! Let’s get moving and preserve it! It’s not too late but we need a patriot to come foreward and lead us.
Posted by sandstorm. at 2:19 PM on May 21
Keep in mind Hillary is extremely popular with Hispanics.Many Latinos have a strong dislike for Obama and would never vote for him. So in this Democrat primary season it is not White Vs non-white. The Hillary supporters are a coalition of working class whites and Hispanics while the Obama fans are a combination of blacks and white elitists.
Posted by Jay at 2:51 PM on May 21
Look up “Non-Hispanic White” if you want the real European population.
There are a few North Africans and Southwest Asians whom nobody would consider White, but there is probably a roughly equal number of Hispanics who are actually European, so it should even out.
The United States does not take in all that many North Africans or Middle Easterners, unlike Canada or France. And many of those we *have* taken in could actually be called White (some Lebanese and Iranians).
Posted by at 4:04 PM on May 21
Hillary received a piece of her own pie, affirmative action deep down i don’t want HUSSEIN OBAMA but just to make it Hillary suffer just like the rest of us, I WILL BE VOTING FOR BARR OR BALDWIN
Posted by at 4:08 PM on May 21
“But that doesn’t make it right.”
Since when does a journalist have the background necessary to make value judgements?
Posted by at 5:26 PM on May 21
Amalgamation of different ethnic groups into a new and single nation with a unified national identity is only possible only when those amalgamating groups are closely related in terms of race.
Blending of of different races into one new race is impossible.The disparate racial groups will always remain distinct from one another and will cling to thier respective racial identities at the detriment of the nation as a whole.
Posted by Mick at 8:11 PM on May 21
It’s farcical for anyone to believe Hillary Clinton. She is notorious for saying what people want to hear. Her co-presidency with Billy Boy for 8 years made a tyrant out of her
and she will unleash that ego of hers mightily if she is put into the White House. The ONLY reason she mentions the word ‘white’ is because Obama is partly Black. For all the years since WW 2, the White People in this country have been laced with guilt feelings about minorities, and seldom if ever
given credit for their 200 years of effort to help make America great. Now that the going is getting tough, drag out Whitey and
play up to him/her….for votes. Mind you, European-Americans, you wil be lost in the sliced baloney of D.C. once the voting is over. The Clinton’s can only disgrace America has it did before, with a list of murders under their belt, amnesty for their criminal buddies, stolen White House furniture, etc.
How much some of you have forgotten.
Posted by Helen at 10:32 PM on May 21
Really only one big mistake was made in the history of the USA - that was by the idiots who brought the people of Africa here as slaves. Had they not done that - we would still be at about 90% whites. What these people of the past did not understand is control. Just like you cannot control rats and rats breeding. Same case. The downfall was the past. It is not so sure what the future can hold.
Posted by UncleTom at 11:18 PM on May 21
” Look under demographics - white is 81% of population - they include Hispanics. I will agree some Hispanics are white but the vast majority are Mestizos which are not white:”
-Very true. Even the P.C. term “Hispanic” is misleading since it refers to “Hispaniola” i.e. Spain. The only link that exists between Hispanics and Spain is the Spanish language which was superimposed upon the population of what was once known as “New Spain”. It is ridiculous to consider “Hispanic” to be a racial category. Just as Blacks are so classified even though they may actually be mixed raced, we may as well have a classification for Amerindians even though some may possess a degree of European blood.
Posted by Mick at 1:34 AM on May 22
What Hillary’s comments really imply is that whites need a party which represents their own ethnic and racial interests in a balkanized America. A truly white party which consciously embraced the concerns of white-european Americans could not fail at present(but could well fail by mid-century). This is simply one more step in the process of legitimization of white ethnic interests. It may well be that by the time that this process crystalizes we will already be in CWII. The outcome will be the establishment of proper ethnostates, which will represent the only possible means of the survival of whites in America. Anything that furthers this development is good.
Posted by at 5:47 PM on May 22
“Look up “Non-Hispanic White” if you want the real European population.
There are a few North Africans and Southwest Asians whom nobody would consider White, but there is probably a roughly equal number of Hispanics who are actually European, so it should even out.
The United States does not take in all that many North Africans or Middle Easterners, unlike Canada or France. And many of those we have taken in could actually be called White (some Lebanese and Iranians).”
Nonhispanic White figures at about 200,000,000 people. That includes 25,000,000 people of semitic origin, the largest being Christian Arabs and Jews. One third of these people are muslims.
I know the census says that some 47% of hispanics are White but I just don’t believe that figure. Alot of hispanics who self identify as White have cocoa skin and are mixed race. Pure European ancestry is probably less than a third of their population.
Posted by at 6:30 PM on May 22
Our decline has a great deal to do with the corruption in our gene pool. Since the founding of this country, some Whites have been miscegenating with American Indians and blacks. If their children married other Whites it re-entered our gene pool and spread like a virus. There’s always been a fresh crop of European immigrants to keep our racial stock healthy, at least until now. I was looking at my high school reunion book from 1984 and the students in the pictures don’t look like alot of the 18 year olds you see today. I made this point on a previous board but todays youth are darker looking and less distinguishable than the last generation. I can’t prove it but I think people were smarter and more innovative than today. I can remember my school having Science Fairs with kids building everything from solar powered models to contraptions that harvested methane from garbage. I don’t see much of this anymore. What I see on average are kids that are soft and living a hedonistic lifestyle. Some of them growing up in single parent homes or with same sex couples, leaving them emotionally wrecked inside and totally unprepared for life. Speaking of that, where did all of these homosexuals come from all of a sudden? Something like 10-15% of kids nowadays are homosexual. Are they being brainwashed by propaganda or is there some kind of genetic damage that can cause this kind of behavior?
Posted by at 9:43 PM on May 23
Sombody tell me why American Citizens can’t make arrest of illegals in this country. The county sheriffs could deputise
American Citizen’s to stop all people who appear to be Mexican and ask for proper I.D. I am sure we could educate enough white American’s about the proper way to handle the matter. Of course Black American’s would rob or kill the Mexican’s under color of law.
Posted by at 8:08 PM on May 25