Around 1990, immigration of hispanics to America rapidly accelerated. The 1965 immigration act had had little impact on the demographic makeup of America, and America was still basically a white country. By 2000, it was evident that the massive influx of immigrants was going to fundamentally change America in the space of a single lifetime into an entirely different, and presumably far worse nation (based on the 30 or so other hispanic countries that already exist's performance). Various organizations tried to point this out and stop it, from Peter Brimelow to Pat Buchanan, but the country didn't want to hear it. After fifty years of education and media dominance in favor of tolerance and diversity, no warnings would ever reach the ears of the electorate. Americans vaguely disliked immigration and demographic shift, but it never interested them enough to vote on the issue. Americans have entirely themselves to blame for the position they find themselves in, for not listening to the groups who avidly attempted to warn them for years.
Now it is the year 2010, and for the first time, the majority of Americans born this year are non-white. This transformation is irreversible. It's not like high IQ whites are going to outpace low IQ hispanics in the baby department from here on out. The same reason that has given low IQ people higher birth rates before will be true in the future as well. Not only that, but the birth rates of whites will continue to decline vis a vis hispanics because hispanics are on average much younger than whites and thus have more fertile women coming up the pipeline than the whites of America can pin their hopes on. To make matters worse, it's not like immigration of fertile young hispanic women is being stopped either, so millions of additional baby-makers will be arriving yearly to further boost the hispanic edge.
White 'advocates' need to look at reality closely. If the majority of American babies are non-white, whites are reduced to genocide, ethnic cleansing, or secession to maintain a white majority population. Most whites are fundamentally opposed to genocide or ethnic cleansing, which leaves secession. The problem is, most secessionists are libertarians, religious types, or who knows what. Only a tiny minority, less than a million people, want to secede on the basis of race. Most secessions in the past have been minorities trying to escape oppression from historical conquerors/enemies, and even then it's rare for them to succeed. Secession is a hopeless task so long as whites haven't been grievously injured by the other races of America, haven't already become a minority, haven't already exhausted all other attempts to redress their grievances, haven't already united around a common ideological banner, etc. The idea of seceding while whites still have a comfortable existence in America is a non-starter. People don't secede over the threat of their descendants maybe someday being oppressed. Therefore genocide, ethnic cleansing, and secession are all equally completely unworkable ideas, that cannot be successful in any reasonable time frame. Even if you make the best argument ever made for any of these ideas, no one will listen and no one will care until at least fifty to one hundred years from now.
The window of opportunity to oppose mass immigration to the United States is closed. No matter what opponents say, the fate of the white race is sealed. Even if we stop all immigration tomorrow, nothing will change. The window of opportunity for genocide, ethnic cleansing, or secession isn't open yet. It's at least fifty or one hundred years away. Therefore no white alive today has any reason to post any argument against the racial dispossession of the United States. It's useless. No one has any reason to listen, and there's nothing anyone can do about it anymore. Racial advocacy made a lot of sense in 1965, it still made sense in 2000, it makes no sense anymore. The majority non-white birthrate in America sealed our fate forever. The same is true of Britain. Perhaps there's still some hope for parts of Europe, Canada, Australia, and Russia. White advocates in those regions can continue to argue against immigration and hope for a more or less white future. Realistically speaking, however, all of these countries are also headed for demographic doom and none of them are showing signs of reversing themselves from the same precipice America has already crossed. In any event, it's none of our business what foreign countries choose to do with themselves.
Wouldn't it be better for the white-advocate-blogosphere to switch their focus from unworkable, useless, obsolete ideas about saving the white majority status in their respective countries, and shift towards finding a way for multi-racial, multi-cultural countries to succeed despite their diversity? Wouldn't it be useful for white intellectuals to start looking for ways their descendants can be happy even as a minority, or even if they aren't even white anymore? More fundamentally, is there any use in finding ways to make whites in particular happy given that henceforth all races will be in this together, and their success or failure will be dependent upon one another? At this point, in a majority non-white America, the only way to improve the well-being of whites would be to raise all boats, and to make sure all our citizens perform at their highest potential. Like it or not, we're going to be relying on the quality of our non-whites to ensure the quality of white life from here on out. From this practical standpoint, racism is counterproductive. It breeds distrust between the races which will inevitably hurt us more than them -- we're going to be the minority, so we'd be the greatest beneficiaries of tolerance. If we couch everything in terms of color-blind fairness, we'll end up with a better law code and culture than if we attempt any sort of biased chauvinism. If our fellow citizens are fair to us, it's likely whites will be just fine. After all, we are some of the happiest, richest, longest-lived, freest people on Earth. Simply being left alone is more than enough, without any special favoritism that hypothetical white advocates could win for us through racist rhetoric.
Does this mean white advocates should ceaselessly whine about affirmative action? Not really. Affirmative Action is not an issue with major impact on white quality of life. Price controls, for instance, are a policy far more destructive to white well-being than specifically anti-white Affirmative Action. Whining about affirmative action is pretty churlish when we aren't offering minorities any other way to get good college degrees or good salaries. If minorities were treated solely on the basis of merit, their lives would be too pitiable. Helping them through affirmative action is no more costly than doing it through some other means. Or if there is a better way, it is only marginally better, so whupdee doo. Affirmative action is a small price to pay for social peace and harmony.
Should they whine about black crime? Not really. Crime is no longer a serious problem in America, it is back down to 1960's levels, when the nation was far whiter. Obviously minorities can't be such a huge crime problem if we aren't anymore criminal now than we were then. Furthermore, there's no point in singling out the race of the criminals, since we can't do anything about the existence of said races in our country. The same arguments can be made for tougher crime fighting without ever mentioning race. Just say you are anti-criminal, and there's no need to say you're anti-black.
There's no point being anti-jew because 'they are so liberal'. If that's the problem, just say you are anti-liberal, and don't show any special animosity towards jewish liberals, or even more unfair, non-liberal jews. There's also no point to being anti-jew because 'they are for the Iraq or Iran war' -- the majority of whites when polled want to bomb Iran, and the majority of whites going into the Iraq war were all for that action too. It's useless to say whites were 'tricked' into it by sneaky jews, if whites are so stupid, weak, and childish that they can be tricked into their opinions, they deserve anything that happens to them. Nor is there any point to being anti-jew because 'they used to be pro-communist' or 'participated in ancient atrocities'. They aren't communist anymore and every race has participated in ancient atrocities. Nor is there any point to being anti-jew because 'they conquered Israel by force'. Whites conquered America in an even more brutal fashion, so who are we to talk?
Practically every single topic discussed by white advocates is a waste of time, or just makes whites look bad. White advocates need to take up a new hobby, and start advocating for something new, something that reflects the new state of things. Something that accords with this era's window of opportunity.
There are vast opportunities awaiting intellectual discourse. How we could improve family life, or if we can't, how we can improve single life and single parent childhood. How we could improve the economy. How we could improve the behavior of the lower class, so that they stop self-destructing with activities such as drinking and drugs. How we could alleviate the plight of the poor, so that everyone has enough health care, food, shelter, education, etc to live a happy life in our country. How we could better get along despite racial, sexual, and cultural differences. How to adapt to the coming scientific breakthroughs. How to make better art, or appreciate the art we have today better than we are. How we can make use of the infinite free replication of information the internet has made possible without driving artists out of work. What we should do next in space. If there are any public infrastructure works our nation could rally behind that would yield some great benefit in the future. How to transition from the rapidly depleting fossil fuels to a renewable energy economy. How we could improve the human genome. How we could improve or replace our constitution to take note of how different the world is from what it was 250 years ago. Whether religion has any place in the future, and if it does, how it should be changed to take into account the new scientific knowledge that invalidates our previous superstitions. The nature of good. The nature of value. The nature of evil. The meaning of life. Fate versus free will. Moral absolutes versus relativism. Utility versus natural rights. Virtue. The world is a vast and interesting place, there's enough to think about without relying on racism, and there are enough ways to improve our lives, and our descendants lives, without showing special favoritism to ourselves or them, or needing to hurt anyone else.
And for God's sake, white advocates need to stop dreaming and hoping for a worldwide economic collapse or societal breakdown that kills off 90% of humanity, leaving only the 'elect' to inherit the Earth. It's absurd (the world has never been better off than it is today), and it's evil (for obvious reasons. . .) If the world would have to collapse for your pet project to succeed (stopping non-white immigration, gaining an ethno-state, becoming rich, stopping Islam, or whatever), guess what, your pet project isn't worth it and shouldn't succeed in the first place. Stating that you aren't hoping for it, just 'predicting' it from the data observed, is just as absurd. There is no way on Earth a world of steadily improving per capita GDP, steadily improving technology, steadily improving art, steadily less violent conflicts, steadily longer lifespans, and steadily growing human rights/freedoms, could be 'on the verge of collapse', nor is there any way on Earth an objective view of the facts could result in such a conclusion. Take a break and get a grip.
No comments:
Post a Comment