Identity Politics: The Denial of American Exceptionalism

Dean Malik, American Thinker, July 11, 2011

In 1630 John Winthrop established the basis of American exceptionalism with these words: “For we must consider that we shall be as a city upon a hill. The eyes of all people are upon us.”

Since that time, America has stood for the promise of escape from tribal loyalties and hatreds, the limitations of social heredity, and from the cruelties of religious intolerance. Uniquely, America remains true to its cultural underpinnings–founded upon a substrate of Anglo-Saxon society with Judeo-Christian values–while still welcoming new citizens through a bonafide assimilative process. Generations of people came here not merely in search of new space to grow, but on a quest for this cultural paradigm that defines America.

{snip}

The civil rights movement, initially focused upon eliminating arbitrary, non-merit based discrimination, in the late 1960s shifted to the goal of promoting “diversity.” Thus, “equality of opportunity” was supplanted by the new objective of equality of result. This change created a politically hardened left-wing no longer committed to incremental change, but instead dedicated to the deconstruction of traditional America and the narrative that goes along with it.

The Movimiento Estudiantil Chicana de Aztlan (MEChA) exemplifies the revolutionary, anti-American version of this phenomenon.

{snip}

MEChA makes no effort to conceal its anti-American philosophy, stating in its founding documents:

“As a nationalist movement we seek to free our people from the exploitation of an oppressive society that occupies our land. Thus, the principle of nationalism serves to preserve the cultural traditions of La Familia de La Raza (literally, “the race”) and promotes our identity as a Chicana/Chicano Gente.”

{snip}

Clearly tribal and ethnic loyalty overshadows and displaces loyalty to America and traditional patriotism.

Although these issues go largely unnoticed or unchallenged by mainstream America, each and every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Aggressive and militant minority identity politics breathes new life into white supremacy, emerging over the past generation re-cast as “White Nationalism.”

It would be a mistake, however, to believe that white nationalism champions the cause of American exceptionalism. To the contrary, the movement simply inverts the argument for minority race consciousness and sets forth a minimalistic vision of American identity in which race is the one and only prerequisite for cultural identification.

{snip}

White nationalist ideology collapses of its own weight primarily because it relies upon a definition of race–European ancestry–that has never served as a basis for culture in the history of mankind. If indeed this scope of ancestry was sufficient to establish common culture, if race and culture are one, how can the existence of Europe’s scores of separate sovereign nations and tongues and traditions and wars be explained?

{snip}

Moreover, if America is simply a blood-and-soil state, what is there to make it exceptional? The answer is: nothing. America is simply a re-constituted, mongrelized, tribe of Europe.

{snip}

Additionally, just as minority identity groups look to establish a transnational sense of unity, white nationalism is also distinctly global in nature. Jared Taylor’s American Renaissance prominently features links to similar white identity groups in Europe, Sam Francis quotes with fraternal admiration French Nationalist Jean Raspail, who speaks of the loss of the French “Fatherland”, and former Klansman-turned-white-nationalist David Duke has become an American expatriate living somewhere in the Ukraine.

White nationalism and minority identity-based political organizations both equally denigrate the American Dream. More precisely, these ideologies represent a tragic abandonment of the American Dream, and appear to arrive at the same conclusion that American exceptionalism simply does not exist. {snip}

White nationalists often cite the fact that Thomas Jefferson included the phrase “of our common blood” in an early draft of the Declaration of Independence as evidence that our Founding Fathers intended to create a blood-and-soil state.

However, the canons of statutory construction mandate the exact opposite conclusion.

The framers took great care in laboring over our founding documents, and ultimately produced the most perfect pieces of political draftsmanship the world has ever known. Lesser men might have proceeded without introspection and chosen to create a new Europe. But the Framers, men uniquely conscious of the historical implications of their actions, instead to chose to create a new Jerusalem, a shining City upon a Hill.

{snip}

Topics:

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • Wayne

    Mr. Taylor, please read the comments. Seems like you have a few fans. Maybe white identity is catching on?

  • J

    The PILGRIMS saw that “shining city on the hill” and NOT necessarily those other English settlers from the early 1600’s.

    The PILGRIMS saw themselves as a modern version of the ancient Israelites trying to build a more pure and moral society based upon a democratic ideal but did exclude others that were not of their persuasion.

    This Dean too – – I am not exactly sure what he is talking about. White nationalism means a lot of different things to different persons and there is NO ONE way to look at it or define it or describe it.

  • Anonymous

    It must be an uncanny coincidence that white Western Europeans establish similar standards of living and governance wherever they go on the planet.

    Nothing to do with race at all, surely.

  • HH

    Still more proof positive that Conservatism is an absoluet dead-end for White People. While some issues important to Conservatives and race-realists/White Nationalists alike, may indeed overlap, the bigger picture and end goals are altogether different. I wish some visitors to this very site would finally come to understand this.

    Conservatism, as a political movement, has done virtually NOTHING to assist the White race, and in many cases, has worked actively AGAINST us! To deny or gloss over this unpleasant fact, is to misunderstand our racial struggle entirely.

    If any of you STILL think Limbaugh, Levin, Hannity, Ingraham, Boortz, et al, are really on our side…you need to look a little closer and listen a bit more critically. They are no friends to racially-aware Whites – few, if ANY in the Conservative movement are!

  • Question Diversity

    Here we go again with these arrogant subcontinentals.

    If “American exceptionalism” or the “American dream” were universal values not attributable to any group of people, why can’t Mr. Malik apply them back in his native Pakistan? Why should he need to come here to get in on our “exceptionalism” and “dreams?”

    Furthermore, I think I have a different definition for “American exceptionalism” than he does and all the egalitarian neo-liberal pseudo-conservative Republican lamers do. I tend to think of it not as something that exists in spite of race, but something that exists as an outgrowth of race, a matter of interested white people from Europe making an evolutionary jump in sociopolitics. They seem to think of it in terms of the prophetic fulfillment of some millenarian quasi-Messianic religion.

    One more thing — Mr. Malik says that the United States is a new “Jerusalem” in his attempt to de-legitimize the “blood and soil” ethnostate. Ironically, the old “Jerusalem” was the capital of a blood and soil ethnostate, and the current Jerusalem, while not the capital, is, at least in its Jewish component, a major part of the current iteration of an ethnostate.

  • E Pluribus Pluribus

    Let’s permit the founders speak in their own words, unfiltered by the likes of Dean Malik, to try to discern their intent in forming this nation.

    We can say with certainty, the founders would not have thought much of today’s reigning platitude, “We are a nation of immigrants.”

    Thomas Jefferson in Notes on the State of Virginia discouraged building the future nation out of immigration: “It is for the happiness of those united in society to harmonize as much as possible . . .” Immigration risked bringing in habits and outlooks rendering our polity “a heterogeneous, incoherent, distracted mass.”

    Alexander Hamilton: “The opinion advanced in [Jefferson’s] Notes on Virginia is undoubtedly correct . . . The influx of foreigners must . . . tend to produce a heterogeneous compound; to change and corrupt the national spirit . . . to introduce foreign propensities.”

    John Adams: “My opinion with respect to immigration is that except of useful mechanics and some particular description of men and professionals, there is no use of encouragement.”

    James Madison wanted only “foreigners of merit and republican principles.”

    Yet for all their doubts about immigration, the Founders never devised a selection process — because levels were quite low. No records were kept until 1820, but rates in the first three decades of the American Republic are estimated at less than ten thousand per year.

    And there is this in the Preamble of the United States Constitution:

    “We the People of the United States, in Order to . . . secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

    Not the world’s posterity, their own posterity.

    *Source for quotes: UNGUARDED GATES: A History of America’s Immigration Crisis by Otis L. Graham, Jr., professor emeritus of history at the Univerity of California, Santa Barbara, pp 4-5:

    http://tinyurl.com/289tub8

  • ATBOTL

    The idea of “American exceptionalism” as currently used — that America somehow is magically exempt from the effects of human nature — is one of the most dangerous falsehoods we have to contend with.

  • BO_Bill

    Dean Malik, who appears to be of Arab ancestry, argues that America is a country consisting of ideals, not men of European origin. Oh and there is no such thing as European culture.

    Sigh.

    http://goo.gl/Q4jnQ

  • Tim in Indiana

    Since that time, America has stood for the promise of escape from tribal loyalties and hatreds, the limitations of social heredity, and from the cruelties of religious intolerance.

    Really? And what does the author base this on…except for a reframing of what we are expected to believe today? Ask the Amerinds how well that “escape from tribal loyalties” thing went.

    White nationalist ideology collapses of its own weight primarily because it relies upon a definition of race—European ancestry—that has never served as a basis for culture in the history of mankind. If indeed this scope of ancestry was sufficient to establish common culture, if race and culture are one, how can the existence of Europe’s scores of separate sovereign nations and tongues and traditions and wars be explained?

    This is a good point, and it’s one that I think race realists are going to have to answer convincingly if we are to effectively make our case.

  • American

    This is typical neocon propaganda.The founding fathers were all European Christians.They repeatedly spoke of their common ancestry as well as their common religion.The neocon fantasy of a multi ethnic paradise was invented early in the 20th century and as we have come to realize is actually a disaster.

  • Whiteman

    I think the author, Dean Malik, would be better off left behind in one of the cities he loves so much, in one of the cities that’s become a dump. That’s what he says he wants, that’s what he should get. Left behind. All we have to do is remember his name.

  • BannerRWB

    “and ultimately produced the most perfect pieces of political draftsmanship the world has ever known.”: Yes, but it was produced for a White-nation after drawing upon the successes and failures of the past nations of Europe. There is no Utopia. We will never be perfect, but to deny nationalism is to invite and even guarantee ethnic conflict. That we have invited the world, including the Mexican Nationalists, to come to America, guarantees that the ethnic strife known throughout history will come to America even sooner.

  • berin

    Another example of an immigration policy (by the evil white man),which admits his dedicated enemies. Suicide! These worthless mooches come here to consume and destroy and complain.

    I think it’s too late to recover because of the toxic white liberals who are clueless.

  • Question Diversity

    1 Wayne:

    I noticed Sam Francis’s name came up prominently in the comments over at the original article in AT. Ironically, another arrogant pseudo-conservative subcontinental, Dinesh D’Souza, cost Sam his job with the Washington Times, with his school yard snitching.

    D’Souza wrote in The End of Racism the implication that western Africa was qualitatively superior to Western Europe in 1500.

  • Anonymous

    “Dean Malik, who appears to be of Arab ancestry, argues that America is a country consisting of ideals, not men of European origin. Oh and there is no such thing as European culture”

    That is exactly what modern conservatism says. They attribute America’s success is due to “free enterprise” and “capitalism” . That is just as ridiculous as your critique of this moron. The difference is that the majority of Whites in this country actually believe the Hannitys, Limbaughs etc. I believe we are going to lose this battle for one main reason. Whites in this country have been coopted by the Repulicans/conservatives. In Europe where they are far far ahead in anti immigration movements they have no equivalent situation. The situation if not so tragic would be comical Here you have working class Whites supporting a group of treasonous Plutocrats and race traitors. These guys make Obama look like a saint for the damage they are doing to real White interests. I do believe in American exceptionalism, however. We have crashed and burned faster than any country in history. Also if Europe should elect White patriots, don’t think we will not invade immediately to “save the world from Fascism”

  • Jane

    The European culture had two strong foundations as its basis: 1. the Roman Empire, which gradually diminished in centrality leading to the early Middle Ages and; 2. The Roman Catholic Church and the Latin Rite Mass. A common religion and a common language with a common inherited form of government led to a strong common identity. This is explored extensively in the writings of a mid 1900s historian named Hillaire Belloc. He was both French and English in background. His motto was Europe was the faith and the faith was Europe!

  • Anonymous

    White nationalist ideology collapses of its own weight primarily because it relies upon a definition of race—European ancestry—that has never served as a basis for culture in the history of mankind. If indeed this scope of ancestry was sufficient to establish common culture, if race and culture are one, how can the existence of Europe’s scores of separate sovereign nations and tongues and traditions and wars be explained?

    We don’t live in Europe for one thing. When Europeans came here they didn’t establish separate states based on identifying with their country of origin, nor did they preach separatism for this reason like our modern immigrants. They assimilated and became one – if the end result wasn’t common culture, which I think it is, the very least you’d have to concede is that this is evidence of such similarity in culture as to make the argument that these weren’t common cultures laughable false. How then were they able to assimilate and not just assimilate, but willfully assimilate? The borders of European countries and the conflicts that created them don’t mean squat. This isn’t Europe and obviously they chose to leave whatever historic European divisions there were behind them. The ability of European cultures to become one here in the U.S. is testimony to that.

  • rockman

    The national founding fathers were remarkably similar in background and education. White males educated in the classics and of a similar Christian religion and with ties to Europe. Diversity was lacking and I am surprised the NAACP has not denounced them as racist for not including people of color in the signing of the declaration of independence. These men founded the greatest country in history based on freedom. they made one big statement that is often forgotten. This form of govt is for a Christian people and no other. our present cess pool of a society would have turned their hair white. Diversity is not strength it is chaos and weakness.

  • XIXth

    That Dean Malik is a foreigner, is enough for any critical thinker to suspect is “conclusion” of our people. However, Dean Malik does open up some doors through which we can question our views on white identity as a means of protecting us from falling into future traps. Namely, that Anglo-Saxon, is as Malik says, just one of the “tribes” of Europe. It is to that and only that group of people, that any cultural ancestry should be traced. It is only in their cultural and national distance in affinity to that people, that other Europeans “tribes” have successfully integrated into the US. Thus, if any policy of white identity, particularly in terms of immigration and cultural policy, is to be explored, it must and can only be in terms of the Anglo-Saxon Protestant people.

  • noneknown

    Malik must have a Ph.D in De-constructionism. To the uninformed, he could seem to know of what he writes. But to a student of the founding of this country, he is just another lame Marxist trying to push the agenda.

    Peddle that prattle somewhere else Malik; your Marxist garbage is not welcome here!

    A careful study of the founders of this country will reveal that they would be positive contributors to Amren.

  • SNAviatrix

    Dean Malik the Pakistani is such a hypocrite. Yes, the Mexicans don’t belong here, but he doesn’t belong here any more than they do. Deport the both of them, I say.

    I always laugh at brown Third Worlders who think they’re good enough for the White Man to form a Special Alliance with them against other brown Third Worlders. Malik, there’s nothing special about you. The White Man (who I’m sure he bashes in other columns) invented 99% of the useful things in the world. We are resourceful enough to solve our Mexican problem without the “help” of some arrogant Pakistani.

  • deadindenver

    The concept of American Exceptional-ism is the latest propaganda effort by the establishment government conservatives?? to keep the conservative sheeple in line. I’ve noticed a lot of this lately, I believe there is a fear the sheeple are getting restless. Folks are waking up that business as usual isn’t working. On the liberal side of the government establishment (is there really a difference) Fareed Zakaria has flooded his available platforms at Time, CNN, NPR etc., preaching on the holy grail of benefits that third world immigration to U.S. Will give us. If I was a conspiracy guy I’d almost think this was orchestrated. I do think more and more of the people are waking up that the Neocon globalist agenda has only hurt us. Seriously what has 10 years in Afghanistan delivered other then 20 billion dollar bill for air conditioning tents. Mr. Malik’s article is attempt to shore things up and keep the sheeple from going off the reservation.

  • John Engelman

    3 — HH wrote at 6:41 PM on July 11:

    Still more proof positive that Conservatism is an absoluet dead-end for White People. While some issues important to Conservatives and race-realists/White Nationalists alike, may indeed overlap, the bigger picture and end goals are altogether different. I wish some visitors to this very site would finally come to understand this.

    Conservatism, as a political movement, has done virtually NOTHING to assist the White race, and in many cases, has worked actively AGAINST us! To deny or gloss over this unpleasant fact, is to misunderstand our racial struggle entirely.

    If any of you STILL think Limbaugh, Levin, Hannity, Ingraham, Boortz, et al, are really on our side…you need to look a little closer and listen a bit more critically. They are no friends to racially-aware Whites – few, if ANY in the Conservative movement are!

    ——

    Since the late 1960s the leaders of the Republican Party have become skilled at exploiting white anger at the persistence of black social pathology, and the increasing secularization and degradation of the culture. Nevertheless, the sympathies of those leaders is to the richest one percent of the country. These have prospered as real after tax income for the rest of the population has declined.

    http://investorvillage.com/smbd.asp?mb=971&mn=389436&pt=msg&mid=10153698

    I wish I could recommend the Democrat alternative. Unfortunately, leaders of the Democrat Party have promoted policies like busing and affirmative action that harm the interests of white blue collar workers. They interfere with efforts by the police to control criminals. They make it dangerous to challenge the delusion that racial differences are chimerical, or at least transitory.

    White blue collar workers and the white middle class deserve better than the choices we are forced to make on election day.

  • Josh Harlan

    Stinking Neo-Con. “American Exceptionalism” means America must go out in the world and try to fix every problem and fight all the neo-con battles. BUT, at home it also means we have to let every person in the world into America. The ones we don’t kill we have to let in, so they say. What kind of hell-hole would the world be without Whites? What kind of a paradise would it be without non-Christian, non-Whites?

  • Anonymous

    Among the core principles of the American Way are: rule of law, limited, constitutional government, individual liberty, sense of personal responsibility, etc. Clearly these principles are rooted in Judeo-Christian, European Culture. Clearly the American Way is under siege, yet I (a white, conservative male) will not embrace white nationalism as a means to salvage it. Among the reasons are:

    1. Some of the strongest components of the American Way are non-whites and non-Christians: the great Thomas Sowell (Black), Larry Elder (Black), Bobby Jindal (Indian), Marc Levin (Jewish), Marco Rubio (Hispanic).

    2. Some of the most toxic, marxist, multiculturalist opponents of the American Way are educated whites.

    And I would pick Thomas Sowell as president any day over a Jimmy Carter.

  • ATBOTL

    “White nationalist ideology collapses of its own weight primarily because it relies upon a definition of race—European ancestry—that has never served as a basis for culture in the history of mankind.”

    Nonsense. European ancestry formed the basis for culture in America, Canada and Australia until recently

  • Anonymous

    I would not take Malik to be a Pakistani name.

    Much more likely, I’d say, to be Arabic.

    In any case, who is he to be lecturing us on the founding principals of our nation?

  • Anonymous

    I think the definition of Eurocentrism is our diversity. Even before colonization of American became a big thing, we managed to isolate ourselves within competing city states and create technologies and art and an overall sense of our position as direction in life that the Arab states settled out from and lost, long before they were ruined by Islam.

    That we have managed to do this this, ‘remaining different and yet the same’ is perhaps the greatest mark of our achievement because we have routinely shown ourselves capable of great and lasting internecine hatreds at the same time we traded and exchanged technologies and shared information which another group might have held in fragmented containment like a precious secret that rotted on the vine.

    But ideas are not people. And this is nowhere more evident than in our a ability to control our population rates and establish largely self-supporting systems of self rule, down to the township level.

    NO OTHER CULTURE OR GROUP HAS MANAGED THIS.

    All have sought to leave their own places, invade ours and breed based on our success rates.

    That is the real definition of culture. That we remain true to ourselves (look at Eastern Europe and the relatively pure racial haplomaps that exist there, despite centuries of plunder and overrun by Asian and Turkish cultures) and able to exchange what counts: ideas.

    And it is also why multicult is doomed to fail. Because we cannot make the planet over into America. Not in place. Not by importation to CONUS. The third world population bloom and low IQ will not allow for this.

    We can only provide them the idea of what it might be like to be successful. And then let them emulate as we supply the basic skilled labor and services (robotics and genetics, _are_ the way forward) to let them move up, in their own lands.

    And that ‘idea’ based concept of sharing what we know, while continuing to live a life apart, is only possible so long as we are not overrun by foreign ethnies who proceed to turn OUR homelands into little-mirrors of their own failed states.

  • BannerRWB

    23-Anon: ~”The American Way – yet I (a white, conservative male) will not embrace white nationalism as a means to salvage it.”: I understand your thought, but I offer the following as possibly a more desireable end point:

    1 – Let those strong non-White components of the American Way lead the non-White world towards a better future – somewhere else. We can even assist them, if they so desire, towards reaching levels of our society.

    2 – We will always have toxic multiculturalist Whites who hate our society for whatever reason. Bind the new White ethno-state in law and allow those who wish to live in the non-White world to leave.

    Otherwise, “The American Way” may or may not exist in the future, but if we continue our current immigration policy and demographic trajectory, the White world (race) is finished. I believe that concern is closer to the main point of AMREN as compared to a given way of life.

    To put it another way: If a 100% Black nation had the best “American Way” type of society, would you prefer to live there as the only White family, thus ensuring non-White grandchildren (if any), or live in the best 100% White society that we could develop?

    Our race is dying a slow death. At some point we will have to fight to survive or we will surely die out.

  • Juggernaut

    Yet for all their doubts about immigration, the Founders never devised a selection process —- because levels were quite low.

    In 1790, the U.S. Congress established naturalization procedures that provided the first rules to be followed by the United States in the granting of national citizenship. This law limited naturalization to immigrants who were “free white persons” of “good moral character.”

  • Anonymous

    24 — Anonymous wrote at 4:40 PM on July 12:

    Among the core principles of the American Way are: rule of law, limited, constitutional government, individual liberty, sense of personal responsibility, etc. Clearly these principles are rooted in Judeo-Christian, European Culture. Clearly the American Way is under siege, yet I (a white, conservative male) will not embrace white nationalism as a means to salvage it. Among the reasons are:

    1. Some of the strongest components of the American Way are non-whites and non-Christians: the great Thomas Sowell (Black), Larry Elder (Black), Bobby Jindal (Indian), Marc Levin (Jewish), Marco Rubio (Hispanic).

    2. Some of the most toxic, marxist, multiculturalist opponents of the American Way are educated whites.

    And I would pick Thomas Sowell as president any day over a Jimmy Carter.

    —————————————-

    YOU still don’t get it, do you? WHO exactly are these so-called educated “whites” you claim are “toxic”? Do you even know anything about genetics?

    As for those you named in glowing terms, Sowell, Levin, Rubio, etc. No thanks. Look beneath the surface in all things. The neocons are all alike and they are not on the White side. The takeover of the paleo conservatives was DELIBERATE through deception and propaganda. Even Buchanan knows all about it.

  • Anonymous

    28 — Juggernaut wrote at 9:29 PM on July 12:

    Yet for all their doubts about immigration, the Founders never devised a selection process —- because levels were quite low.

    In 1790, the U.S. Congress established naturalization procedures that provided the first rules to be followed by the United States in the granting of national citizenship. This law limited naturalization to immigrants who were “free white persons” of “good moral character.”

    ———————————-

    So true. You will never hear any of these neocons ever acknowledge that fact.

    Last week the “conservative” talk show host filling in for Glenn Beck, said that he did not care if EVERY Mexican citizen poured into this country from Mexico, as long as they did it legally. He seems to think that race has nothing to do with the “America” he lives in. I find this attitude among 99% of all neocon talk show hosts. They cannot comprehend in their little minds America as being a White nation founded by and FOR Whites. I have always voted Republican but in the last few years I have decided I do not agree with their stance on race and racial issues and they have just become just like the left on the race question.

  • Jupiter7

    I have a very strong suspicion that Dean Malik read the previous thread about his American Thinker commentary about White Identity politics where I exposed the fact that he is a Pakistani “American” married to Pakistani “American” with three Pakistani “American” children.

    No one here should doubt for one moment that Dean Malik is neutral on the racial transformation of American issue. He is for it..full speed ahead..just ask him. Dean Malik is demanding that the Native Born White American Majority commit racial suicide within the borders of America..and if they don’t agree to do this they are traitors. In fact he has gone so far as to claim-see Charles Bloch post on vdare.com today-that the constitution demands this also.

    I just want to point out that Charles Bloch could have easily figured out through a Google search that Dean Malik is a Pakistani. This fact is not incidental to his race-replacement enthusiasm.

  • Question Diversity

    32:

    Ironically, Glenn Beck himself admitted on his radio show (*) yesterday that during his time on TV, when he wanted to do border issues, CNN said “Hell no what border?” and Fox News never gave him permission to do immigration issues. The occasion of him saying this was his announcement of a big border documentary that he will make for his own video distribution service.

    * – Call me crazy, but I get the feeling that the radio Glenn Beck and the TV Glenn Beck are two different people. The radio GB is relatively sane, and sometimes hilarious, but far from perfect or ideal, but the TV GB was a bit too preachy and condescending and neo-connish for my tastes, and he could have taken that dorky blackboard and stuck it where the sun doesn’t shine. Very few people can pull off the one-two punch of TV and radio, and the only reason Sean Hannity “can” is because he has a dorky personality that appeals to a fair number of middle aged white women.

  • Anonymous

    I exposed the fact that he is a Pakistani “American” married to Pakistani “American” with three Pakistani “American” children.

    ——————

    You have not exposed any such “fact”. You have merely made an undocumented statement, unsupported by any facts whatsoever.

    I do not know anything about the man, so (unlike you) I will not make any assertions. But I continue to suspect that he is not a Pakistani, but more likely an Egyptian (or other such Arab).

    Not that his provenance matters greatly, but I think that Amren should be careful about not allowing unsupported assertions to be printed as if they were facts, when they are nothing but someone’s idle speculation.

    You may be right, but where is your proof?

  • Anonymous

    He implies that an America without “diversity” would be merely a “mongrelized” European outgrowth? So, is mongrelization a negative? Oh, that’s right — of course it is, in the few, perverse, highly selective, ideologically loaded uses of the m-word i.e. as an antiwhite slur.