Is There Hope for America? A British View

Robert Henderson, American Renaissance, January 4, 2013

The way is clear. Do you have the courage to take it?

Even by their own adolescent standards, white liberals have been dangerously overexcited by Mr. Obama’s re-election. They are reveling in the belief that the United States is locked into an inescapable demographic trap that will soon end the white majority and the dominant culture that shaped the country. This, the white liberal fondly and ludicrously imagines, will mean a wondrously multicultural and multiracial America standing as the very model of social and historical development.

This is truly an epic fantasy. Even if mass immigration does continue and makes whites a minority, it does not mean that the multiculturalist dream of groups living in harmony will come true. Indeed, we can be sure it will not, because never in history has a territory occupied by racially or ethnically differentiated groups produced harmony. The best that is ever achieved is an uneasy armistice enforced by an (often formally imperial) overlord. Ever-larger racial or ethnic minorities will create greater competition among themselves, not a rainbow alliance against the white population.

White liberal enthusiasm for a future in which they are reduced to just another ethnic minority extends to their claim that the Republican Party is in inescapable decline—unless it panders to blacks, Latinos, gays, feminists, and immigrants, while dropping any pretense of trying to stem immigration. In short, Republicans must become the ideological Tweedledum to the Democratic Party’s Tweedledee.

The chief fly in the ointment for the white liberal’s vision of the USA and the GOP is that the demographic future for the USA does not have to be as they imagine it. Mass immigration can be stopped if there is the political will.

[Editor’s Note: This article is adapted from an essay that originally appeared here.]

But even under the most aggressive demographic projections put forward by liberals there is no compelling reason to believe that in the next 15 years Republicans will be excluded from controlling Congress. There is still time for the GOP to do what is necessary to defeat the supposedly predetermined demographic and political future, by adopting a program that appeals to whites and ending mass immigration.

The voting patterns

How was Mr. Obama elected?


The ethnic vote went overwhelmingly for Mr. Obama: blacks 93 percent, Hispanics 71 percent, and Asians 73 percent. Obama also won 55 percent of female voters and took 60 percent of the 18-29 group and 52 percent of the 30-44 age group. Mr. Romney won 59 percent of the white vote to Mr. Obama’s 39 percent.

We can draw several conclusions. The overwhelming black support for Mr. Obama is almost certainly available only to a black candidate. The Hispanic vote is racially disparate and white Hispanics may eventually see themselves as white. The Asian constituency is still small and disparate, and Asians probably voted for Obama to a significant degree because many are recent immigrants, but the tendency to support the most immigrant-friendly candidate may decline as succeeding generations become distanced from their ancestral culture. A majority formed of several ethnic minority groups is certain to be neither stable nor harmonious.

The youth vote for Obama dropped significantly compared with 2008, and women helped give Obama a healthy but not overwhelming advantage. This last point is important because women are the largest group that is supposedly set to consign the Republicans to the dustbin of history unless they change their supposedly outmoded ways. A 5 percent shift in women to the Republicans—something perfectly plausible under different circumstances—would solve the Republican woman problem.

If the Democrats run a white man as their candidate, they could lose the votes of many non-white women. At the same time, a white Hispanic Republican could capture a large part of the Hispanic vote while perhaps not alienating too many white voters.

As for the under-30 white vote, 51 percent went to Mr. Romney versus 44 percent to Mr. Obama. This was a reverse of the 2008 election, when Mr. Obama won 54 percent of the under-30 white vote to Mr. McCain’s 44 percent. This is a significant shift, with young whites at least drifting towards a racial realignment. It is also true that younger voters often change their politics as they grow older, normally moving left to right.

In 2008, Mr. Obama was a novelty. Now, he is increasingly seen as just another tired, failed politician. Any black candidate in the future will be just another candidate, and will not get quite as much mainstream-media deference as Mr. Obama has enjoyed.

Support for immigration by recent immigrants is often strongly driven by the desire to bring in extended family members and friends. It is possible that the descendants of recent immigrants will have weaker attachments to their ancestral lands, and this could weaken their support for immigration. More dramatically, there are examples of the descendants of immigrants wanting to pull up the drawbridge to prevent further immigration of their own people. In the 19th century, for example, Anglicised Jews from families long settled in Britain opposed immigration of Jews from Eastern Europe.

It is not unsurprising that immigrants should sometimes oppose further immigration, especially by people who are different in race, nationality or ethnicity. More immigrants always mean greater competition for jobs, housing, education, healthcare etc. There is a particularly strong motive for immigrants to oppose further immigration if the country they have settled in has a comprehensive welfare system.

As ethnic/racial solidarity within a country declines, taxpayers become less willing to fund welfare programs. (see, for example, Frank Salter: On Genetic Interests: Family, Ethnicity, and Humanity in an Age of Mass Migration). Mitt Romney was castigated for saying that 47 percent of the American population were on benefits and would not vote for someone who might reduce benefits. What if the 47 percent became 60 or 70 percent? As a matter of simple arithmetic, there has to be a point beyond which benefits cannot be maintained.

That would be a serious difficulty in a homogeneous society; in an increasingly fragmented one it is a recipe for racial and ethnic strife. At the same time, those within ethnic and racial groups who have done better will tend to see themselves in class terms rather than ethnic or racial terms. This could lead to large cuts in welfare payments, which would discourage immigration.

Mr. Romney as a candidate

There were many drawbacks to Mr. Romney as a candidate. He is a rich man who made his wealth in the now widely hated financial industry. He is a member of a religion with elements that trouble some mainstream Christian voters. He has a tin ear for what should be said when you are courting the general public. In an electoral race where personality counts for so much, he came across most of the time as wooden, and incapable of engaging with voters.

He also moved from being what is politely called a moderate Republican (translation: closet liberal) on subjects such as immigration and homosexual marriage to a significantly less PC position, particularly during the primary. Many liberal commentators are now arguing that this made him unelectable because it alienated Hispanics, blacks, homosexuals, the young, and women. It is also equally plausible that conservatives did not think his change of heart was sincere. His shifts probably lost him votes on both sides of the political divide.

There was also an air of diffidence about Mr. Romney, as though his heart was not wholly in the fight. According to one media report:

After failing to win the 2008 Republican nomination, Mr Romney told his family he would not run again and had to be persuaded to enter the 2012 White House race by his wife Ann and son Tagg.

“He wanted to be president less than anyone I’ve met in my life. He had no desire . . . to run,” Tagg Romney said. “If he could have found someone else to take his place . . . he would have been ecstatic to step aside.”

Mitt Romney “is a very private person who loves his family deeply and wants to be with them. He loves his country, but he doesn’t love the attention,” his son said.

If this is true, it would have been signaled unconsciously to voters by body language and vocal traits.

In addition to benefiting from Mr. Romney’s many weaknesses, Mr. Obama had the advantages of a sitting president. Since 1945, only Jimmy Carter in 1980 and Bush Senior in 1992 have failed to win re-election. Mr. Obama also had a reduced but still significant boost from the fact that he was the first black president.

Balanced against that, Mr. Obama had presided over the most difficult economic conditions since the 1930s. However, the recession began under a Republican president and in the public mind—at least at the headline level—was created by bankers and their ilk, who generally supported Republicans.

Voters seem to have widely accepted the view that Mr. Obama did not create this mess. They may have blamed Mr. Obama for not ending the economic troubles, but they blamed the Bush administration even more for starting them. In the eyes of many voters, Mr. Romney’s past as an investment-fund manager may have made him by proxy part of the cause of the mess.

Despite the result in electoral college (332 to 206), Mr. Obama did not win a massive popular victory:

Obama : 64,428,975 votes (50.80 percent)

Romney : 60,227,548 votes (47.49 percent)

Total votes: 126,832,750

Mr. Obama won many states by narrow margins. If approximately 850,000 Obama voters spread over the closely contested states had switched to Mr. Romney he would have become President. Taking the broad picture, there are reasons to believe that a better Republican candidate under better conditions could win, especially if he did not have to face a black Democratic candidate.

The demographics

One might conclude from liberal media excitement that whites are on the brink of becoming a minority. Of course, they are still a large majority.

The 2010 US census arrived at a total figure of 308.7 million, with a non-Hispanic white population of 196.8 million. The census also counted 50.5 million Hispanics, of which it classified 26.7 million as white. If all these people really were white, it would raise the white population to 223.6 million, or 72.4 percent. As noted above, as time goes by, some Hispanics may identify as Americans rather than Hispanics, especially if they succeed economically.

An important political imponderable is the approximately 100 million whites who were eligible to vote but did not. As the US becomes more polarized  turnout is likely to increase, but an increase need not be uniform across all races. While whites are the majority, a candidate offering pro-white policies can win an election simply by appealing to enough white voters. The same is not true for minorities. They will all be competing for political attention, and will have different demands, so no single party or candidate will satisfy them. Already, there is friction between blacks and Hispanics, and this will intensify as the Hispanic population continues to grow.

The other thing in the favor of the white population is that even according to the most aggressive demographic predictions, there will be at least another generation before non-Hispanic whites become a minority. If some white Hispanics identify as white, that would delay white minority status even further. All of this means that there is time for both the Republican Party and whites in general to change the demographic future by voting for candidates and parties that would control immigration and cease to pander to minorities.

But even if the white population becomes a minority it would remain by far the largest minority for some time. That could result in a coalition of whites and one or two smaller partners to create a white-dominated group that would leave the white population in a position of considerable power.

A program to maintain the white majority

Any party, whether existing or new, could adopt a program of preserving the white majority, but it is unrealistic to expect a new party to challenge the Democrat/Republican duopoly. Since the Democrats are wedded to politically correct ideology, the only real option for such change lies with the Republicans.

The logical and natural thing for the Republican Party is what neither they nor any other mainstream party in the developed world has done: play the racial/ethnic political game by appealing unambiguously to whites. To be effective, such a political platform would have to be adopted by Republican candidates across the board, not merely by presidential candidates. That would go against the US party tradition, in which discipline is much looser than in many European countries. Perhaps the most likely way such policy uniformity could arise would be for it to be adopted first at the state level and grow nationally after it had proven itself locally. What the Tea Party achieved on taxation and spending could perhaps be achieved on race and immigration.

At the core of this appeal to the white majority must be a promise to end mass immigration by those who cannot be assimilated. This would require a truly effective barrier along the Mexican border, stronger coastal surveillance, and proper policing of small airfields. It may also be possible, without amending the Constitution, to stop granting birth-right citizenship.

There is also the question of the millions of illegal immigrants already in the United States. Many claim there are too many to remove forcibly, but this may not be true. During Operation Wetback in 1954, more than 1 million Latin Americans (mainly Mexicans) were either deported or chose to leave for fear of being deported. Their removal was accomplished by a border force of little more than 1,000. It is manifestly not impossible to expel large numbers of people, especially when they are being expelled just across the border to a neighboring country.

A large-scale expulsion of illegal immigrants would be the strongest possible signal to whites that the Federal Government was willing to act on their behalf. Other inducements for whites would be a pledge to abolish racial preferences, and to end all public assistance of any kind to illegal immigrants.

A recast GOP would explicitly recognize the tribal nature of human beings. Above all, it would make it clear that the values and culture of the founding and ancestral white population are precious things, which whites have both the right and the duty to defend. It could declare English the official language and make real fluency a requirement for naturalization. It could also invite ethnic and racial minorities to become Americans and not hyphenated Americans. It is debatable whether minorities would embrace European values and culture, but such an offer would assuage white doubts about the program and would be seen as an attempt at inclusion.

This program would have great appeal to whites. They may pay lip service to the multi-cultural creed or stay silent for fear of losing jobs or social standing. However, once mainstream politicians have the courage to denounce political correctness regularly and unashamedly, at least some of the mainstream media would come on board. Ordinary white Americans would lose their fear, and their pent-up resentment at what has been done to their country would be released like water from a breaking dam.

If the GOP adopted such a program it would put the Democratic Party in a very difficult position. It would have to make a hard decision: Would it unashamedly go after the non-white vote by promising ever more privileges to them to counter the GOP’s appeal to whites? If so, the Democrats would lose most of their remaining white support. Even if its policies remained unchanged, it would still lose white voters because the party would have nothing to offer them to compete with the white-enticing program of the Republicans.

If the Democrats lost substantial ground among whites they would almost certainly start to shift away from political correctness and towards the new program of the Republicans. That would help to move the entire political debate in a sensible direction.

The rest of the West

What applies to the United States holds true for the rest of the white world. The program I suggest applies to any country with a largely homogeneous white population that has been fractured by mass immigration. In many such countries the task will be easier than in the US. European countries are not dominated by two parties and therefore give their voters more options. Their parties are more coherent and ideologically unified than American parties. Finally, they are much smaller countries, which makes it easier to create a party with the unified program that is required.

In principle, Britain would be well placed among larger First-World countries to create such a party and have its program followed through. This is because Britain has no superior constitutional law (any law passed by Parliament can be repealed by Parliament); no executive head of state; a first-past-the-post electoral system for the House of Commons, and an executive drawn, with one or two exceptions, from that House of Commons. It is true that Britain is presently enmeshed in the European Union and various other treaties and conventions such as the European Convention on Human Rights and the UN Convention on Refugees, but these could all be abrogated and repudiated by a simple act of Parliament.

The main barrier to political change that would protect the interests of the white native majorities in the United States, Britain, and elsewhere is a matter of political ideology and custom. If the political will exists, there will be change.

Just another “End of History”

Where do the dramatic predictions made by white liberals about the America’s political future come from? Such ideas have a long history. The last time something similar hit the headlines was Francis Fukuyama’s 1989 article, “The End of History?” Published at the time of the fall of the Soviet Union, it argued that liberal internationalism was the conclusion of human social development and that the long march of human social evolution had come to a halt.

Francis Fukuyama

Francis Fukuyama

Wittingly or not, the present outpouring of liberal triumphalist glee is an offshoot of the Fukuyama world view, which itself was in the line of historicist claims that history was not simply a series of random events but a process that had some ultimate end, either willed by God or the consequence of ineluctable cause and effect.

For Mr. Fukuyama, the victory of liberalism was inevitable:

The triumph of the West, of the Western idea, is evident first of all in the total exhaustion of viable systematic alternatives to Western liberalism . . . .

. . . at the end of history it is not necessary that all societies become successful liberal societies, merely that they end their ideological pretensions of representing different and higher forms of human society.

The legionaries of this ideal want a world with no nations, no states, no borders, and no distinctions between people. That idea has a religious intensity for true one-worlders. It is a goal that promises a world which, for the one-worlder, will be perfect—or at least greatly superior to what now exists. That has the intensely exciting and liberating effect of absolving true believers from responsibility for the here and now. It also fosters the idea that anything done now is legitimate regardless of its moral consequences, in much the same way that Marxism permitted any atrocity provided it was part of the historical motor that drove society to its final and perfect end.

Moreover, even if the one-worlders believe their goal is inevitable, they may also believe, as Marxists did, that the speed at which it arrives may be hastened by conscious action. The similarities between Marxists and the one-worlders are worth noting because the latter are the type of people who, 30 years ago, would have been Marxists.

However, the claims made by liberals about the Republican Party and the United States are different in one important respect from earlier historicist theories. Both Marx and Mr. Fukuyama described what was supposed to be an inexorable process that could not be halted. The modern liberal claim is different because there is a mechanism—mass immigration—created by human agency, that helps achieve their goals. Immigration can be stopped, but if there is no party that takes action against immigration, the native population could be quickly reduced even to a small majority. This is a very real danger in a small country such as Norway.

The liberal voices calling for the Republicans to “wake up and smell the ethnic coffee” are asking whites to commit political suicide by allowing ethnic and racial victimhood to become the driving force of their party as well as that of the Democrats. That would remove any chance of an effective stand against immigration. The logic of ethnic and racial change should tell the Republicans to do one thing only: use the still-white majority to safeguard their position by stopping mass immigration. Racial politics may be distasteful, but if that is what everyone else is playing, then you have to play the same game as a matter of self-preservation.

Will Republicans embrace their only rational way forward and become the standard bearer for white America? It would be a tremendous psychological hill for them to climb. Left to their own devices, Republican will accept the fate bestowed upon them by white liberals and their minority auxiliaries. But they may not be left to their own devices; hard economic times are making white Americans angrier and angrier at the way they have been betrayed.

Since Mr. Obama’s re-election there have been petitions gathering substantial numbers of signatures in many American states arguing for secession. For now, these are just expressions of exasperation, but they are signs of a growing sense among whites that there is no way to change things within the Union. If mainstream American politicians remain divorced from the wishes of the still-white majority, secession may become more than an expression of exasperation.

It is not inconceivable that the USA could fracture if mass immigration continues. If that happens, territory is what counts. A large majority of the physical territory of the United States voted Republican. In the end, control of physical territory, whether through the overt exercise of power or the passive fact of being the dominant population, is the most important political fact. That could make all the difference.

[Editor’s Note: This article is adapted from an essay that originally appeared here.]

Topics: , , , , , ,

Share This

Robert Henderson
Robert Henderson studied history and politics at Keele University in England. He blogs at Living in a Madhouse and England Calling.
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.
  • pcmustgo

    Hmmm, Obama took a 3 point jump with Democrats in 2012. 08′ must have had a lot of disgruntled Hillary supporters… so dems like him now more than ever…

    He dropped 4 points overall among whites.

  • pcmustgo

    Mitt Romney has a beautiful family full of beautiful people, but I must say the woman (brunette) in the upper right corner is looking a bit non-white…

    Half Amer-Indian or Asian or Latino?????

    • Fair Dingum

      How white is white enough for you? Are you quite sure you have no non-white ancestors in your family tree?

      • Remington

        That poster is a half-jewish woman (she’s been saying so on AR for years now) and is projecting her own insecurities every time she sees anybody with non-stereotypical White features. She also likes to look down on poor Whites and especially the Irish. It’s quite silly to say the least…

      • pcmustgo

        I’m half jewish, as everyone on here knows, and meant it as a joke- sort of… I am not critisizing them, just saying…

    • James Flower

      Its thanks to comments like that most people think we are all nuts. What a stupid, pointless comment/observation.

      • David Ashton


  • I don’t buy for one second Tagg Romney’s statement that his father never really wanted to be President. Losers tend to rationalize their loss with the sour grapes mentality that they “never really wanted” that which was denied to them. I can proved that Mitt Romney wanted to be President: In 2009, he sold all but two of his houses. Because he saw all the flack McCain got in 2008 for owning so many houses. I took that as a clue way back then that Romney was running for President. Another clue that Romney wanted to win: A Mormon winning the Presidency would grant great credibility to Mormonism, just as JFK punching it through did for American Catholics.

    There is precedent for the demographic tidal wave supposedly spelling doom for whites politically, but not actually doing so: The state of Mississippi. All we have to do is Mississippiize American politics. Easier said than done, though.

    • E_Pluribus_Pluribus

      QD: “All we have to do is Mississippiize American politics. Easier said than done, though.”

      True and true.

      Mississippi’s electorate is 60 percent white, 37 percent black. whites voted 89 percent for Romney. Romney carried Mississippi 55-44. Then there is Vermont, which is 96 percent white, 1 percent black. Vermont’s whites voted 33 percent for Romney. Obama carried Vermont 67-31.

      What’s different about the mentality of white Mississippians and white Vermonters? Vermonters’ understanding of diversity derives from what media, Hollywood, schools and universities tell them about diversity. Mississippians’ understanding of diversity from direct experience.

      How sad for diversity-deprived northerners! But there is a solution. Liberals typically support racial balancing within schools, school district and places of employment. What about national campaign for racial balance among states? Why should Vermonters — and blue states generally — be deprived of the glories of diversity? Why should states like Mississippi hoard all of diversity’s riches and strengths?

      It’s unfair. Let’s redistribute the diversity wealth.

      • This is where the libs get too clever by half when they start calling for kick-starting forced integration programs back into existence. The heyday of the closest America had to open white nationalism outside the Deep South was the school deseg battles, thanks to the arrogant Federal judiciary. Even Boston resisted, and George Wallace carried a lot of white (mainly Irish and Italian) boxes in Boston in the 1976 Democrat primary in Massachusetts, even though he didn’t win the whole state. He got 17% in a state where the winner, Scoop Jackson, won with 22%. And Wallace was running openly from a wheelchair in ’76, and in a deep blue liberal state while openly crippled, he still did a lot better than Ron Paul did in most states in 2008 and 2012. (That’s for JackRyanVB).

      • Dave4088

        I agree. Vermonters likely think blacks are as peaceable and affable as portrayed on network television. I think at least 10,000 violent blacks from Detroit need to be bussed in to Vermont and sprinkled throughout their whitopias and then we’ll see if the collective attitudes of whites towards diversity doesn’t start to change.

        • Joseph

          I like your inclusiveness program, scattered-site housing for diversity. THAT would be a white awakening.

          p.s. -you needn’t stipulate “violent blacks”; it’s redundant.

          • 1Forced_Registration

            Have no fear, the Federal government is already implementing this plan, and all of America is getting the bill. They love relocating blacks, and sticking us with the bill for free housing while they do it. There is no better tool for converting liberals into race realists than a section 8 housing complex being dropped into their neighborhood.

  • storibund

    A lot of “ifs” in this article. One “if” that I think can be taken off of the table: I honestly don’t think the Democrats are ever going to run a white candidate again.

    • dhs

      They may run a white female.

      • RileyDeWiley

        Or a homosexual white male.

        • Non Humans

          Or Lesbian…

          • Dan

            Or a homosexual negro muslim. Oh, wait…

    • JohnEngelman

      Jared Taylor has pointed out that Mitt Romney won the same percent of the white vote that Ronald Reagan did in 1980. I think it is more likely that the Republicans are never going to come close to winning the White House again.

  • So CAL Snowman

    Apparently Robert Henderson is unaware of the fact that the Republicans actively intend to lose the presidential election on purpose. John McCain and Mitt Romney were the best they could come up with? Interesting that the Repubs can still maintain the House, but what does it matter when they cave to the leftist establishment at every opportunity? Mr. Henderson needs to understand that the Repubs only exist to “conserve” the gains made by the lefty pinkos.

    • Mike Lane

      Absolutely. The Republican Party has been infected with neocons and crypto-liberals. If they really had principles they would have nominated Ron Paul, who comes the closest to the true American ideal. What we need is a brand new party entirely void of political correctness, as well as an organized movement to go along with it.

      The problem is that too many Right wing individuals are divided on a few issues that make them bicker amongst themselves (divide and conquer) while the Left has feminists, homosexuals, minorities, and many blue collar workers fighting hand in hand, yet none of them have much in common.
      We need a movement consisting of paleocons, libertarians (at least those Right leaning), race realists/racialists, white nationalists, etc. joining each other. There is a clever theory in Europe where the nationalists have proposed counties/cities for their people and the like-minded in which they could establish their own laws. As citizens grow, so does the territory.

      • David Ashton

        These leftist groups have little in common EXCEPT that they are or expect to be the special beneficiaries of government action with funds provided by others. They are also the groups directly targeted by the Cultural Marxists as recommended by Herbert Marcuse &c.

        • Joseph

          The motivation to GET something is much stronger than the motivation for the rest of us to try to prevent a thousand things from occurring.

          There is no champion of “Let’s do nothing”, but there are a thousand champions of “We MUST do this”.

      • Matt West

        They have much in common, a detesting of the historical American nation and the historical American way of life.

    • JohnEngelman

      Although a small number of ballots remain to be counted, as of this writing, votes for a Democratic candidate for the House of Representatives outweigh votes for Republican candidates. Based on ThinkProgress’ review of all ballots counted so far, 53,952,240 votes were cast for a Democratic candidate for the House and only 53,402,643 were cast for a Republican — meaning that Democratic votes exceed Republican votes by more than half a million…

      Republicans won several key state legislatures and governors’ mansions in the election cycle before redistricting, and they gerrymandered those states within an inch of their lives. President Obama won Pennsylvania by more than 5 points, but Democrats carried only 5 of the state’s 18 congressional seats:

  • David Ashton

    Robert Henderson is an excellent analysis of the multiracial messing up of England. His writings are always worth considering. The New Century Foundation should go through the archives to collect the most positive suggestions, big and small, for western recovery.

  • If Samuel L. Jackson had told me to say the N-word, I would have.

    • OlderWoman

      I as well. The nasty sound of it fits the cultures nasty behavior.

  • ricpic

    After four years of Obama’s miserable stewardship of the economy and barely concealed hostility to whites he received 55% of the votes of white women, down a mere 1% from the percentage they had given him in ’08. That should tell anyone without stars in their eyes that white women represent the single biggest obstacle to a return to a white ruled limited government individual liberty America. Mr. Henderson says cavalierly that it shouldn’t be all that difficult for Republicans to capture half the white woman vote in future. It will be equivalent to climbing Mt. Everest. In winter. For one thing there is a natural affinity between the great majority of women, white women included, and what they perceive to be the benevolent, protective, compassionate state. For another, far fewer white women than white men can live with the thought that they, as whites, live in the midst of naturally hostile blacks browns and yellows. The thought is extremely distressing to them and they will believe anything, any fantasy, just as long as that grim reality goes away. So race consciousness is not their bag. Women are also highly conscious of what’s in the air, the zeitgeist, and desperately want to be in line with it. And in case you hadn’t noticed the zeitgeist is overwhelmingly liberal. I have no solution to this problem. But a first step is to at least acknowledge the raised odds against a consciously white oriented limited government party retaking power that is posed by white women.

    • It does not say that 55% of white women voted Obama, it says that 55% of all women voted Obama. White women voted 56% for Romney. Even under-30 white women, the group said only to care about aborticides and pills, voted slightly more for Romney than Obama.

    • Joe Webb

      au contraire?? I read somewhere that White women voted only 42% for Obongo in 2012 and 46% in 2008.

  • JohnEngelman

    What the Tea Party achieved on taxation and spending could perhaps be achieved on race and immigration.

    – Robert Henderson, American Renaissance, January 4, 2013

    What the Tea Party achieved on taxation and spending is the reason for the persistence of high unemployment. This in turn is the reason the President was reelected by a smaller margin than he was elected by in 2008.

    The Great Depression was ended by high government spending and high government employment paid for by high taxes on the rich.

    In 1933, the same year Franklin Roosevelt was inaugurated he began the Civilian Conservation Corps. This created jobs at government expense. It was overwhelmingly popular with the voters.

    A Gallup poll of 18 April 1936, asked “Are you in favor of the CCC camps?”; 82% of respondents said yes, including 92% of Democratsand 67% of Republicans.[31]

    As a result of CCC, and similar actions by the Federal Government unemployment from 1932 to 1934 declined from 23.6 percent to 21.7 percent. In 1936 there was an additional decline to 16.9 percent.

    From 1932 to 1936 the top tax rate rose from 63 percent to 78 percent.

    FDR was reelected by a landslide in 1936 with comfortable Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress to pass additional efforts to reduce unemployment.

    • robinbishop34

      The Great Depression was ended by WW2

      • JohnEngelman

        Military spending and employment is government spending and employment. I do not regret America’s entry into World War II. Nevertheless, if the money had been spend by the government on public sector spending and employment the effect on the economy would have been better. People cannot eat bullets and live in tanks.

  • JohnEngelman

    Although the standard of living for most Americans has declined since Bill Clinton left office the rich have gotten richer. This is a Democrat issue.

  • JohnEngelman

    Within the Republican Party there is an irreconcilable difference between white blue collar workers who want less or no immigration, and their employers who want more immigration because it enables them to lower wages.

    The only possible schism that I see in the Democratic Party is between blacks and Hispanics. They frequently dislike each other in the neighborhoods where they live. Nevertheless, this dislike has not lead to major differences in political policies that they desire.

    The vast majority of voters who are not white Gentiles vote Democratic. This is not changing. In addition, most white trade unionists vote Democrat as do most college educated whites who are not self employed. Employees feel – and may resent – the power of bosses and employers more than the power of the government.

  • This essay pre-supposes that an elected conservative majority would actually engage in core conservative principals? That’s comical. This nation must awaken from their soma induced trance and realize a global elite oligarchy is steering this train slowly but most assuredly towards a world order. Both parties serve the same masters, and it’s not you and me.

    Just look at the ridiculous choreographed dance over the “fiscal cliff”. What forgery and trickery of meaningless supposed ideological arguments set forth only to placate the masses into believing their ”side” is engaged in important participatory representation.

    Mr. Henderson is right that the weight of this fraud will collapse upon itself but not for a turn towards conservative principals but into chaos and the fragmentation of the nation.

    Then, and only then, would America’s white population condense into an ethnic coalition to support what would now be evident as their own self interests.

  • Let’s look at this from the other direction.

    Is there hope for Britain? An American view.

    “For Dummies” answer: More than America. While their current political and cultural climate seems hopelessly oppressive and insane, they’re whiter than America, they have a functioning openly nationalist political party and a functioning crypto nationalist political party, their very existence is rooted in ethnicity, (English, Scottish, Welsh, and some Irish), not creed or ideology which in theory can be universalized, and they’re completely surrounded by ocean which means immigration-style invasions are extremely hard if you don’t let them in. They don’t share a several thousand mile long border with a country which has an irredentist bug up its crawl waging demographic warfare against it. And in the right situation, its heavy handed government could be more of a feature than a bug, provided the right people (white nationalists) control it — The same jack boot which can be used to oppress white people can also be used by white people to deport non-whites without fear of being inconsistent with some creed.

    • rightrightright

      The three main political parties in Britain that used to oppose each other now sing from the same songsheet. They are all of them Left-wing and in thrall to the EU, globalism and ever-increasing third-world immigration. One three-headed monster.

      In opposition there is the BNP which has more or less died (whether nobbled by the State or not, we don’t know); the popular English Defence League leader, Tommy Robinson, languishes in prison, on long-term remand in respect of a collection of silly and spiteful charges levelled against him. Kevin Carroll, the deputy leader of the EDL, was arrested and is now out on bail, again for a silly charge. His house was raided and his computer taken. Paul Weston, Chairman of the EDL-linked political party, British Freedom, has resigned this week.

      That only leaves the UK Independence Party which is regarded in nationalist circles as being a “vent” party to soak up nationalist-inclined votes.

      In Britain, the state is out to silence all opposition to its New World Order commitment. America, please note what I have written here, on how they silence opponents while maintaining the myth of freedom of speech and political expression. Learn from it, so when your state tries they tactics on you, you are ready and ahead of them. My country is stuffed. Utterly stuffed. I hope yours does better.

      • storibund

        My heart breaks for you guys. Surely, surely, there is some way out? Perhaps the chaos we’ll all be plunged into when this global economic train goes shrieking off the rails, will contain somewhere within it the seed of freedom for future generations.

        (But something tells me the global elites have already planned that far ahead)

        There’s a huge gun show in town today. I’m off to restock.

  • DelmarJackson

    I propose we put up, or shut up.

    The author identifies a key component to western cultures survival, which is reducing immigration.

    Most everyone here would agree. Then what is stopping us?

    well….The leaders of both parties, the leadership of the churches, the media, environmental groups, academics, even unions are all against us. How can we prevail?

    Here is my proposal of a way we can at least begin…. there is a video on youtube showing how a person can take a used $20 overhead projector and use it to make signs on cardboard or tyvek and post them along highways where they can be seen by tens or hundreds of thousands of drivers everyday.

    I propose we begin blanketing the nation with simple slogans on home made signs and at the bottom give links to numbersusa and vdare and amren to entice those who are interested in the message to join with us.

    American advertising businesses knows how to sell a product, they do it by repetition of a simple message over and over.

    Imagine signs on highways all across America















    At the end of every message have a website listed like Amren or numnbersusa so people can learn more.

    repetitive messages will soak into peoples brains and get people more receptive to talking and thinking about reducing immigration.

    You will have to be careful where you place a sign, but if enough of us do this we can help shape the public narrative and bring more people to sites that support our cause.

    you have nothing to lose but your scrap cardboard and a couple of weekend afternoons. post on youtube when you get your immigration signs up..

    How to reach 100,000 people for under $1

    • storibund

      Or… you could casually drop links on Drudge-linked stories (for the websites that support them, that is). Lots and lots of eyes, there. Someone linked AmRen, SBPDL, and a few others in a thread the other day.

      Whatever works. Lots of people looking for direction, and like minds.


      • NM156


    • David Ashton

      One of the good ideas I suggested that the NCF should collect & help implement.

  • KenelmDigby

    Where Robert Henderson (in a Pollyanna-ish piece, if I might say), gets things wrong is this –
    ‘minorities’ will continue to vote in their own ethnic genetic interest. The primary thrust of mestizo EGI is NOT to increase living standards for mestizos who have successfully managed to trick their way into the USA, as high as possible (which Henderson seems to intimate that future Reublican strategy should focus on), but it is to import as amny of their co-ethnics as humanly possible into the USA, so that their EGI can thrive on fertile soil.
    The same is true of all other non-White ‘minorities’.
    As for blacks, well blacks realise the Democrats are a government for them and by them.
    Many White women see the Democrats as a way of neutering White men.
    So altogether, you’ve got a pretty solid and unbeatable Democrat alliance that is based on rock-solid, primal instinctive urges.

    • Petronius

      Agree. Good, succinct analysis.

      Democrats are beating Republicans with Hispanics by around 70/30, blacks 95/5, Jews 70/30, Muslims 80/20, Asians 75/25, females 55/45, unmarried females 70/30, and young voters (ages 18-29) by 60/40. They do this with identity politics, a helpful media, and “free stuff.”

      The only things Republicans have to offer are jobs, low taxes, and prosperity. And those things only appeal to people who are interested in making money the old fashioned way, by working for it. Unfortunately more people are now inclined to make money by voting for it.

      When it comes to defending white interests, or even conservative interests, I don’t think the Republicans are willing to help.

      Rather, it so often seems to be a question whether my deck chair will get more sun on the port or starboard side of the Titanic.

      For example, SC Republican Gov. Nikki Haley (Sikh-Indian) recently appointed rookie Congressman Tim Scott (black) to fill Jim DeMint’s Senate seat, even though there were many better qualified, more experienced white candidates for the job. This was pure affirmative action.

      Also note how often Republicans have betrayed the Tea Party :
      • Advocating for amnesty
      • Banning Tea Party adherents from the Republican Convention
      • Florida GOP gerrymandering Allen West’s district to ensure his defeat
      • Chief Justice Roberts upholding ObamaCare in an act of unmitigated cowardice
      • Slam-down of Rand Paul by Republican leadership in Senate.
      • Night of the long knives––removing four Tea Party conservatives from key House Budget and Finance committees.
      • Conceding tax increases to the Commiecrats without obtaining spending cuts.

      • Non Humans

        “The only things Republicans have to offer are jobs, low taxes, and prosperity. And those things only appeal to people who are interested in making money the old fashioned way, by working for it. Unfortunately more people are now inclined to make money by voting for it. ”
        This statement speaks volumes about what is wrong with the majority of our country. Not only in the voting statistics, but also in the people elected to “Represent” us. I, both, feel and fear that this fact will be realised too late by the majority of hard-working americans to prevent a complete collapse of our economy and otherwise.
        And they wonder why we stock-up on guns and ammo. It’s not so much out of fear for home-invasions, but more in preparation for what comes after said collapse. Remember the LA riots and the Katrina aftermath…

  • JohnEngelman

    Pew Research Center December 26, 2012

    Blacks voted at a higher rate this year than other minority groups and for the first time in history may also have voted at a higher rate than whites, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of census data, election day exit poll data and vote totals from selected cities and counties…

    These participation milestones are notable not just in light of the long history of black disenfranchisement, but also in light of recently-enacted state voter identification laws that some critics contended would suppress turnout disproportionately among blacks and other minority groups…

    In 2012, more Hispanics and Asian-Americans voted than ever before, but the turnout rates among these groups (votes cast as a share of eligible voters), while rising, continues to lag that of the general public by a substantial margin. Their growing electoral muscle is mainly due to their rapid population growth.

    As for whites, not only has their share of the eligible electorate been falling for decades, but their turnout rate appears to have declined in 2012 for the second presidential election in row…

    Obama won 80% of the non-white vote (including 93% of blacks, 73% of Asian Americans and 71% of Hispanics)…

    For comparative purposes, consider the 1988 presidential race between GOP nominee George H.W. Bush and Democrat Michael Dukakis. Bush received the identical share of the white vote that GOP nominee Mitt Romney won this year – 59%. But 24 years ago, that share was good enough to give Bush a popular vote margin of 7 million and an Electoral College landslide of 426-111.

    • David Ashton

      Have you got any positive ideas for ending illegal and third-world immigration?

      • JohnEngelman

        It did not seem to be a problem until the Immigration Reform Act of 1965 was passed.

        I would like to prohibit the immigration of anyone who does not already have a job lined up. I would like to punish anyone who hires an illegal immigrant.

        • Non Humans

          Also, armed predator drones patrolling our southern border, or give the border patrol agents there shoot-on-sight directives. (1 warning shot first, to be fair)

    • Young Man

      I mentioned this link to someone here the other day:

      Under “2009 Still the Other”, slide 49: 82% of Chinese Americans believe Asian Americans have too little influence on government and more importantly 69% believe whites have too much. Chew on that for a while. To the extent that Chinese-American opinions are a good proxy for Asian American opinions, and I think they are, I don’t see how the republican party can win more than 50% of the Asian vote.

  • kjh64

    I’ve always said the USA needs more than 2 political parties. We are in a 2-party stranglehold with the Dems/Reps. Many European and other nations have 3 or more parties. The problem with the Reps is they have pandered to the evangelicals and that scares off a lot of moderates and moderated conservatives who are much larger than the evangelicals. The GOP should openly tout the economy, bringing back American jobs and stopping immigration and being unapologetically for Whites and preserving the White majority. However, on other things, they need to butt out .. This isn’t “pandering” to anyone etc.etc. It just means that if they believe in limited government then they need to practice what they preach.

  • IstvanIN

    Let us reflect on the UK: The UK is doomed because a black said that explicitly race based political parties (such as the BNP) are illegal in the UK.
    When foreign elements can decide what parties can and can not
    represent, when foreign elements can dictate who political parties can
    have as members, you are doomed as a nation. A black is a foreign element regardless of how many generations his family has lived in the UK.

    In addition, like in the US, the major UK political parties have a lock on the electoral process and those three parties are intent on destroying the UK. The UK has no constitution and no freedom of speech, the politicians have made the most inane of comments punishable by law. In addition the UK has two branches of government that are fairly useless: the Crown, which is allowed no say, and the House of Lords, which has minimal power and is filled with largely appointed members, it neither represents the general public nor the aristocracy.

    Mr. Author, you are going down as fast as we are, the difference being that if we ever get the nerve we may be able to carve out a homeland for ourselves out of what was the US. The tiny UK will be subsumed in its entirety.

  • IstvanIN

    Let us reflect on the UK:

    The UK is doomed because a black said that explicitly race based political parties (such as the BNP) are illegal in the UK. When foreign elements can decide what parties can and can not represent, when foreign elements can dictate who political parties can have as members, you are doomed as a nation. A black is a foreign element regardless of how many generations his family has lived in the UK.

    In addition, like in the US, the major UK political parties have a lock on the electoral process and those three parties are intent on destroying the UK. The UK has no constitution and no freedom of speech, the politicians have made the most inane of comments punishable by law. In addition the UK has two branches of government that are fairly useless: the Crown, which is allowed no say, and the House of Lords, which has minimal power and is filled with largely appointed members, it neither represents the general public nor the aristocracy.

    Mr. Author, you are going down as fast as we are, the difference being that if we ever get the nerve we may be able to carve out a homeland for ourselves out of what was the US. The tiny UK will be subsumed in its entirety.

  • Edgar Schaaf

    With all due respect to our friend & well wisher from England – Robert Henderson, I believe the Republican party is NOT what he assumes it to be. The GOP is anything but a pro-white party. Obviously, most white race conscious folks vote Republican, but the people who control the GOP do not share the views of the voter base.

    Additionally, the GOP is going under a major multicultural mode. Note that the current newly elected President of the all powerful GOP National Governors Association ( the REAL movers & shakers within the GOP) is an Asian Indian – Piyush (Bobby) Jindal. Oh and many conservative white men from Indiana ( where I live) seem to dote non white candidates like Nikki Haley (Asian Indian), Eric Cantor (Jew), Herman Cain (black), Allen West (black) & Marco Rubio (Hispanic). Heck the so called conservative shill Michael “Kosher” Weiner (Savage) in his radio show blamed the GOP loss in the recent election on the fact that they chose a white Christian man like Paul Ryan over a Hispanic like Marco Rubio.

  • NeoconsNailed

    Oh, sure, Mr. H. All we need is for the GOP to become human again. There’s only one problem — it’s run by anti-humans to suit their own genocidal agenda. Republican voters blew the last chance they’ll ever have by rejecting Ron Paul — well, that’s what most of them did, claiming all the while they’d really like to vote for him “BUT………” (fill in the blank).

    This shows that white conservatives are too programmed for self-destruction to ever come around. Their life’s track is avoiding appearing different from their neighbors in any controversial way. The Bernaysian brainwashing and behavior-mod on them is virtually absolute. EVEN IF THE GOP MAGICALLY WENT REAL AS YOU DESCRIBE TOMORROW the media would up the volume screaming “racism” to a deafening level and each man would make sure that if anybody was going to take that bullet first it would be some other tough guy, not him. His wife wouldn’t want to be married to a notorious BIGOT, you see!

    Three strikes and you’re out. This makes three so-called Republican Revolutions (one occurred in the 1940s to the same exact kind of passionately tawdry acclaim) that haven’t amounted to a hill of beans. People are happy to run off to help rape Iraq or Afghanistan and maybe die or become paraplegics there, but — publicly stand up for white people in this country? Now, THAT scares them, partly because it means facing the full extent to which they’ve been dispossessed, swindled and deceived. Very, VERY few people — even most activists and real patriots — have any idea of the magnitude of it.

    The one constant in all this is that average conservative citizen never stop drinking he communist Kool-Aid,.They know it’s killing them, but it’s the thing to do, including sending their kids to college to become mainliners of the drug. One fondly imagined that the present four years of depression would jar a turnaround of some kind — hasn’t happened.

    Prove me wrong — please. What’s it worth to you? I write this in dread of killing somebody’s optimism. We all need to keep working as if real, meaningful change IS possible. We’re still winning any battle enough of us get behind (i.e. Real ID, various amnesties killed) and our top goal must be to keep the truth in the eyes and ears of the masses so that can someday “In case of fire, break glass”.

  • white world

    In todays pc screwed world it does not matter how bad the empty chair is as he will always get a free pass and it is hilarious to see the liberal media already begin to pump the Clinton bitch knowing what a wasted mess the mutt is. The only answer is secession and take all the conservative white decent females so the apes cant get their stinking cocks into them to make millions more mutts. Male apes are having a field day quietly and secretly more than anyone can know and its epidemic..

  • Samantha

    Robert Henderson,

    Good article. One small flaw with your article is that you seem to overestimate how many white Hispanics there are in the USA. Only a small percentage of Hispanics in USA are white; the vast majority are mestizo or Amerindian. And the white ones seem to have taken jobs managing and organizing the darker ones. See:

    Here’s on demographics of Hispanics:


  • Dave4088

    This is a pretty good assessment of the recent election and our electoral future, but Mr. Henderson is a wild eyed optimistic if he believes the Republicans will, at some point, embrace neo-white nationalist policies. This is the same party who, in 1994, assumed control of Congress with the mandates to end affirmative action, deport illegal aliens, seal the Southern border and reduce legal immigration. Instead we got the repeal of Glass Steagall which led to the housing bubble and crash of 2008, tort reform and welfare reform.

    And as others have pointed out, the party has largely been taken over by Israel worshipping neo-cons, crypto-liberals, moderates and amoral opportunists to the point that true rightists are a minority with little influence inside the Republican establishment. An eventual state of de facto secession among one or a coalition of red states is more likely in my opinion culminating in de jure secession once the fissures and stresses resulting from anti-white, multiracial policies deals the tyrannical central government in D.C. the final coup de grace.


    The real issue why nationalists have not been able to organize effectively in English speaking countries as they have in France, Austria, Denmark, Italy, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Belgium, Bulgaria, Hungary, Finland, Greece etc…

  • Robert Henderson

    I am under no illusion about the present state of the Republican hierarchy. What I am arguing for is a movement to shift the Republicans towards a programme appealing to whites. My purpose in writing the piece was to debunk the idea that the liberal line that the future is cast in politically correct stone and to suggest the sort of programme that would appeal to the white majority and the means by which the Republicans might be moved.

    I realise that it is very difficult for people who have been the subject of ever growing and increasingly relentless and all pervasive politically correct propaganda for half a century to feel comfortable with expressing ideas which they have been taught are both morally wrong and increasingly likely to attract penalties such as the loss of a job, social ostracism or even criminal charges (this last is becoming increasingly common in the UK). There is the natural fear of the consequences and also a subtler barrier to go through. When propaganda is sustained and backed by the power of the state, as has been the case with political correctness, people begin to think that the mention of things which run counter to the propaganda is not the done thing in the same way that swearing is not the done thing in polite society. People do not believe the tenets of political correctness but they feel embarrassed about saying so.

    White Americans are in a stronger position that you may think. The ideology the politically correct preach and increasingly enforce with methods worthy of a police state is divorced from reality. Like all such creeds it will melt as the snow melts before the sun when their control of what may and may not be publicly said is broken. That can be done by civil disobedience in which large groups of people march against the politically correct doctrines; ring phone-ins to do the same; lobby politicians both local and national in large numbers and so on. All that is required is that most precious of human qualities courage.

    • Well Mr. Henderson, I would guess there’s no shortage of courage from the readers on this site. However, the reality is our sympathetic fellows are justifiably concerned about their own short term economic interests and social Demonization for exhibiting even the slightest support or interest in gathering as a white political group.

      As you stated, there is a natural fear of “consequences” and any utterance of the word “white” that is not said in scorn is immediately racially suspect in today’s America.

      Our potential supporters reward for conformity is that most people accept them, they get to keep their job, and their family is temporarily safe and secure from violence and debasement. The downside is they may not like themselves very much.

      I fear the type of gradual societal change you suggest would require sustained de-programming over a generational cycle and we may not have that much time.

      When the inevitable economic collapse strikes and police state tyranny becomes irrefutably apparent, then, and only then, would America’s white population condense into an ethnic coalition to support what would now be evident as their own self interests?

      • Robert Henderson

        Well, Rick, these type of changes can be slow to ripen, but once they do things tend to happen very rapidly as the Emperor is exposed as having no clothes, what might be called the Ceaușescu moment.
        What is required is group action. Get a few hundred people breaking the taboo and it is difficult for the authorities in a country like the USA to act because it looks to much like naked despotism.

        • Well I had never heard of “The Ceaușescu Moment” but looked it up. OK, I get it, a sudden sub conscious to conscious group transference effect. Believe I’ve spoken with others about this as the “hundredth monkey effect”. LOL same/same I guess.

          Maybe all these varied and disparate efforts Will suddenly create a mass awakening, hard to say. I suspect some type of catalyst will be required, being what I don’t know. However, I’m sure we don’t have 20 years to wait around and find out.

          • Robert Henderson

            Rick – It is not an awakening but rather a releasing of natural feelings which have been hidden and even sublimated through ceaseless propaganda and threats of punishment. Once people see that those with power can be challenged and do very little about the challenge if enough people take part then the spell is broken.

            In an out and out tyranny saying the emperor has no clothes is very difficult for the obvious reason that death, torture or imprisonment are likely to be the fate of those who do, or at least those who first make the challenge. But it is not like that in countries such as the USA and England.

            The liberal elites in places such as your country and mine still wish to pretend that their rule is not a tyranny, that our countries are still free countries. Moreover, they still have enough of the apparatus of a free society such as a criminal justice system without direct political interference, a variety of media outlets which do not have state censorship and elected politicians who cannot all be trusted to obey the party line to make naked oppression impossible. .

            All of that places the individual in a strong position provided they act with courage. Show fear and you are done for, but be resolute and the liberal elites will retreat because the one thing they cannot afford is for someone to be pursued by the state simply for speaking the truth about the politically correct fantasy world the liberals pretend is reality. That is doubly so if the person to be pursued cannot be represented as an uneducated bonehead.

            I have personal experience of their cowardice. During the 1997 British General Election campaign Tony and Cherie Blair tried to have me prosecuted for letters I had written to them. They did not go to the police when I sent them the letters only after I had sent copies of the letters and the non-replies I received from their offices to the British media in the first week of the election campaign.

            The English prosecuting authorities rejected their complaints within hours of receiving them. The Blairs then arranged to have a highly libellous story about me placed in the British newspaper most favourable to them, the Daily Mirror. This was intended to frighten me off. It had exactly opposite effect. I knew instinctively as soon as IO saw the Mirror story that there was only one thing to do: go on the attack. I immediately made formal complaints top the police against the Blairs and the Mirror editor Piers Morgan; used the Data Protection Act tio get the release of police files on their compaints against me and sent copies of these complaints and requests to every national media outlet and large number of MPs.

            The result was that I never heard anything officially about the matter, although I was subject to a campaign of harassment throughout Blair’s time as PM, including death threats and constant interference with my post. All that was enraging but the point is I was never the subject of any official state action or further media attention.

            The details of the Blairs attempt to haveme prosecuted can be found at


          • Mr. Henderson, read through your link and the Sean Gabb PDF. Clearly you have been at the forefront trying to expose the hypocrisy and inequalities of the liberal mindfog. Despair.

            Your situation has parallel warnings to the novel “Sea Changes” that was recently reviewed here and displays the brainwashing totality of the masses on a global scale.

            The futility of altering this trend becomes obvious when the facts and truth are ignored or dismissed as the irrelevant rantings of a “racists”, who therefore has no credibility and whose challenge to conformity is somehow a “crime”? Many of us here have been there.

            Do you have a website/blogsite? I would like to follow your future endeavors. The only sanity we can hold onto is our own knowledge of the truth and each other.

            FYI – Did you see this analysis on Thomas Huxley’s “Group Competition and Ethics” by David Sanderson? Magnificent.

          • Robert Henderson

            Rick – My two blogs are



            I had not read Sanderson’s but have now done so. I would agree with the general thrust of his argument. However much we might wish to believe otherwise we are bound be the same biological reins which any social animal is bound by: any social animal has to be able to say where their group ends. No social animal has a universal sociality.

    • Non Humans

      I really enjoyed reading your article. I feel as you do, that something has to begin to be done about this mess, but I do not feel, however, as optimistically as you do about the republicans. At this point nothing can be done to subvert the strangle-hold grip that libtarded political correctness has on all levels of our governments. IMO, I feel that it will take a collapse or recession in our economies who will be unable to sustain the handouts and other un-checked spending. Or an equivalent to the great depression back in the late 1920’s.
      This, IMO, is the point at which the greater (white) populations will even begin to discuss, openly, all of the damage that is being done.

      • Robert Henderson

        Non humans – Glad you found it of use. The way forward is to start at the local level and get the movement to spread. The vital thing is not to try to place the programme
        of dissent within a pc sugar coating. The message has to be unambiguous and simple: we want our America back without all the political correctness, the cringing before any pc protected group; just America as it was and was meant to be.
        When I get the time I shall write another piece expanding on the skeleton sketch of what needs to be done, not only in the USA but throughout the developed world where countries have suffered mass immigration.

  • valeofignorance

    Even if the Republicans get elected on a Hispanic ticket, immigration will never stop because the Hispanics will (naturally) want to increase their voter base. So, as usual, diversity will simply lead to less White people, and ever less attractive options for White people.
    It would be better for White people to face racial reality now, but I don’t believe most of them will. The GOP certainly won’t – they’ll just do what the author of this article suggests and take the least decisive (least painful) option. But whoever gets elected, the White population will decline, their power will decline, and their ability to protect their own interests will decline. The GOP simply doesn’t have the nerve to protect the very group of people which it has always has been able to count on. That’s a fatal weakness.

  • Hal K

    It is futile to try to plan out in detail what a healthy future for whites in this country would look like. We need for whites to start looking out for their group interests explicitly. Until they do, they will keep losing ground. The sooner they wake up, the better things will be for them in the long run. There is not much more that can be said about the future for whites.

  • lhathaway

    The only hope for white american’s is racial separation. it’s difficult to say it this would only be the best thing for white american male’s or if it would be best for all white american’s. I’m not one who thinks racial separation would doom blacks, hispanics, asians. Perhaps racial separation would be best for all american’s, even white females, however, white females may be an exception.

  • Aware

    The author of this article is wrong. America is finished. The moment a black man became president is the moment it’s decline was legitimized. There’s no way minorities will be assimilated; even the passage of time will not lessen their resentment and envy of whites. Whether because of looks or it’s accomplishments, Western civilization’s legacy is a hard, perhaps impossible act to follow. And minorities will be painfully reminded of this as long as they see or are aware of the existence of whites.

    The only way for Western countries to be saved is to forcibly eject immigrants from their lands, reduce immigration to a trickle (and only accepting the most accomplished people from other nations), maintaining loyal politicians and leaders in government and society, and educating their youth with the proper and comprehensive knowledge they deserve. And carefully maintaining that status quo for good.

    • Hal K

      I think that it is tactically unwise to make this point in trying to win over whites. This means that if your target audience is people on the fence about white solidarity then it is best to avoid the issue of separatism.

      The first political step has to be to bring about white solidarity. There are many issues less threatening than separatism that could be argued from a pro-white perspective. These include affirmative action, immigration, and anti-white bias in our institutions (media, entertainment, education, etc.).

      There is no point in debating whether the country can be salvaged in any sense while whites still are not looking out for their interests. Let’s work on waking up whites first, and then, whenever this finally happens, whites can collectively decide how to go forward.

  • Garrett Brown

    Unless self loathing whites wake up nothing matters and nothing will change.

  • Morris Thecat

    Mr Weiner would be very very unhappy to if the authors prescriptions were adopted.

  • Morris Thecat

    The game is rigged, white people need to actually fight. Those that are selling political strategies are just trying to get whites to sit still for another 20 years while we lose even more ground.

  • scutum

    An interesting article but the author fails to address the fact that the predicament western nations find themselves in has been carefully planned by the cultual marxists who control most of the institutions of the West. The author also fails to take into account something the cultural marxists overlooked, the resurgence of an aggressive islam. As for the USA fracturing into a number of smaller nations, I have thought this was inevitable for some time now. The general public will not wake up to the dangers of mass third world immigration and its destructive effects until it is to late. As for the elites and the political classe in this country, they are enthralled with by their delusions of a mutiracial multi-ethnic utopia. Never mind the fact that multi-ethnic societies have always led to eventual conflict and war as the various ethnicities and races compete for resources.

  • Joe Webb

    The Repugnican Party can and will probably die its natural death. Parties come and go in history. Ergo, the natural question is what will replace it?

    We could hope for a White Nationalist Party, but that does not seem to be nigh. It is probable that it will take a couple election cycles for the Repugnican party to breathe itsr last breath. This time period will be one of turmoil as the country continues its economic stagnation, growing racial divide, and immigration struggles. Polarization is the word.

    The Demogogue Party will therefore (probably) remain in power nationally, while more and more local and state elections spawn anti-immigrant and coded race-realist candidates and many victories. 2012 election saw many such local victories.

    Since our electoral system does not allow proportional representation, the various tendencies from the Right will have to deal with one-another in a give-and-take manner. Where this goes in terms of a new political party is far from clear. However, we can count on further racialization of US politics.

    All of this is Good. We are getting somewhere.

    Ah, to be young (again) in the new dawn of Renewal of Western and White Civilization.

    The news today was of French military “shooting into a continent” ( Joseph Conrad, Heart of Darkness) to battle African Islam.

    The Islamists stated in the NYT that France was “welcome to hell.” All of this is great news. Let the Rights of Man Frenchies eat their words. You think Arab average IQ of 84 has tweaked Islamic extremism…wait till the Africans and their average IQ of 67 get excited up with political Islam. ( Of course , you can thank the Neocons and Israel for this…really…they are helping White Nationalism…if you think about it.) Joe

  • Running an hispanic will turn white Republicans off, about 10 percent of Republicians dislike Rubio more than either MCcain or Romeny. Cruz who is half-white might do it but he has problems with whites in the politcal middle like Oh. A white Dem can win like Clinton against an hispanic Republican.

  • Here’s the fallacy of your thinking, blacks in Ms are not growing that much while hispanics in Texas are. For example, Orange County and San Diego Ca circa 1970 over 90 percent white and only 10 percent hispanic and less than 2 percent asian in both the OC and Sd. San Diego has about 5 percent black while the OC 2 percent. Today whites in OC at 43 percent and in San Diego at 47 percent. Romeny get 53 pecent of vote and over 60 percent of white vote in OC. In 1972 Richard Nixon got 63 percent of vote when the county was over 90 percent white. So, the Vermont theory doesn’t hld for Oc and Sd.

  • Actually, Mittens could his most votes from Okalhoma as a percentage not MS. In fact a county in Texas next to Oklahoma voted for Mittens in higher rates than MS did. Also Ms is more white than Florida. VDARE wrong on this since Florida combine hispanic/black and asian population minority is greater Miss which only has a lot of blacks but about 2 percent hispanics and less than 1 percent asian. here is the results: Florida 23 percent Hispanic and 16 percent black and 4 percent asian from 2010 Census and MS 38 percent black and 2 pecent hispanic and 1 percent asian. In fact, Mittens score higher percentage in West Virginia, Tn, and Kentucky and Nebreska and Alaska which are not high on the minority list a few places like Maine or Vermont or Oregaon or Washington but most states that are about 80 percent white like those above voted for Mittens at higher levels than South Carolina, Ms, Georgia, or Texas.

  • I mean a few white liberal states like Maine,Vermont or OR or Washington.

  • didn’t vote for Mittens.

  • MBlanc46

    Counting on Repubs to end immigration is a bit of a stretch. Most of the immigrants here are employed and it’s not unreasonable to imagine that many or most of their employers vote Repub. The employer class has supported immigration since the 19th century. There’s no reason to think they’re going to change now.