The Silly Panic Over a Minority White Nation

Claims that whites will be a minority by 2050 are historically outworn.

“Whites will become a minority of the American population by midcentury if not sooner,” states America Enterprise Institute scholar Charles Murray in his fascinating new book, Coming Apart: The State of White America 1960-2010. In repeating this claim, Murray (likely unintentionally) furthers a misconception about the country's shifting racial makeup and what it means for the future of the United States.

Murray's likely source is the much-ballyhooed 2009 U.S. Census report [PDF] that parsed certain immigration trends and fertility trends to reach that conclusion. But the claim that “whites” will be a minority in America by 2050 implies an invidious view of the importance of ethnicity and race. “Whites,” by earlier definitions cherished by nativists, are already a minority in this country and have been for many decades. The successful amalgamation of previously scorned "races" is a testament to the ever-broadening inclusive tolerance of the American social project.

Let’s take a brief tour through the history of race and immigration politics in this country: Shortly after the turn of the last century, many nativists feared that mass immigration was overwhelming the white “races” that had historically contributed the most to populating the nation. One of the most notable expressions of this racial anxiety was the classic 1922 anti-immigration screed by Saturday Evening Post correspondent Kenneth Roberts, Why Europe Leaves Home: A True Account of the Reasons which Cause Central Europeans to Overrun America. “The American nation was founded and developed by the Nordic race,” asserted Roberts. “If a few more million members of the Alpine, Mediterranean and Semitic races are poured among us, the result must inevitably be a hybrid race of people as worthless and futile as the good-for-nothing mongrels of Central America and Southeastern Europe.”

In 1921, Congress passed the Emergency Quota Act that established the national origins formula that limited the number of immigrants admitted from any country annually to 3 percent of the number of residents from that same country living in the U.S. based on the 1910 Census. Roberts claimed that the 1921 restrictions were not enough.

“After 1880 the Nordic immigration was overwhelmed by the backward, unassimilatable, undesirable immigration from Eastern and Southern Europe,” he argued. Roberts was most particularly concerned about the influx of Jews into the country. 

Inspired in part by Roberts’ book, Congress passed the 1924 Immigration Act to change the national origins formula, limiting the annual number of immigrants to 2 percent of the number of people from any country who were already resident here based on their numbers in the 1890 Census. The national origins formula remained the basis of U.S. immigration law until 1965.

But, from the point of view of nativists like Roberts, such immigration restrictions would prove to have come too late. The “Nordic races” have already been overwhelmed and mongrelized by the progeny of the “Alpine, Mediterranean, and Semitic races,” black Americans, and immigrants from south of our border.

Let’s add up the numbers: Despite Roberts’ warning about swarms emanating from Central Europeans, there are about 20 million Americans who trace their ancestry back to Slavic ethnicities, including about 10 million Polish Americans. And 6 million more identify themselves as Jewish. And surely Roberts’ would despair that 26 million Americans can trace their ancestral roots back to the Mediterranean regions of Europe, mostly from Italy.

Roberts did admit that some people of Irish ancestry qualified as “Nordic,” but anti-Irish sentiments among Protestant Americans ran high in the 19th century. Sociologists Jonathan Warren and France Twine in their study, "White Americans: The New Minority" [PDF], note that back in the 19th century, “The Irish were seen as a separate race.” They cite other scholars who report, “Inherited features like eye and skin color, facial configuration, and physique were often mentioned. Common adjectives such as ‘low-browed and savage, groveling and bestial, lazy and wild, simian and sensual’ were employed ‘by many native-born Americans to describe the Catholic Irish ‘race.’” In any case, some 40 million Americans today claim Irish ancestry.  

Of course, African Americans are the group that for centuries against which being white in this country was always contrasted. So anxious were some to maintain a clear distinction between the races that in the early 20th century 18 states adopted laws that classified citizens as black if they had “one drop of Negro blood” in them. Today, some 42 million Americans identify as African American.

Nowadays, the growing number of Hispanics is what most concerns many people. The Census Bureau uses the terms Hispanic or Latino to refer to a person of Cuban, Mexican, Puerto Rican, South or Central American, or other Spanish culture or origin regardless of race. That group now comprises the largest “minority group,” numbering just over 50 million.

So adding up all of the “non-white” groups, one finds that they and their descendants now total 184 million out of 313 million citizens, constituting nearly 60 percent of the country’s current population. But how can that be? After all, the Census Bureau notes, “In the 2010 Census, just over one-third of the U.S. population reported their race and ethnicity as something other than non-Hispanic white alone (i.e. "minority").” The answer to this conundrum is that Italians, Poles, Jews, and the Irish are now considered “white.”

It is this fact that renders silly and nearly meaningless the pronouncement that “whites” will be a minority in this country by 2050. By 2050, just as the earlier waves of Irish, Italian, Jewish, and Polish immigrants were assimilated, so too will today’s Hispanic immigrants and their descendants be. For all intents and purposes, Hispanics will become as “white” as Irish, Italians, Jews, and Poles.

Meanwhile Roberts’ worst fear of the “mongrelization” of the races in America is being realized. The rising intermarriage rate between members of the arbitrarily defined and federally recognized ethnic groups demonstrates ever-lessening concern by Americans about this issue. It is my hope and belief that Americans of whatever ancestry living in 2050 will look back and wonder why ever did anyone care about the ethnic makeup of the American population. America is an ideal, not a tribe.

Ronald Bailey is Reason's science correspondent. His book Liberation Biology: The Scientific and Moral Case for the Biotech Revolution is now available from Prometheus Books.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • ||

    "Alpine race."

    I'd never heard of that before, except in the context of snow and slalom gates.

  • Bill||

    They're the worst of the lot.

    Simian (due to interbreeding with sasquatch) and sensual.

  • ||

    As an Austrian-American, that makes me think.

    Simian-sensual, perhaps. Hot Austrian monkey sex.

  • Rick Santorum||

    That's it, I'm coming for you, Satan.

  • STEVE SMITH||

    I CONTRIBUTE TO BLENDING OF RACES! ALPINE, NORDIC, NEGROID, MONGOLOID, CAPOID, SASQUATCH: I NOT CARE! I RAPE ALL EQUALLY!

  • ||

    Everybody says there is this RACE problem.
    Everybody says this RACE problem will be solved when the third world pours into EVERY white country and ONLY into white countries.

    The Netherlands and Belgium are just as crowded as Japan or Taiwan, but nobody says Japan or Taiwan will solve this RACE problem by bringing in millions of third worlders and quote assimilating unquote with them.

    Everybody says the final solution to this RACE problem is for EVERY white country and ONLY white countries to “assimilate,” i.e., intermarry, with all those non-whites.

    What if I said there was this RACE problem and this RACE problem would be solved only if hundreds of millions of non-blacks were brought into EVERY black country and ONLY into black countries?

  • ||

    How long would it take anyone to realize I’m not talking about a RACE problem. I am talking about the final solution to the BLACK problem?

    And how long would it take any sane black man to notice this and what kind of psycho black man wouldn’t object to this? It would be Genocide.

    But if I tell that obvious truth about the ongoing program of genocide against my race, the white race, Liberals and respectable conservatives agree that I am a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.

    They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-white.

    Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white.

  • ||

    The Polish artist Stanislaw Szukalski believed that Yetis operated rape-camps in Soviet Russia.

    He claimed that many living (at the time) humans - Charles Manson, King Farouk of Egypt, L.Breszhnev - were descendents of Yetis.

    He actually measured peoples' noses at his art openings to be sure that Yeti-spawn assassins were not among the crowd!

    He had detailed illos backing up his work.

    A truly mad genius...

    http://www.kookscience.com/201.....-zermatic/

  • ||

    We're gonna need a sh*tload of albinos....Oh, you mean the off white race?

  • ||

    "For all intents and purposes, Hispanics will become as “white” as Irish, Italians, Jews, and Poles."

    What's an interesting question is this: what group will get into UC Berkeley with a 2.5 GPA, in 2050?

    (Assuming that there is a UC Berkeley, given the changes I think we will see in California and in higher ed.)

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    ...what group will get into UC Berkeley with a 2.5 GPA, in 2050?

    Laboratory grown collections of human organs, encapsulated in and powered by solar voltaic tubes, with a consciousness freshly implanted by a newly re-formed Atari Corporation.

  • ||

    Who will lobby for the blobbies?

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    "Blobbies"? Racist!

  • ||

    Fortunately, I'll be long dead before caucasians are considered a minority in the US. But based on what I've seen while living in California, those who don't belong to the 'chosen' minority groups will pay the price for the benefits all the caucasions before them enjoyed. Thanks to the persistent message of 'victimization,' persecuting caucasions will be justified as a form of pay-back.

  • EscapedWestOfTheBigMuddy||

    Will be?

  • wareagle||

    persecuting caucasions will be justified as a form of pay-back.
    -------------------------
    dude...it's already policy, sometimes called affirmative action, other times referred to as quotas, and in some cases, called set-asides. Only in America can the solution to a problem be a reapplication of the problem.

  • ||

    I hope you don't mean like "debt"
    Because it is a well known scientifical fact that economic collapses caused by too much bad LENDING can only be solved by more borrowing....uh, cause lending is an entirely horse of a different color.

  • jtuf||

    +1 to Danno, EWOTBM, and wareagle

  • jtuf||

    Racial classification can be extremely fluid. For example, when a applicant to a PhD program who checked off "White" on his college application 5 minutes earlier mentions in his application essay that "Whites are racist," you can be 99% sure he doesn't include himself in that group.

    Most of academia would break down if they rigidly applied the transitive property.

  • jtuf||

    The "women and minority" classification is so ingrained in our culture that it is even affecting our art. Most interracial porn features a non-White male with a White woman.

  • jtuf||

    Mmmm, academic interracial porn dialogue.

    "You're RACIST!"

    "You're SEXIST! Give it to me. You owe it to me."

    "What a minute, I never signed up to be your slave."

    ...

  • k2000k||

    I dunno, I've watched a lot of porn and usually the cock be white.

  • jtuf||

    HHHHmmm. You could argue that White males have been a minority of the population since 1960 and that the net effect of the 1960's was to change which minority the majority oppressed through biased laws.

  • EMp||

    Sounds like another great reason for 'comprehensive immigration reform'... know whut I'm sayin'?

  • ||

    And that is why we say ...

    "anti-racism" is just a code word for anti-White.

  • ||

    Common adjectives such as ‘low-browed and savage, groveling and bestial, lazy and wild, simian and sensual’ were employed ‘by many native-born Americans to describe the Catholic Irish ‘race.’

    The more things change, the more they stay the same.

  • ||

    Only a Ginger can call another Ginger "Ginger."

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msHfplyW7_8

  • jtuf||

    LMFOA, Barry D,which reminds me, if LMFOA was a female group, academics would be denouncing "I'm Sexy and I Know It" as an example of the sexist sexual exploitation of women.

  • unhyphenatedconservative||

    "in repeating this claim, Murray (likely unintentionally) furthers a misconception about the country's shifting racial makeup and what it means for the future of the United States."

    Likely source? Murray's book is pretty well cited, so one would think Bailey would just need to flip to the notes. Methinks Bailey didn't read the book - the demographics of white vs. minority was not even really a topic for it - and just wanted to hitch his wagon to the new book for clicks.

  • Zeb||

    Go hyphenate yourself, buddy.

  • Realist||

    If everybody is equal....why quotas?

  • Samuel Colt||

    What are you talking about?

    I don't have any quotas for the Peacemaker!

  • EMp||

    What really will be interesting is how much these figures in demographic changes will hold true and how much faster the Constitution is jettisoned in favor of 'positive rights' for those 'victimized' in the United States 'past'...

  • BRM||

    Whether whites are in the minority or not, it matters more that the vast majority of us are hardworking people desiring to live our own lives in peace and freedom. When the majority of us are content to snuggle next to nearest open teat of the Uncle Sammy's Nanny Service, and let others pay their way, we are screwed as a nation no matter what color we are.

  • Tony||

    The majority will probably never be oil billionaires.

  • Zeb||

    And obviously all non-oil -billionaires are poor suffering victims who can't get by without government handouts.

  • ||

    The oil billionaires apparently can't, either.

  • ||

    (Or don't, anyway.)

  • DK||

    Is this real Tony or spoof Tony? Either way, he has gotten extremely lazy. What happened to the half page long diatribes?

  • Brother Grimm||

    They kept getting picked apart and trashed by Old Mexican. Now he's resorting to brief statements in an effort to not get smacked so hard so often.

  • jtuf||

    < patronizing sarcasm > Yes, Tony, it is so difficult for multi-millionaires to survive these days now that the billionaires are oppressing them. < /patronizing sarcasm >

  • Fatty Bolger||

    ^ This

  • Realist||

    "When the majority of us are content to snuggle next to nearest open teat of the Uncle Sammy's Nanny Service, and let others pay their way, we are screwed as a nation no matter what color we are."
    We're there buddy!

  • BRM||

    Now that 49.5% of us pay no federal income tax, yeah, I think you are correct.

  • Joe M||

    This made me think of the Piers Anthony book Race Against Time. In the future, all the races have blended, everyone is tan-skinned, and they create these zoos/enclaves for lab-grown individuals from "pure" DNA strains of the "major races" we know today.

  • fish||

    Could be worse...in the film/TV version of The Lathe of Heaven everyone was a lovely shade of primer gray.

  • protefeed||

    It depends to some extent also on whether you consider someone who is half-white 100% a minority.

    Given enough time, close to 100% of the populace will have both caucasian and other ancestors in their genetic makeup, now that airplanes have connected every part of the world together -- and given that men will, given the opportunity, fuck any woman with a pussy, ethnicity be damned.

  • STEVE SMITH||

    STEVE SMITH NOT EVEN NEED PUSSY! EQUAL OPPORTUNITY RAPER!

  • jtuf||

    As travel became faster, one rule of thumb stayed rather constant: mating occurred between people who lived within half a day's journey from each other. Regardless of how many meetings it takes to get from "Hello" to "That was nice", most people want to spend the night sleeping alone in their own beds after the first meeting.

    It may be possible to fly to a date with a new love interest in 2012, but how long will that be possible with the current TSA trends? The 2 races on Earth in 2150 might be American and Global.

  • Mooooooooo||

    This will not happen. A war will break out long before.

    A war always breaks out.

  • Discuss||

    60 percent of the current population is not "white." And that's a good thing.

    Why is it a "good" thing?

  • Joe M||

    We haven't had any ethnic cleansing, for one.

  • ||

    Um, yes we have. Whites have been forced put of neighborhoods by crime and high taxes, and now we are being forced out of entire States. Blacks murder whites nine times more often than the reverse. Fifty years ago Detroit was ninety percent white. Now it is a no go zone for whites. How bad does it have to get before race replacement enthusiasts like you admit that diversity

  • ||

    is terrible for whites.

  • Blackie||

    Cuz whites is crackas, thats why.

  • Zeb||

    It is a good thing because it has happened naturally and organically without interference or compulsion. And for optimists, it means that just maybe we will be able to stop looking at everything in terms of race sometime in the foreseeable future.

  • ||

    It is a good thing because it has happened naturally and organically without interference or compulsion.

    While I don't think that skin color makes any difference, that still does not mean that the majority of people have given up their tribalism. Did a large ethnic mix in the Balkans produce a melting pot or genocide?

  • ||

    MG: As the Balkans illustrate, the problem is tribes, not skin color.

  • fish||

    Why must you summon the demon?

  • ||

    As the Balkans illustrate, the problem is tribes, not skin color.

    I agree, Ron. The article reads, to me, as if ethnic or racial plurality produced a reduction in tribalism.

    It doesn't matter what the color of the skin of the people who come here is, I agree. What evidence is there that this produces a lack of tribalism? If we bring in enough different tribes it will be eliminated?

  • Discuss||

    Seems to me that obsessing about race is a little...I don't know...racist.

  • ||

    Yeah, but ...

    anti-racism is just a code word for anti-White.

  • Old Salt||

    So we can reduce SOME of the tribalism but we'll just make more.

    Could you imagine explaining Mac vs PC vs Linux to George Washington?

  • jtuf||

    MG, in the USA the "races" are the tribes.

  • ||

    How much tribalism is there in Japan? How many hours of Fox News riot footage did you feast upon after Fukushima?

  • jtuf||

    The Balkans was a part of the Austrian-Hungarian Empire with relatively little tribalism. Attitudes can change relatively quickly despite a long history of tolerance and even interbreeding. I'm still optimistic about the future, but only cautiously optimistic.

  • jtuf||

    Speaking of quickly changing racial perceptions in the former Austrian-Hungarian Empire, between 145 CE and 1945 CE, most experts would classify any of the Jews in Vienna as Middle Easter foreigners. Ever since 1970, most experts would classify descendants of those Viennese Jews who live in Israel as European foreigners.

  • k2000k||

    I have heard the US Balkans analogy before and I think it is a poor one. The Balkans is very different from the US. The Balkans resulted in a supranational, yugoslavia, being forced on different ethnic groups that had long standing rivalries amongst each other, when that state finally collapsed it was no surprise what happened. Then again, look at belgium, two different groups of individuals and they haven't been slaughtering each other in the streets. Either way the US is very different. Excluding the blacks that were forced here as slaves every minority and caucasian is a part of this country by choice, and being as they chose to come here they will most likely choose to assimilate. Race and ethnicity is irrelevant it is cultural homogenity that matters.

  • ||

    It is a good thing because it has happened naturally and organically without interference or compulsion.

    Are you for real?

  • ||

    What a bunch of crap. It did not happen organically. It happened as a direct result of the government's abject refusal to carry out its most basic duty to its citizens, to protect the territorial sovereignty of the country. Do tell. Do you think that whites should be reduced to a minority in Europe too? Because that is what is happening.

  • ralph||

    "It is a good thing because it has happened naturally and organically without interference or compulsion."

    You absolutely DO NOT live in the real world, do you? Let me guess, your experience of third world immigration is "Look, they're opening up a fabulous new (fill in the blank) restaurant!"

    Bailey, this applies to you as well. Anyone who uses the word "silly" to describe concerns about a monumental and unprecedented disruption of American life such as this is living in a fetid little elite bubble. Try living in my old neighborhood sometime. If you survive then you can come back and write another silly article.

  • ||

    60 percent of the current population is not "white." And that's a good thing.

    Why is it a "good" thing?

    Because, as every college educated person knows, white people are the font of all evil. Ron is just getting his white guilt on.

  • ||

    MG: What Zeb said above: It is a good thing because it has happened naturally and organically without interference or compulsion. And for optimists, it means that just maybe we will be able to stop looking at everything in terms of race sometime in the foreseeable future.

  • ||

    So, the race and ethnicity-obsessed leadership of these various non-white groups will suddenly become race-neutral when they become more numerous and more politically powerful? Really.

  • ||

    Only to the extent that, some day in the foreseeable future, individualism makes some sort of dramatic leap forward. As long as loyalty to various collectives remains a valid form of social currency, it will almost certainly be the case that those collectives will battle to decide which collective reigns supreme. The U.S. has thankfully been spared much of the infighting one would expect from a multi-ethnic society because it has almost always been a couple of standard deviations more individualistic than most other societies. Well, that and the fact that, as ethnic groups attain increasing amounts of wealth and prestige they get reclassified as white (effectively co-opted).

  • ||

    Because, as every college educated person knows, white people are the font of all evil.

    Precisely; and an evil minority is still evil.

  • Private Idaho||

    Damn! We must be the apex of evil!
    We need more coloreds here, stat!

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    What am I, chopped liver?

  • Tony||

    No. A sellout and/or dupe.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    If that wasn't a spoof, I might have been perturbed.

  • k2000k||

    Because it means more white women, and I love me some non-white women.

  • k2000k||

    Because it means more non white women, and I love me some non-white women.

  • ||

    Because we have been seeing the resurgence of rickets, since people have become paranoid about skin cancer.

    If someone is 60% not white, that means that he/she has spent some time in the sun.

  • Realist||

    "Why is it a "good" thing?"
    Because Bailey is a fucking liberal.

  • Rainbow||

    Ethnic pride! It's not just for racists any more!

  • ||

    I'll never join you! You killed my father!

  • fish||

    Noted Mick......Luke Skywalker?

  • ||

    It's not a question of just throwing a few census projections around or showing that past predictions were wrong. They have no relevance to the modern jet-age world connected by the internet.

    The 'elites' experience immigration differently from the middle or lower classes. As a govt. scientist I attended international meetings and we worked on solving global problems jointly -leading to a bias for a world without borders. On the other hand, my earlier volunteer work teaching in an inner-city school and
    in Kenya (Peace Corps) helped me understand the tribal problems that are present in all societies. LA now has Hispanics and Black that are at war with one another according to the Hispanic LA county sheriff. Migration has come too fast and from to near to allow the requisite assimilation to occur. And its coming faster all the time. Obama claims he created 3 million jobs in his administration, but over the past 3 years legal immigration added 3 million new immigrants many of whom took American jobs while being subsidized by the American public to the benefit of corporations that 'claim' they want open borders, but really want cheap,subsidized labor.

    Tribalism is alive and well in both third world (Rwanda) and first world (Yugoslavia and numerous other examples). Immigration threatens society's cohesion and increased rioting and poverty will is occurring along with a deteriorating world economy. As I warned in: http://www.jspes.org/Sample_Blondell.pdf

  • k2000k||

    The problems with LA isnt immigration, it is ill thought out policies that discourage intergration. We've had latino migrants in the south west since the south west has been a state and it hasn't been a problem. Moreover it isn't like Latinos aren't Western. Their cultural roots stem to Europe just like ours, the only difference is that theirs came from Spain. I think some of the fears is left over from the ill-thought out fears about Catholicism versus Protestanism that existed up until the middle of the 20th century. That was one of the predominant reasons why the Irish, my ancestors, were so feared, yet today no one would ever doubt an Irish-American Catholics fealty to the States. The problem we have now is that we have a goverment and academia in certain places, like California, that are actively sabotaging the intergration process through poor, but well meaning, policy.

  • EMp||

    Most business owners that practice the hiring of said cheap labor, I think, are betting on making that quick buck and off-shoring the profits. These individuals can send their progeny to the best private learning institutions and further their estate through their offspring after they have established themselves in the business, industry, or trust. Then when the have accumulated enough in capital or material wealth they can, as the thinking goes, retire to an insulated/ secure/ gated part of the world and they will not have to live with the consequences of their business model and/or practices. Just a wild guess....

  • ||

    I feel lucky living in world with hot golden-haired beauties having sky-blue eyes. In few more generations of globalization, 'people of color' like that will be gone.

    Grace Kellies and Scarlett Johannsons of the world are going extinct.

  • ||

    Thank you for caring whether we white folks continue to exist or not. Its rare these days.

  • Sidd Finch||

    “Whites,” by earlier definitions cherished by nativists, are already a minority in this country and have been for many decades...
    “The American nation was founded and developed by the Nordic race,” asserted Roberts.

    Why is "whites" in quotes when the only person quoted uses "Nordic race"?

    By 2050, just as the earlier waves of Irish, Italian, Jewish, and Polish immigrants were assimilated, so too will today’s Hispanic immigrants and their descendants be. For all intents and purposes, Hispanics will become as “white” as Irish, Italians, Jews, and Poles.

    ... and Native Americans?

  • ||

    SF: "Whites" is in quotes because people -- Itialians, Irish, Poles, and Jews -- who were once not considered "white" now are.

  • Sidd Finch||

    Why didn't you quote one of those people?

  • ||

    What do you mean, "those people?"

  • Sidd Finch||

    notsureifserious

    That was poorly phrased. I was referring to people who didn't consider Italians, etc. white.

  • Some Guy||

    You should have just pretended you did that on purpose, because it was awesome.

    I totally read that in Robert Downey Jr.'s voice from Tropic Thunder.

  • ||

    Sorry for the typos above. Let me add from my 2008 publication http://www.jspes.org/Sample_Blondell.pdf:
    Very few foresaw the breakup of the Soviet Union, Czechoslovakia, or Yugoslavia, tribal wars in Rwanda, Sudan, and Kenya, and the separatist movement in Quebec. If the United States continues to champion ethnic and racial divisions; concerns for social justice could have the unintended consequence of reinforcing developing hatreds between ethnic, racial, and national groups. [and research shows] "members of diverse communities tend to withdraw more. The educated, well-off homeowners tended to be more trusting and young people, Blacks, and Hispanics, less so. Fundamental to this review, a high level of “immigration seems to have a somewhat more consistent and powerful effect” in terms of the negative influence on social capital than does ethnic diversity."

    People in areas of greater diversity have lower confidence in local government and the news media, vote less often, are less likely to work on community projects, give to charity and volunteer less often, have fewer friends, have less perceived happiness and quality of life, and spend more time watching television. It is not a matter of problems coming for a white minority; it's a matter of problems already here that will get much worse.

  • ||

    Thanks for the correction. Still not reading it.

  • k2000k||

    Sounds like the same line of reasoning that certain leaders said about the States 70 years ago during a certain war in which the States eventually proved victorious

  • ||

    “Why should the Palatine Boors be suffered to swarm into our Settlements, and by herding together establish their Language and Manners to the exclusion of ours? Why should Pennsylvania, founded by the English, become a Colony of Aliens, who will shortly be so numerous as to Germanize us instead of our Anglifying them, and will never adopt our Language or Customs, any more than they can acquire our Complexion?” (The papers of Benjamin Franklin. Ed. Leonard W. Labaree. New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 1959. vol 4:234).

  • Alan Vanneman||

    Ron forgot to add that the 1921 act setting quotas pretended that no blacks, Latinos, or Asians were present in the U.S. The quotas for those groups were zero. And the 1910 Census was used as the basis for apportioning congressional seats throughout the Twenties, to avoid counting the last ten years of unrestricted immigration. No additional seats for all the Jews, Irish, and Italians flooding the sidewalks of New York.

  • shrike||

    Good article, Bailey.

    You tackle the toughest issues here.

  • fish||

    Yeah Ron...how bout an article about ChristFags?

  • shrike||

    Holy shit, I just realized all these beaners are Papist christfags! SECURE THE BORDER NAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

  • shrike||

    You know, I actually enjoy being the most hated person here.

    The irony is that I am a secular capitalist - right in the LP wheelhouse.

    But that goddamn LP purity test - I fail and I know it.

  • shorter shrike||

    I fail and I know it.

  • fish||

    You know, I actually enjoy being the most hated person here.

    Not even in the top 5.

  • R||

    No shit; I'm pretty sure White Idiot/rectal beat him out of the top spot; probably the top 10 spots if we count all of its personalities separately.

  • Sleeping Dog||

    Why don't we just start referring to Honkey Injun as Cybil instead?

  • Realist||

    The fact that shrike liked the article, tells you all you need to know about Bailey.

  • Jose Rodriguez||

    People who's name end in "z" make people 'fraid. At least our food is better than yours.

  • Folkaphobic||

    Yeah, like that scary Joan Baez. Never had her cooking though.

  • illini||

    Jose...your food is ours now. We took it in, and it belongs to us now. Mmmmm... and it's damn good, you're right! And yes, your right, the Z ending so hard to pronounce it IS downright scary. Sort of like Kwrejeski, huh.

  • The Man||

    I love Chee Poll Tay burritos!

  • ||

    Nowhere does Bailey quote anyone saying that these europeans weren't "white". Roberts said they weren't "Nordic". The government has gotten into officially classifying people into groups, I don't know if they told anyone whether they were an "Alpine" back then, or if anyone got reclassified as "Nordic" (which would work as an analogy for Bailey) later on. And of course Mexicans have been in the U.S (there is a state named "New Mexico", after all) long before Roberts wrote that.

  • illini||

    True. Regarding New Mexico, actually it was white Europeans who colonized NM in the 1600s with missions...they were the Spanish. Mexico didn't exist and there was no such thing as a "Mexican" back then. Mexico became independent from Spain later. Anyway, my point was that is was those "mediterranean" whites that populated New Mexico first. Well, that is after the Indians.

  • illini||

    Last time I checked, Hispanics were categorized as White. They are Caucasian already, so if you mean White or Caucasian of Hispanic origin (which is what I think you mean), then yes I agree by 2050 they will be as white a rice, however, one only hopes they speak English, too. I would not be concerned whether or not Whites will or will not be a minority, but rather whether English will be the minority. jk

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    I would not be concerned whether or not Whites will or will not be a minority, but rather whether English will be the minority.

    Why? Is the thought of your grandkids learning another language so scary to you?

  • illini||

    I hope they will learn to speak and read many languages as I have. They will learn others perhaps. My comment was a reference to the sluggishness of Hispanic immigrants to assimilate into American culture. Our version of the English language, of course, being part and parcel to that culture.

  • k2000k||

    Well by and large Hispanics do assimilate to American Culture, save in certain areas, normally very blue cities, that have policies that discourage it. No doubt it will be an issue in the south west in the future if certain states don't rethink their policies, but there is no reason why it has to be so.

  • ||

    This is rubbish. They are not assimilating because they are a low iq racial minority. If you think multiculturalism is the problem, how do you explain Asian success?

  • ||

    By the way, even if low iq is caused by environment, we have no idea how to remedy it. We've been trying with blacks for over half a century now.

  • Anthro||

    You are really horrible with racial classification. There are some Whites that live in Mexico, but they are very few. When someone thinks of a "Mexican" they are refering to the mixed-race Mestizos, who are NOT White, and never will be considered so. Because, they are obviously not.

  • Tony||

    Since all libertarians are white, this is bad news for the libertardian party.

  • fish||

    Since all libertarians are white, this is bad news for the libertardian party.

    Going to be fun watching how little minorities like paying those taxes of which you are so fond.

  • Private Idaho||

    I might have seen a black libertarian the other day. Well, he was black, anyway, which is a rarity here. Would he be more or less likely to be a libertarian if he lives in Idaho? Why am I asking you?

  • ||

    They were statistically over represented at the RP speech last Saturday in Boise by my math.The most important and distinguishing human characteristics have always been located in the area somewhere below the surface and roughly between the ears.

  • Oh||

    the skull?

  • Shorter Tony||

    Herp derp.

  • thirtyandseven||

    Meh... Decent spoof.

    Needz moar smug.

  • Sevo||

    Tony|2.21.12 @ 7:09PM|#
    "Since all libertarians are white, this is bad news for the libertardian party."

    Shithead, it seems libertarians aren't particularly worried about it.
    Does that tell you something, shithead?

  • Slap the Enlightened!||

    Yes. It tells me libertarianism is a philosophy that shits where it eats. So much so that one might reasonably conclude that the goal of libertarians is to create societies where libertarianism is impossible.

  • Sidd Finch||

    Since non-Asian minorities are stupid, this is bad news for social liberalism.

  • Tony||

    But good news for national socialism, which is all I care about.

  • Doctor Doolittle||

    I haven't been so bored since I gave up chasing women.

  • ||

    I think it was Warren Beatty in the movie Bulworth whose character commented that racial problems probably won't be solved until all humanity is the same shade of brown from interracial breeding. He's probably got a point there.

  • Private Idaho||

    It won't matter. They'll jut kill each other over religion.

  • ||

    +1

  • k2000k||

    Failing that they will kill each other over politics. And failing that, what the best kind of pizza is.

  • KPres||

    Android vs. iOS?

  • Anthro||

    If humanity ever makes it to that point, there won't be ANY electronics.

    It's absolutely impossible to have evenly spread, international gene flow anyway.

    ONLY Whites are in danger of not existing in the future.

  • Realist||

    The Chinese will have us bent over long before this country goes less than 50% white. They don't believe in that diversity bullshit.

  • Bishop Romney in plaid shirt||

    That's why its time to get tough with the Chinese. We can still change the arch of history if you give us Mormons a chance.

  • Mountain Meadows Survivor ||

    Yeah, sounds like a good idea. What could go wrong?

  • Heroic Mulatto||

  • Gordon Chang ||

    Uyghur's will rise up!
    Tibetans will rise up!
    Currency will crash.
    People will riot and loot in the streets.
    There will be no more China. The people of the Han will go the way of the Soviets.

  • Realist||

    "Sorry Mr. [Ir]realist, you'll have to wait for another authoritarian country to save you from those uppity Darkies."
    How many "Darkies" live in China???

  • k2000k||

    You mean like how the ethnicly pure Aryans and Japanese would over power the mongrol race of Americans?

  • Fruit Baisting Pastry Chef ||

    If you look at the graphic headlining this story you don't see any black people in the collage... THAT IS FUCKING INSULTING!

  • RuPaul, 2012||

    That's because Libertarians don't care about black people.

  • Idaho? No. Udahoe!||

    What is with the lily whites in here carrying on about Sartre and Camus into the wee hours of the evening like anybody gives a damn. The meaning of life is eat shit and die! Watch the animals for heavensake!

  • Coach Panto||

    The following joke is brought to you by the US Dept of Correct Thinking. Failure to laugh is grounds for immediate detention and investigation.

    Three Australian racists are at the bar.

    One says,

    "Once I had a thought that it wasn't productive for the Lithuanian guy in our accounting department to sleep on the job."

    Second says,

    "Crikey, that's pretty racist. One time I noticed that Hungarians commit crimes at higher rates than the Swiss."

    Third says,

    "Shite, those are pretty racist thoughts you two are having, but check this out: One time seven Belgian guys raped my sister and killed her by smothering her with waffles...and...and...I can barely say it... I ALMOST used a racial epithet!"

    The other two racists drew boomerangs and killed him, then boomeranged themselves because they couldn't live with what they heard.

    It was just too damn racist even for racists to think.

    (Big Brother is waiting for laughter)

  • Coach Potato||

    You vile, racist pig!

  • Durango Bagel Shoppe ||

    The Republic will be long dead before whites are a minority. Not that it matters. Nothing matters.

  • Mouth Breaking Oregonian ||

    What is it with nihilists and bagel shops?

  • Durango Bagel Shoppe ||

    Countless sunny afternoons spent on the back deck listening to stale Bob Dylan tunes, gnawing on an everything bagel underneath the shade of a beach umbrella can move a person to think heroic thoughts.

  • .||

    Not that it matters. Nothing matters.

    To whom?

  • Math Wizard ||

    Charles Murray and his lousy book have received a ton of free press. Who's to say that Charles Murray is nothing but a racist cracker with a grudge against black people?

  • pedant||

    ...is anything but a racist cracker...

  • Pious Paiute for Peyote||

    We brought the white man corn and maize and he brought us small pox, rape, poison, and sent us to arid plantations high in the sky. Hopefully the white man will fare better as a minority than my people have.

  • .||

    Like the red man never raped anyone. Please.

  • Some Guy||

    So is there a name for the "Mutt American" race that will be about 80-90% of the (newborn) population by 2050?

    Because I'd like to think when we're all varying shares of the same color, we can stop being retarded about it. But I don't really think that's likely.

  • stuartl||

    American mongrel.

  • jtuf||

    Bailey, you wrote a great article as usual, but your count of Slavic American Jews is off by a bit over 1 million. Today, 20% of American Jews consider themselves Sephardic, Mitzrahi, or Jews of Color. Furthermore, Yeki (German) Jews are White by the 1920's definitions. At that time, Reform Jews (aka Progressive Jews) declared that "Berlin is my Jerusalem".

  • jtuf||

    Slavic Jews, whose ancestors arrived in the USA after the Civil War, were prominent in the efforts to racially integrate America in part because they didn't see any difference between White Christians and Black Christians.

    Today, Asian-Americans and Hispanics have the highest rate if interracial marriages while Whites and Blacks have the lowest rate. Obama has a 100% White mother and a 100% Black father who was actually born in Africa. He is as biracial as you can be, but everyone calls him Black. I think Hispanics and Asians will lead 21st efforts to end affirmative action and racial classifications.

  • jtuf||

    [edit] 21st century efforts to

  • ||

    The thing that potentially makes this wave of immigration different than previous waves is that we didn't have a massive welfare state at the time with affirmative action programs that make it close to impossible not to qualify for public benefits if you fit into any identity group that can be classified as a minority.

    Also, we didn't cultivate racial animosity in the public schools, such as the recent ruling in Arizona: http://www.joannejacobs.com/20.....izona-law/

    That confluence of factors not only makes it more challenging to assimilate new immigrants, but stokes the flames of tribalism that may eventually lead to racial violence and Balkanization.

  • jtuf||

    Yes and no. The Homesteading Act was a massive transfer of capital via the Federal Government.

  • Guessedworker||

    I am English, but the dispossession and dissolution of my English people is occurring at about the same pace as that of white Americans. The same is happening from Sweden to Spain, and throughout the West. It is deeply troubling to any sane European. It is a race-replacement process, and in the historical sweep is as final as any genocide (indeed it meets the definition of the Convention).

    Mr Bailey's claim that concern for our peoples and our race is "silly" or "historically outworn" is anti-Natural and anti-moral - and, of course, completely inadequate to the gravity of the subject.

    I do not castigate him for this, because the struggle against the European struggle for existence has become the very meaning of liberalism, and, plainly, most folks are caught up in it. But the struggle for existence is the only human right guaranteed in Nature (all others are contingent). Expressed as self-defence from colonisation it is morally unimpeachable. There is no counter-veiling moral right to remove the right to self-defence ... to call it "racism" or "hate" ... to shout it down and pathologise it.

    Ah yes, the liberal will reply, but the category "European" does not exist as an absolute and definable entity. It has fuzzy edges. Its relatedness is not only to itself. Etcetera. But this line of argument is easily overcome by the universality of the struggle for existence.

    From an evolutionary perspective, the right to [struggle for] life is the right to struggle for genetic continuity. Obviously, genetic continuity for Homo sapiens implies the transmission of genes distinctive to us as a species, in addition to the genetic material we share with other primates, mammals, vertibrates and living organisms. But distinctive genes (and distinctive genetic structure) also exist at the intra-human level, and these, too, are important to genetic continuity since they are the carriers of fitness to environment - without which there could be no evolution and no life beyond the simplest cell.

    Distinctive genes (and structure) are the cutting edge of evolution and the key to Nature's subsistent function. They do not belong to us individually, but ethnically. It is the ethnic group, therefore, which possesses - in full - this Nature-given right to (struggle for) life. That struggle is conducted both at the level of selection and as the struggle for the land and resources which guarantee survival. But, of course, there is no right to succeed. An ethnic group which loses its territory loses control over its own security of existence.

    Applying this universal principle ethically, since all groups have the right to struggle for life, they have that right in full because between life and death there is no stable middle-ground. Existing as an English people, for example, in an endlessly globalising England is not life for the English, but a dying-process. One must be clear about that, or the life of which we speak will have no meaning, and one will be saying the opposite to that one thinks one is saying.

    Further, the rights which support the right to struggle for life must, in turn, obtain. A right to life cannot be upheld without recourse to the rights of consent and of self-defence. Then, the rights to those things which directly support life itself must be granted. For example, let us suppose that you granted a people the right to life but not living space, water or food resources. You would be acting disingenuously (and genocidally). You must grant everything together or the right to life is not extant.

    There is no rejoinder in liberalism to the ethic of life. Mr Bailey's constructed denial, founded in the fuzziness at the edges of white America, argues for its immersion in the bottomless seas of the Third World and, therefore, for its extinction. Well, white America exists. White Americans know they are not Mexican. White Americans have a natural right to choose life for their race, and to be deeply concerned both by the present demographic trend and by Mr Bailey's ethno-masochistic and mistaken carelessness for that life.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Distinctive genes (and structure) are the cutting edge of evolution and the key to Nature's subsistent function. They do not belong to us individually, but ethnically. It is the ethnic group, therefore, which possesses - in full - this Nature-given right to (struggle for) life. That struggle is conducted both at the level of selection and as the struggle for the land and resources which guarantee survival. But, of course, there is no right to succeed. An ethnic group which loses its territory loses control over its own security of existence.

    What makes you think that this argument would hold any currency to libertarians?

  • Guessedworker||

    If "libertarian" simply means "deracinated, atomised hyper-individual who manages not to see coercion at the level of his own ethnic group", it will hold no currency whatsoever.

    But you must understand that such a reductive definition is untrue in itself. We are not autonomous individuals, and believing Popper does not make us so. We are unelected members of groups to whom we have natural affinity and with whom we share interests and obligations.

    Return, please, to the statement in my third paragraph that "the struggle against the European struggle for existence has become the very meaning of liberalism". It is the reification of abstract principles and a notional model of Man above Nature and human nature, above love, and truth, and above life itself.

    The scales do not tilt for liberalism, do they? Be honest.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Distinctive genes (and structure) are the cutting edge of evolution and the key to Nature's subsistent function. They do not belong to us individually, but ethnically. It is the ethnic group, therefore, which possesses - in full - this Nature-given right to (struggle for) life.

    You still haven't convinced me that argument doesn't suffer from the fallacy of composition.

  • SAL||

    @Guessedworker I'll explain it in simple terms for you: if your germanic neighbour wants to have 7 children with a Pakistani immigrant, that's none of your sodding business. If your neighbour is a Pakistani immigrant and he wants to have 7 children with a Pakistani woman, that's none of your sodding business either. Therefore your concern about race is silly and meaningless.

  • EMp||

    I'd agree except if those budding families become in need of tax-payers assistance. Then it becomes other peoples business, wouldn't you say?

  • ||

    As much as if your neighbour is a poor Irish couple with 7 children. This isn't a race issue, it's a welfare state issue.

  • EMp||

    I totally agree, SAL....

  • Guessedworker||

    SAL,

    The fate of white America is not a welfare issue. It is a race issue.

  • Guessedworker||

    SAL,

    Why are you using offensive language? Obviously, you are not an intellectual. So I will try to explain this as simply as possible.

    The destruction of any people and any race is a profoundly important matter for the people or race concerned, and for all humanity.

    We are not "individuals". We are not separate atoms without relation to, interest in, or concern for one another. Hyper-individualism is the shoddiest bill of goods ever sold a blind man. It exchanges a fiction - the unfettered will - for the realities of belonging, peoplehood, and what is natural and mete in us.

    It is my business what happens to my people because they are my people. Is that clear?

  • ||

    "We are not 'individuals'"? "my people"? Are you aware this is a libertarian forum? Do you honestly think you have some kind of ownership over every white person because you share a couple of specific genes with them ? What about the people who have brown skin but are mostly 'white' genetically ? Since you're obviously the shoddiest (not sodding) intellectual I've seen around, I suggest you read John Locke, a great English intellectual who's written that the individual 'has a right to decide what would become of himself and what he would do'. So if you think you have the right to forbid a white person from having children with a brown person, you're just an authoritarian prick.

  • ||

    As a libtarian forum I would expect a higher level of engagement with the issues. All I can see is libertardians parroting empty liberal platitudes.

    Its not libertarianism, its nihilism. Its laughable, you're laughable, you actually take yourselves seriously.

  • Soire||

    But, how did the Pakistani immigrant happen?

    Wasn't that an intentional and deliberate action of Government?
    Was race "silly and meaningless" when government deliberately began flooding White countries with non-Whites?
    Is limitless, unending, mass non-White immigration a "free choice"?

    If it was a free choice, then did Western people ever request it? Or give permission for it?

    Is it not true that Western Governments have been actively FORCING White people to accept it for the last 60 years?

    How can you even try to use the argument of free choice; "it's none of your sodding business"?
    Obviously, mass non-White immigration is Governments business. Western people never had "free choice".

    If the future existence of an ethnic group is at risk due, entirely, to the deliberate actions of Government. What word would use to describe that? It starts with G.

  • Guessedworker||

    I didn't compose genetic similarity, HM. Nature did - and she composed it in a concentric form whereby the number of copies of one's distinctive genes/structure are shared at the level of one's family, then one's ethnic group, then one's race, then in humanity in general, and do so.

    All I am doing is translating this natural order in ethical terms.

  • jtuf||

    It is a race-replacement process, and in the historical sweep is as final as any genocide (indeed it meets the definition of the Convention).

    I almost agree. Affirmative action programs are the only policy specifically designed to relatively limit opportunities for Whites, and the damage they do don't reach the point of genocide. The lower birthrate of White Americans and Europeans has more to do with economic priorities than any campaign against Whites. What is the housing cost in predominantly White neighborhoods verse predominantly non-White neighborhood?. The inflated housing costs of the former results from policies that are designed to "raise home values" and have the full support of residents of predominantly White neighborhoods. When people are more concerned about the value of their own home than about the availability of homes for the next generation, the population declines.

  • Guessedworker||

    I am glad you almost agree.

    Affirmative Action? Actually, I am responding to Mr Bailey's assertion that white Americans have no existential facticity and no shared, natural interest in continuity like other human groups, and can be replaced by, say, Mexicans without there arising a single moment's concern. Why, soon Mexicans will be "white", too!

    When an entire political system disrespects and disvalues one racial group to that extent there is something wrong, and that something is rather more profound, my friend, than housing costs and home availability.

  • EMp||

    Profound insights there, Guessedworker. Great screen name as well....

  • ||

    "Hispanic" is treated as a separate category from race on the census. Hispanics can be of any race. Over half of all Hispanics in the U.S. are white. Charlie Sheen (Estevez), for example, might very well call himself Hispanic. Whites will not be a minority any time soon.

    The reason why this concept has been promoted? Because Democrats view it as their political future. What they're aiming to do is to make sure white Hispanics view themselves as minorities and vote for Democrats, rather than assimilating into the overall white population and voting for Republicans.

  • jtuf||

    +3 to Aj

  • ||

    Why are other countries allowed to maintain their ethnic composition, but western white countries get demonized as racist and nativist xenophobes and anti immigrant if they wish to do so.
    Isreal does a very good job on focusing on the dangers of immigration to their country. Our neighbor Mexico, gives racial prefernece to immigrants from Spain. Not because they are racist, but Immigrants from Spain share a common language,hsitory,culture,values,morals and ethnicity.Until the 1964 Immigration Act opened the floodgates we use to have a silar sane immigration plicy.
    Why do so many people want tio see whites wliminated? They make up less than 11 percent of world population and are being etnically cleansed for western countries via massive immigration. I thought diversity was a good thing, I guess whites are not included in the diversity thing.

  • ||

    please, cleanse your mouth before saying whites are being ethnically cleansed. They're just having few children (because they choose to). People in Sudan are being ethnically cleansed.

  • ||

    Sal - you're an idiot.

  • ||

    That is it? I was expecting a more convoluted and misleading racist argumentation.

  • ||

    No you're an idiot, I hardly need to go any further than that.

  • ||

    For starters non-white violence against whites exceeds that of whites against non-whites. Blacks & hispanics commit more crime. Thats a pretty good pointer right there.

    White flight is an attempt to escape all that. But its at a cost to whites. They bear the costs of relocating, commuting etc. They are also expected to pay for their displacers through welfare. Blacks and hispanics are obviously net benificiaries, whites are net payers.

    But you spew out your idiocy of whites merely choosing to have fewer kids, as if there were no other factors.

  • ||

    Even if you had any data to support your claims regarding violence, that's just aggregated data ; it conceals that a fraction of white people commit crime and a part of brown people are law-abiding citizens. You can't lump criminals and non-criminals together according to their skincolour; in fact, the judicial system must treat everyone equally regardless of skin colour, religion or wealth.

    The welfare issue is a real problem that would exist even if every non-white in the USA were expelled tomorrow. Again, the aggregated data conceals that part of non-whites are wealthy and (an increasing) part of whites are poor.

    Using aggregated data to advance their causes is what leftists do, notably for affirmative action. You're just the other side of the coin; an authoritarian, collectivist bigot unable to see there are individuals behind those statistics.

  • ||

    This is such bs. The fact that not all brown mestizos are criminals does not justify subjecting my grandchildren to the disproportionate number that are.

  • ||

    Sal, you don't know about the vast, intractable disparity between crime rates for minorities and whites in the US? This is old news, even for the left, which stopped denying it decades ago and has resorted to attributing the difference to so-called poverty and the environment in which minorities are raised. In fact, the US Dept. of Justice collects statistics on all crime and incarceration rates in the US, broken down by race. At this late date, those who deny genetic differences between the races can't accept the propaganda of the 1960s is full of lies or belong to leftist political organizations.

  • ||

    You haven't addressed my point. Even if there is a statistical correlation (which isn't causation) between being brown or poor or a dove hunter and a higher rate of crime, it isn't fair nor moral to punish the hole group which includes law-abiding individuals; the moral imperative is to punish those who have actually committed crime. Are you guys familiar with the concepts of individuality and free will?

  • ||

    My God you are a piece of work. Look, blacks sexually assault 37,000 white women a year. If the government had any respect whatsoever for white Americans, which it doesn't, no black immigration would be allowed unless and until this problem is solved. If you think that smacks of collective punishment, I don't really care. My white granddaughters' right to enjoy the first world civilization her ancestors built is more important to me than foreigners. Or are you saying I should put foreigne

  • kim||

    foreigners interests before my own descendents?

    You seem to think that it doesn't matter how much crime we have in society as long as the "individuals" responsible are held to account. So its okay for my grandchildren to live in fear as long as if and when they are victimized, the taxpayers also have the privilege of prosecuting and incarcerating the brutes at a cost of several tens of thousands of dollars a year.

    If this is the way people are thinking, our civilization will drown by the end of this century.

  • ||

    OMFG the CHILDREN!!!111!!! Surely your grandchild cannot be a victim of a white criminal, right? Do you know white men are statistically more prone to commit crime than white women? Why don't we expel every white person with a penis to protect the white women of America? They'll just need to import white semen.

    At least, the civilized and humane people in America can take solace in the fact that despicable bigots like you are (ironically) a race in extinction. Hope your granddaughter will have a dark-skin fetish and will have lots of interracial sex with her black boyfriend! Do you figure?!

  • ||

    The odds are against her child's being a victim of a violent crime committed by a white criminal.

  • EMp||

    Describe for me, or categorize / profile (if I might use that term...) those you would consider 'humane' or 'civilized' & what right to self-determination or even preservation would they have? Curious...

  • kim||

    You are truly a piece of garbage, SAL. Your lack of regard for the well being of future generations of white Americans is appalling. Oh well, I guess your oh-so-holier-than-thou opinions are more important than maintaining a high standard of civilization in this country.

  • kim||

    By the way, you seem to think miscegenation is a great big joke. Do you also think it is funny that a white woman is 12.4 times more likely to be MURDERED by a black intimate partner than a white one. I bet you think you are a really liberal-minded progressive person, don't you SAL?

  • ||

    I used a reductio ad absurdum and you have ignored it. Men are statistically more violent than women, why shouldn't we deport all men, then? Indeed, women are more likely to be murdered by a male partner than by a lesbian partner. Can you appreciate how absurd is your argumentation?

  • kim||

    Indeed, I did ignore it because it is a reductio ad absurdum, which is a fallacy. I can't believe I'm getting into this, but the thing is unlike you, apparently, I value organic connections between people. I value the natural family. You know, where a man and a woman marry and have children together.

  • ||

    LOL, reductio ad absurdum is a fallacy? I present you Wikipedia: Reductio ad absurdum (Latin: "reduction to the absurd") is a form of argument in which a proposition is disproven by following its implications logically to an absurd consequence

  • kim||

    Yes, reducio ad absurdum is a fallacy. And come to think of it, this whole line of debate has gone completely astray. The premise of this article is that the white majority of this country can be replaced with racial aliens and nothing will change. Our way of life will continue just as before.
    Yet the characteristics of the populations we are importing clearly show this is not true.

    Whites put up with it now because there are still whitopias to flee to. When those have been swamped, even self-righteous liberals like you will wake up to the grave mistake we have made.

  • ||

    the funny thing is I am not American neither live in the US. Thanks for the good laughs anyway, mister reductio-ad-absurdum-is-not-a-mathematical/logical tool-but-actually-fallacy!

  • KPres||

    "My white granddaughters' right to enjoy the first world civilization her ancestors built is more important to me than foreigners."

    Well, since we're worried about the survival of first world civilization standards, let's just cut to the chase and deport the shitheads rather than the non-whites.

    That means you and your granddaughter are out, while the vast majority of blacks and hispanics can stay.

  • kim||

    You're just calling me a nasty name because you don't like to hear white people standing up for their own legitimate interests just like every other ethnic group does. Well tough! You'd better get used to it because you can't make people a minority and not expect them to notice that they are a minority and begin to resist scapegoating, discrimination, and victimization.

  • Soire||

    HAH! You say it is fair or moral to punish the (w)hole group, and yet you have no problem condemning ALL white people to Extinction via Mass Immigration.

  • Joseph Hertzlinger||

    Can we deport anybody who can't spell?

  • ||

    Thank you very much for this clear argument that I have made to my students for years. Assimilation is the key. Hispanics will be as accepted as the Poles are since the 1970's. It just takes a few generations of native born to get to the assimilation point.

  • ||

    The Median iq in Mexico is 87, in Poland its north of 100. Third world population, third world country.

  • Amakudari||

    And? The IQ of all countries -- including the US -- has shown a long term rise over history. And the scores of Mexican Americans born in this country are much higher than those in Mexico, and has demonstrated a convergence over the past decade with the scores of whites.

    It's for the same reasons that a Third World immigrant to the US is more productive than back home: a more stable society, better nutrition, a more symbol-rich environment, better schooling, fewer diseases, greater access to capital, etc.

  • kim||

    Rubbish. The hispanic white achievement gap as measured by pisa scores has not changed in 20 years. The American hispanic iq is 89 on average, barely higher than Mexico.

    If environmentalism is true, transracial adoption studies would show that adopted children resemble their adoptive parents in iq more than their birth parents. They don't. Its the other way around.

    You people have bet the future of our country on a speculation that with more time and government help black and brown people can be made just like the white founding stock of this country. When even you all are forced to admit this is wrong, it will be too late and our country will be in total ruin.

  • ||

    Poles since the 1970s? Poles have been in Chicago and the Eastern US, in large numbers, since the 1870s and never had a problem with assimilation and integration in Protestant America anywhere. Just ask the Residents of Kosciuszko, GA.

  • ||

    And that's a good thing.

    The only interesting things about progressive/liberal racists, such as the author of that sentence, is their shallow social conformity and incredible hypocrisy.

  • ||

    Everybody says there is this RACE problem.
    Everybody says this RACE problem will be solved when the third world pours into EVERY white country and ONLY into white countries.

    The Netherlands and Belgium are just as crowded as Japan or Taiwan, but nobody says Japan or Taiwan will solve this RACE problem by bringing in millions of third worlders and quote assimilating unquote with them.

    Everybody says the final solution to this RACE problem is for EVERY white country and ONLY white countries to “assimilate,” i.e., intermarry, with all those non-whites.

    What if I said there was this RACE problem and this RACE problem would be solved only if hundreds of millions of non-blacks were brought into EVERY black country and ONLY into black countries?

  • ||

    How long would it take anyone to realize I’m not talking about a RACE problem. I am talking about the final solution to the BLACK problem?

    And how long would it take any sane black man to notice this and what kind of psycho black man wouldn’t object to this? It would be Genocide.

    But if I tell that obvious truth about the ongoing program of genocide against my race, the white race, Liberals and respectable conservatives agree that I am a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.

    They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-white.

    Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white.

  • k2000k||

    I couldn't give two shits what the racial make up of the United States is provided that.

    a) they speak english
    b) don't try to suckle from the goverment teet
    c) don't try and take my guns

    I am not that worried about immigrants trying to recreate the US into a replica of their homeland. They know it sucks and thats why they immigrated. It is only when goverment policy actively promotes such actions that those things happen.

    As and aside: It seems the only individual that leaves one place that sucks for another and try to change it to the place that sucked so bad they had to left is progressive Californians. Anyone else notice this or is it just me?

  • EMp||

    k200k, I think you know the answer to your own statement. The more immigrants from latin-American countries that move in to the United States and are not educated will, by default, 9 times out of 10 vote for a more left-leaning, bennies promising politician. The issue of 'as long as they don't take my guns' becomes much more suspect at that point. Just look to California - lots of immigrants, lots of professed catholics in office as a result of that immigration, strict gun laws and a liberal abortion platform (this, in the face of overwhelming catholic representation.) It is power (and along with that a seeming strong sense of ethnic pride as well...)that matters to them most.

  • ||

    I am not that worried about immigrants trying to recreate the US into a replica of their homeland. They know it sucks and thats why they immigrated.

    Get real. Do you think Mexicans arrive thinking. "Hmm, Mexico sucked, we wont recreate that in the US".

    Bullshit.

    Thats exactly what they do - recreate Mexico.

  • EMp||

    Yep - again...evidence: California, vast swaths of Texas (Pasadena TX, right next door to Houston is 60% hispanic now, compare that to 30 years ago - the 'Urban Cowboy' era...), which will become a blue state if this current immigration situation continues in the next 5-10 years... not exactly a rosy scenario for the future of 'libertarianism' as most posters here visualize it.

  • ||

    Exactly.

    Libertarianism is an interest of whites only. No other group cares about it.

  • ||

    You don't get it. They think Mexico sucks because of domination and exploitation by gringos, not anything endemic to Mexico.

  • EMp||

    & 'Reconquista' is a term that is used fairly frequently among a lot of the Latino Grievance activists - there are youtube videos of such things happening in California & Texas over the past few years, 'specially after the push for 'Comprehensive Amnesty' in '06 and '07.....

  • EMp||

    Alas & sadly, the majority on this site cannot see the future problems inherent because they are blinded by a fatter 'bottom-line' to their own accounts...irregardless of the cost to the country, the Constitution, & their "stated" ideal of libertarianism - which is really a form of 'cosmo-tarianism' or better yet, Beltway-libertarianism.....

  • ||

    Not many progressive Californians responsible for gunshots and sirens all night long, night in, night out, although they may have a vested interest in maintaining a huge Third World underclass existing in every US city now. All of your qualifications are contradictory.

  • ||

    Mandating anyone to speak your language is not a negative right, is it? Indeed, some people are mute.

  • ||

    Anti-Whites say there should be no White Countries ✓
    Anti-Whites say there should be no White Towns ✓
    Anti-Whites say there should be no White Neighbourhoods ✓
    Anti-Whites say there should be no White Schools✓
    Anti-Whites say there should be no White Classes ✓
    Anti-Whites say there should be no White Sports ✓
    Anti-Whites say there should be no White Anything ✓
    Anti-Whites say there should be no Whites
    Anti racism is a code word for anti White.

  • ||

    "Anti-Whites say there should be no Whites."

    Your arguet would be better if you said, "Anti-Whites say there should be no White PEOPLE."

  • ||

    Argument, not "arguet".

  • ||

    People say there is this RACE problem and this RACE problem will be solved when the third world pours into EVERY White country and ONLY into White countries. They say the final solution to this RACE problem is for EVERY White country and ONLY White countries to “assimilate,” i.e., intermarry, with all those non-Whites. It’s really just the final solution to the White problem.

    It’s genocide.

    They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-White.

    Anti-racist is a code word for anti-White.

  • ||

    “Anti-racists” Demand all White countries and only White countries be flooded with millions of people that are not their race, until White people become a vanishing minority. If any White person objects to this geNOcide, “anti-racists” call them a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.

    Anti-racist is a code word for anti-White.

    They want White geNOcide.

  • ||

    If you support mass immigration and “assimilation” for all White countries and ONLY White countries, you are an anti-White.

    If you say the continued existence of White children is “irrelevant” and should not be defended from policies that will lead to their extinction as a group, you are an anti-White.

    If you insist White people are not allowed to have their own countries and self determination like non-Whites have in non-White countries, you are an anti-White.

    Anti-racist is a codeword for anti-White.

  • ||

    Since 1948, international law has defined genocide as the deliberate destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious or national group.

    Raphael Lemkin, who created the word, used it broadly to describe not only outright extermination, but also demographic restructuring and policies that bring about the destruction of culture, language, national feelings and religion.

    There is no justification for the current program of GENOCIDE against White children.

  • ||

    My fellow white citizens demand an open public discussion about the mass non-white immigration and "assimilation" being forced ONLY on white countries.

    It is genocide.

    Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white.

  • Gar5||

    If ALL and ONLY Black countries in 1965 let hundreds of millions of non-Blacks into their countries and encouraged the non-Blacks to assimilate. Then 90 years later, Blacks are expected to be minorities in those countries; that's not done by accident. It's obviously a plan to wipe out the Black race. AKA genocide.

    This is what's been done to my people, White people. It's genocide.

  • ||

    Whites have not chosen to be a minority, its forced on them.

    Not enough people in white countries, so they should be flooded with immigrants?
    Japan and South Korea, birth rates are the 2nd and the 3rd lowest in the world.
    Nobody says this justifies flooding them with millions of non-Asians.

    White countries are being flooded by non-whites. We are told to be TOLERANT. We are forced to integrate. With assimilation we see the extinction of one race only, the white race.

    Its not funny, not comedy, its white genocide. Anti-racism is code for anti-white.

  • ||

    Won't this be great. Another huge low iq, low achieving ethnic bloc blaming my grandchildren for their failures.

  • ||

    And voting to take their money for themselves.

  • ||

    Damn it -- I mean:

    "And voting to take OUR money for themselves.

  • Kevin Phillips-Bong||

    According to US Census reports (see "Multicultural Health" by Lois Ritter, p. 203) even Hispanics who've been in the US for four generations or more are twice as likely as (non-Hispanic) whites to report not having a HS diploma.

    So my question is, if four generations (about 100 years) isn't long enough for the magic-sparkle-fairy-dust of assimilation to white norms to take place then how long will it take?

    And with the border door wide open, will it ever happen?

    I see no evidence - just faith in some inevitable future miracle of ethnic/racial transubstantiation.

  • ||

    Jeez! There is so much anti-white bias in this article it makes me want to go around terrorizing non-whites while chanting Seig Heil! I'm part Jewish too, so you can see how absurd that would really be for me to do. But fu%ck it all if you are going to keep using a pervious genocide to excuse the latest form of gencoide.

  • ||

    Africa for the Africans. Asia for the Asians. Israel for the Jews. White countries for EVERBODY!

  • ||

    Agreed.

    This goes under the category of the different standards of multi cultural appreciation of Whites and non Whites.

    For non Whites (Arabs, Blacks, Muslims, various Asians) it's:

    "What's mine in mine, what's yours is multi cultural"

  • Ralph||

    Except Whites of course.

  • John||

    Funny how no one is Demanding non-White countries be flooded with foreign random populations and are telling everyone to “mix in” until the target group disappears. They only Demand this of all White countries and only White countries. Anyone that disagrees is a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionje­ws.

    It is GeNOcide.

    Anti-racist is a code word for anti-White.

  • Joseph Hertzlinger||

    Of course, some people are demanding non-white countries be flooded with foreign populations. That's why some of us support the "invade the world" program.

  • ||

    After reading these carefully-chosen rationalizations, I now know that the word "rationalize" is very apt . When you rationalize, you make rational-sounding LIES.

    To claim that previous Americans saw differences in the quality of immigrants from certain parts of Europe and to then extrapolate that as meaning that they weren't all seen as "white" is misleading to the highest degree.

    I still remember when I was growing up in Gary Indiana and I made the mistake of referring to some Hispanic boy as "white" and he made it known in no uncertain terms that he considered those to be "fighting words." I invite this author to move to some Hispanic neighborhood and to float these same ideas there and see how well they fly.

  • ||

    Similar reassuring articles were written regarding Rhodesia changing over from a White run country to the Black run country of Zimbabwe. All kinds of reassuring words were written guaranteeing the productive White minority private property rights, physical safety under the rule of Western/British oriented law. Lot of libertarians wrote that the Black leaders around Mugabe wouldn't want to destroy the golden goose of such a productive, free enterprise economy where everyone - Black, White, mixed race was doing OK, better off than in all Black socialist African countries. What happen? DId race matter in Zimbabwe? How about Detroit? East St. Louis? Haiti? Algeria? Algerian Arab majority areas of France now? Face it folks - race matters, demographic dominance matters - anybody here want to live in Pakistani Muslim dominated areas of England?

  • ||

    You just said it all brother.

  • McGillicuddy||

    What a silly and ironically unreasoning article. Because group x was successfully integrated (according to the author's notions), group y will be successfully integrated? That is not logical, my friend.

    By the way, the Irish, Slavs, and Mediterraneans were never considered "not white." In the time when the US limited citizenship to "free white persons," these groups were granted citizenship, and were also counted as white on the census. And Irish oppression and NINA signs are a myth.
    http://tigger.uic.edu/~rjensen/no-irish.htm

  • ||

    A historical look at immigration is interesting. But a comparative lens is critical. There is a big difference between non-White and White, that overshadows any comparison between, say, Nordic and Irish. But the comparison is even more fruitful when you consider that nobody is sending tens of millions of non-Africans into Africa, nobody is sending tens of millions of non-Moslems into Islamic countries, nobody is sending tens of millions of non-Chinese into China. And nobody would expect the Africans, the Moslems, and the Chinese to just roll over and play dead! Only White countries are suffering this inundation of non-White populations, and in point of fact it is a deliberate policy of genocide directed at Whites. There will be public discussion of this issue.

  • Joseph Hertzlinger||

    "nobody is sending tens of millions of non-Moslems into Islamic countries"?

    I've defended the Israeli settlements on the West Bank on open-borders grounds.

  • ||

    I like the way you said that. Good job.

  • ||

    By "you", I mean "exerces".

  • ||

    Bailey's argument completely falls apart when you consider that most blacks in the US still have a very distinct, and quite different identity separate from mainstream American identity. Consider also that many US blacks have ancestors who were brought here before many white's were, and yet still no assimilation, integration, or meltingpotification. The example of blacks in the US proves Bailey very, very wrong. Sorry!

    The fact is, the extended family of European whites blended. Blacks haven't. Hispanics? We don't know.

    What we do know is what sort of states that Latin American hispanics produce. If you want to live in a Latin Americanized version of the US, then by all means continue to support unfettered illegal immigration from Latin American countries and amnesties that benefit mostly hispanic illegal immigrants.

  • kim||

    I agree 90% with you, champ, but I would just clarify that the issue is not so much Latin vs. Anglo American, but bronze vs. white. The Southern Cone Latin American countries are doing just fine, thank you. So is Costa Rica. Of course all these are white countries. According to leftists, this must be some grand white conspiracy to keep the bronze man down. You would think that libertarians would have more sense, but apparently they just think it is one grand coincidence that wherever whites settle they create liveable societies!

  • ||

    That's just a lie. Two south-american countries that present the most consistent growth and human development are Chile and Brazil, perfect examples of mixed-race populations where around 40% and 50% aren't white, respectively. On the other hand, the white and european Greeks aren't so well nowadays... I'm sorry, but the real world doesn't fit your bigoted views.

  • kim||

    Sorry, SAL, but it is you who is LYING. Here are the demographics on Chile:

    One social study conducted by Francisco Lizcano from UNAM suggested that people of European self-identity made up 52.7% of the population and that Mestizos made up 44% of the population.[6] Another social study suggested a self-identified white majority that would exceed 60% of the Chilean population.[7][8] However, a genetic study conducted by the University of Chile found that within the Chilean population, 30% are of European descent and Mestizos with mostly European ancestry are 65% of the population.[9]

    So, according to actual genetic studies, 95% of the Chilean population is either wholly or mostly WHITE!

  • ||

    I'm surprised to see that you consider people who have brownish skin and identify themselves as mestizos (around 40% exactly as I said) but are genetically mixed, as white people. I guess you support the mixture of races, them! That's actually good.

    And you haven't addressed Brazil, which is the real emergent power in South America with a population that's 50% white.

  • kim||

    It doesn't matter what they identify themselves as. What matters is their genetic heritage! They are mostly European. And no I don't support racial mixture. I am merely pointing out that Chile's success is further evidence that prosperity goes along with whiteness.

    Also, I don't know what you mean by "brownish skin." No I'm not a one-dropper and I don't think whiteness is all or nothing. But the whiter the population, generally the better off the country.

  • ||

    Yeah, hows that working over in Ukraine and Russia? Some of the highest crime rates, alcoholism, and human trafficking anywhere on the planet. You racial existentialists are cowards-afraid of death and trying to attain immortality through race preservation. Let other people enjoy our country and chill out.

  • kim||

    Now about Brazil. If you know anything at all about the country. You know that it has a white population that is heavily concentrated in the south and southeast states of the country. Now go figure, those are also the richest and most highly developed parts of the country.

    Also, why do you ignore Argentina? The average European genetic admixture of Argentines is 80%, and predictably their society reflects this genetic heritage. They score .797 on the UN human development index.

    By the way, Greece scores .861.

  • ||

    I actually lived in Brazil. The Brazilian states with the highest HDI are Distrito Federal in the center of the country (0.874 of 49 of whites). Rio de Janeiro e.g. is the 4th one (0,832 - 54% of whites). That's higher than the index of Argentina. Indeed, Distrito Federal bets Buenos Aires (0.836) (and even Greece before its debacle); how is this possible according to your theory? The reason is that the history, resources and institutions of each region are the main factors determining human development.

  • ||

    corrections: (0.874 - 49% of whites)/ *beats

  • kim||

    What you are doing here is essentially claiming that any correlation that is not perfect should simply be ignored. I am not saying that, as a mathematical certainty, race determines human development. There are other factors, like economic system, history, and natural resources. But if you look at the world as a whole, there is a clear correlation that no rational person would ignore. The fact that race is not the only factor does not mean that it is not a factor at all. That is complete nonsense and you know it. Smoking is clearly not the only factor in lung cancer, because not everyone who smokes get it, but it is clearly a factor.

  • ||

    Correlation is not causation; you might as well say that low temperatures favor economic development since most developed nations are situated outside the tropical region. The correlation observed between race composition and HDI is due to the history of the world; eg. you can't deny slavery of black people had a profound impact in Africa and Brazil, for example. You have absolutely no real proof that race is a significant factor.

  • kim||

    Well at least you admitted that you do indeed blame us for minority failure. Indeed, so do they, which is part of why I don't want them here.

    Did you know that in Canada, blacks are 2.5% of the population but 20% of prisoners. Why is that? They never had slavery in Canada. Canadians are clearly not racist, because if they were they never would have allowed them to immigrate to begin with. The fact is blacks sink to the bottom of every society they find themselves in.

    These brown people from south of the border do better but still cannot compete at the level of whites. The initial evidence from test scores, high school completion, crime, illegitimacy, employment all suggest we are going to have another underclass on our hands.

  • ||

    Canadians are clearly not racist, because if they were they never would have allowed them to immigrate to begin with.

    This is a non-sequitur. The government may have allowed immigration even if a significant fraction of canadians were racist (I honestly don't know the fraction of racist people in Canada). And again, your argument to expel minorities because they are statistically more prone to criminal activity or whatever isn't supported by simple logic; I got a new reductio ad absurdum for you: young people are more prone to crime than old people, so why not expel every person between 18 and 25 y? It wil certainly reduce the national crime rate of Canada.

    Anyway, if a company in Canada wants to hire an immigrant or a Canadian wants to marry an immigrant, that's none of your business.

  • kim||

    So are you saying Canadians are racist? If not, what is your explanation for their dysfunctional behavior in Canadian society.

  • kim||

    It most certainly is the business of Canadians who comes in to the country to work. Back in the day, South African miners and other industrialists demanded to be allowed to hire foreign black labor. Now, their black descendants are genociding the descendants of the white South Africans who were stupid enough to let them. I don't doubt that many whites who said it wasn't such a great idea to import potential enemies for their children were called "paranoid" by the likes of our friend Lilly.

    As for your argument about the youth, like I said, I believe in the natural family.

  • ||

    I'm sure you can give us historical examples of black people murdering white people; one could also mention the millions of black people murdered by white people through history; none proves anything about the relationship between skin color and violent behavior.

    The fact that 18-25y people, men or black people are over represented in prison cannot be addressed by a collectivist approach because it's simply immoral to treat the law-abiding citizens in each of those groups as criminals. It's the most basic principle of justice: one is innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around.

    If you are unable to understand the reductio ad absurdum argument, you are beyond logic. In fact, you suffer from pathological, irrational bigotry. You pretend to value the 'family' but your views would interfere with the rights of individuals to marry foreigners. Just like in damn North Korea.

  • kim||

    I don't think there is any relationship between violence and skin color, but there is a relationship between violence and testosterone, with which black males are well endowed.

    Also, it really doesn't matter whether there is a relationship between race and crime or not. The point is that the South Africans chose to become a minority in exchange for cheap labor. In so doing, they gave up their self-determination and compromised the security of their descendants. The result is now that their descendants are being slaughtered and driven out of the country. A libertarian, Ilana Mercer, thinks we ought to learn our lesson from that. You can read all about it in her book, Into the Cannibal's Pot.

  • kim||

    I said I value the "natural family."

  • kim||

    By the way SAL, when did I ever suggest treating law-abiding citizens as if they were criminals? The only thing I said is that blacks should not be allowed to immigrate until they stop rampantly raping and murdering whites. I would think that would just be common sense for any white person. Not that it matters. In the end, whites are going to be driven out of this country by nonwhite crime as has already happened in California. You know what they say, "As California goes, so goes the country."

  • kim||

    Of course, de facto, any measures whites take to protect themselves and their interests are "racist" if they in any way inconvenience other races. Other races interests come first, always, even if they are foreigners who after all have no right to come here. Foreigners "right" to come here is apparently more important than white people's right to not be disproportionately raped and murdered.

  • kim||

    And another thing. I'm not Canadian, I'm American. Here in America. All children, even illegal immigrants are entitled to free K-12 education. I think the average expenditure per pupil is up to something like $10,000 a year. So Consuela comes over here and has three kids. It costs $130,000 to educate each one of them. What does that come to, SAL? A whopping $390,000 courtesy of the taxpayer. You'd better believe that is my business! Let the hotel chain that wants her cheap labor pay for it!

  • kim||

    Oh and by the way, since these students are disproportionately low iq, they will drag down standards in your neighborhood schools, so you also get the privilege of paying for private school for your own children or moving to a more expensive neighborhood.

  • kim||

    I've been meaning to point out to you, SAL, that there is indeed a correlation between low temperatures and economic development. That is probably because cold regions select for intelligence. Where food is not available year round, planning and forethough is required to survive the winter. That is why whites and Northeast Asians have larger brains, and correspondingly higher IQs, than persons indigenous to tropical regions. Google it.

  • kim||

    Don't you think its a coincidence that the races with the highest iqs also have the largest brains? Or do you figure brain size is "cultural"?

  • ||

    Screwball Sal, both Brazil and Chile are economically dominated by whites.

  • Ralph||

    SAL, I also travel to Brazil on business a lot and outside the tourist places it is mostly a teeming slum. Ever heard the word Favela? They can put up stellar GDP numbers all they want but it is still not a civilized place. SAL, where do you live? If you love non-whites so much then go and live with them. If you already do and you think it's just great then you have serious problems. BTW, nobody cares that you call them bigots or racists. Whenever I read it I always imagine it said in an effeminate voice.

  • ||

    I actually lived in Brazil. Their level of development is quickly and visibly improving thanks to GDP growth indeed, despite having an extremely mixed population. I guess Maine is certainly a more civilized place, where the GOP has recently ignored the votes of some counties while telling voters they ended up in the spam folder, only to favor the establishment candidate.

    The fact that you're an unashamed bigot makes you only more repugnant. I advise you not to bring up this subject during social situations, which probably take place in a nursing home in your case.

  • kim||

    Why do you keep calling people names? Can't you see we don't care? It doesn't help your argument.

  • kim||

    The whites in Brazil can continue to uplift the non-whites, as long as they are allowed to thrive and not hampered and held down by affirmative action policies. But we know that won't happen. The diversity brigade will sacrifice Brazil's well-being for the appearance of equality just like they do here.

  • Ralph||

    I was right, serious emotional problems.

  • Ralph||

    No, the Southern cone countries are not doing so well (except maybe Uruguay). In Argentina where I travel for business they are experiencing an influx of mestizos and pure indians from Bolivia, Peru and Paraguay. The effects are the same and the Spaniard and Italian people there tell me the same things that I had already experienced in New York. Race matters.

  • kim||

    Naturally, whites build liveable societies and then non-whites barge in, can't compete, and then scapegoat racist whites for their failures. I don't know where all this is going to end up.

  • Ade||

    Anti White racism on Youtube.
    http://www.youtube.com/results.....acism&oq;=

  • transformation of reason||

    reason-->national review-->stormfront (based on the above)

  • kim||

    Indeed, the very fact that we are having this debate proves my point. Can you think of a single country, not dominated by high iq whites or east asians, that is facing inward migratory pressure? No, you can't, because there aren't any. Look at white countries, the "browning" of America, the Islamification of Europe (by brown Muslims), the Asianisation of Australia. Do you see a pattern here? Why is it that all white countries and only white countries are facing this unwanted influx? Is it because we build better societies, or is it because there is some conspiracy afoot to blend us out of existence?

  • ||

    Actually it doesn't prove anything. South America is having an influx of Spaniards looking for jobs now. Portuguese people are going to Angola and Brazil. Greeks are going to Germany. People from the entire world are going to China. Reality is way more complex than your simplistic bigoted views.

  • kim||

    You are being ridiculous. There is no massive influx of whites into nonwhite countries and you know it.

  • ||

    Historically North American and European countries have had robust economies and economic growth along with a generous welfare state, thus attracting people from all over the world. Of course, wouldn't you do the same if you were born in Mexico or Algeria? The human flows are now changing since unemployment is growing in the developed world while there are opportunities in developing countries. People follow the money.

  • ||

    The problem is nobody is flooding Asian nations and ONLY Asian nations with non-Asians,nobody is flooding African nations and ONLY African nations with non-Africans.

    White countries and ONLY white countries are being forced to become non-white(genocide).

    But if I tell that obvious truth about the ongoing program of genocide against my race, the white race, Liberals and respectable conservatives agree that I am a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.

    They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-white.

    Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white.

  • ||

    RE: I don't know where all this is going to end up.

    C'mon Kim, you (and I) know EXACTLY where this all ends up: Whites Extinct and White civilization destroyed.

  • ||

    I don't know Slanders I have to believe we will come to our senses before its all over for good.

  • ||

    You are assuming the prosperity in these countries has nothing to do with the talents of their people. You have no proof of this yet you insist that we gamble our childrens' future on it. As far as I am concerned, you are either irrational or outright wicked.

  • ||

    There are talented people everywhere, they just need to be free to create and sell their products and services. Why is Chile the most developed country in South America even though Argentina is 'whiter'? Because Chile has more economic freedom than Argentina (Chile is the 7th most free using the Heritage Foundation index, ahead of the USA in 10th place). Prosperity has to do with the people in a cultural sense (related to economic freedom, tolerance of corruption etc), not in a racial sense.

  • kim||

    This is getting really tiresome. First of all, I agree there are talented people everywhere. That doesn't mean all are equally talented. Second, I already acknowledged that factors other than race account for levels of economic development in various countries. However, you are claiming that race doesn't matter at all, and that people are interchangeable. You have no proof of this, yet you demand this assertion form the basis of public policy. Surely you must recognize the possibility that it will turn out to be false. Yet you do not care. Your ideological commitments are more important to you than the future of this country. That is unforgiveable.

  • EMp||

    ^ This explanation right here ^ - is instictively felt by most Americans & why most people(55% - 75% depending on the polling organization...) want immigration laws enforced. It is not that Americans do not care or are inherently racist - they do not want to sacrifice their country and way of life for some utopian scheme by the left or quick profit by the multi-national/ open border advocates....

  • lily||

    kim i pray you are not a teacher. its people like you that spew fear, hate and misconceptions that leave people feeling segregated and discriminated against. i'm sure its hard for you not to walk past children of color thinking they may possibly be the future criminal violating your white granddaughter... but, keep in mind as the present situation (and REALITY) shows, they may also be a top surgeon who saves a family members life or even the next president of the united states! as slim a statistic as it is, its still a possibility!

  • Slap the Enlightened!||

    I may also win the lottery, slim as the statistical possibility may be. But I wouldn't plan my future on it.

  • EMp||

    BANG! Good Slappy....

  • Soire||

    No thanks. I'd rather my loved ones be operated on by someone belonging to their own ethnic group.

    When it comes to healthcare. When it comes to caring for the young and the old. Empathy is important.

    Empathy is racially linked. Chinese people do not care about Somalian children as much as they do their own.

    White people should be allowed to love our own kind once again. To work with, live amongst, and study with... Our own kind.

    To ensure that our decendants will be White for thousands of years to come.

  • lily||

    wow, this article is not the most fact-based out there, but the theory behind it is true. if all racist commenting parties want to fall back on current minorities are the only ones committing crimes, violence, etc. well, its called evolution, survival of the fittest. just like the white "founders' of this country did to the native americans. yes, i will go there... they came in and polluted the country and made the indians into a very scarce minority, now the non-whites are doing it to the white inhabitants (who are certainly not native btw). the circle of life, adjust, deal with it and let nature take its course. if you want peace and harmony, try to look past color, gender, class and focus on real issues. a crime is crime, tragic no matter what color of the victim or criminal. children are children and we should try to improve education for all no matter what color the students.

  • kim||

    Why do you think that minorities are more "fit" than whites? Is it because they are willing to brutalize us or is it because they are willing to have children they can't afford and stick us with the bill?

    And yes "peace and harmony" is great but I will not just roll over and die like you seem to think we whites ought to do.

    What is your point when you say that crime is tragic no matter what color the victim or perpetrator? I agree. The question is why are we importing people we know to be crime-prone. I didn't say that some crimes are any more tragic than any others.

  • lily||

    you missed the point of this article and my comment. its not about immigrants so much as race. there are many legal citizens belonging to minority groups here now that are discriminated against because of their color. i am not for open borders, though i am for living in peace and harmony together, native americans,asians, blacks, hispanics and whites! your comments are racist, not so much against immigrants (in which i don't object to your personal opinion one bit on the illegal immigrant issue), but against legal citizens. its a sad fact that many whites live in the same paranoid state as you. not me, i do not believe "the more the merrier", but i am for we all live here now lets focus and get it together. united we stand divided we fall, remember?

  • ||

    Why do you think I am paranoid? Wasn't it you who just said whites should just go die because we're unfit?

  • lily||

    nope, again, you missed the point. when did i ever say whites should just go die because we're unfit? i will not take the time to explain comments, besides i'm white so i won't attack you for misinterpreting it (we don't do things like that). i can just hope the next generation isn't as ignorant and hateful as you are.

  • lily||

    ooops, correction. i was not always considered white. but according to this author now am classified as white. white of the worse kind... irish (for now, if this author is correct we will be bumped up on the white scale when the hispanics are considered white, then they will be probably be the worst)!

  • kim||

    Pardon me, but what exactly did you mean by "adjust, deal with it and let nature take its course"? In context, it sounded like you were saying that whites should just acquiesce in our reduction to a "scarce minority". That sounds to me like you think whites should just go gently into that good night.

  • lily||

    meaning deal with the fact that this country is made up of many different peoples... race, religion, ethnicity. not go away and die. misinterpreted and why i said you must be paranoid. sitting around full of prejudice and ignorance of others is not going to move us forward. it does the opposite, when you disrespect people based on their race, then they hate your race and retaliate. studies show oppression leads to crime. obviously the world is not full of sunshine and rainbows, but what a sad life you live if you live in fear and paranoia. most people, white or not should realize, we already have a very diverse base of LEGAL citizens. you can't deport legal citizens based on them being non-white, and even if you could, there are many whites on welfare, committing crimes and not graduating from high school. but i guess that's ok because they are white.

  • kim||

    I will continue to advocate for white rights in the countries they built. We have been trying to buy the blacks' friendship for fifty or sixty years now and it has never worked and it never will work. They are not equal to us and they will always blame us for their inability to achieve at the same level as we do. If it makes you feel better to pretend otherwise then go ahead. I will face reality as I find it not how I would like it to be.

  • lily||

    everything about this comment is half-witted, so i throw in the white robe, i mean white flag. yes, i came back to this site hours later to see what intelligent response you would post. sadly i was disappointed. reality? "blacks" as you refer to them (well here, i'm sure you reserve much more ethical names for them elsewhere) are not equal? reality is its 2012, not 1950. reality is we have a black president. reality is redneck, paranoid racist like you give the rest of us whites a bad name!

  • kim||

    Please Lilly, if you think that I am wrong, what is your solution to the race problem? Do you think that affirmative action will bring blacks up to the level of whites? If so, how long do you think it will take? The fact is that in our society unequal results are taken as proof of white malfeasance. Why should I want my children and grandchildren to be a minority in a country where they are blamed for everyone else's shortcomings? Do you know that the first thing Hitler did to the Jews was impose quotas on them?

  • kim||

    Whites are not allowed to thrive around blacks. Gifted and talented programs are under attack as "racist" because not enough non-Asian minorities qualify. Do you think this is good for America, Lilly? Holding back our best and brightest so as not to hurt anyone's feelings?

  • lily||

    no, as hard as it is to say, i agree with you there. i don't believe in affirmative action. people should get in on their own merit and talent, not based on color. which is my whole point. but for people to hate others solely based on their color, is how we got to the place we are now. i believe this article was expressing that legal citizen hispanics will be considered white to census bureau in the future so try not to panic about the white race being the minority. you are the one who keeps bringing up blacks and illegal immigrants.

  • kim||

    I don't hate anyone, Lilly. I just recognize the reality that we aren't all the same and I don't want to be ruled by other races. I don't know if Hispanics will be considered white or not. So far, I question whether they want to be considered white. As it is now, they band together in ethnic pressure group and demand special treatment at the expense of whites, yet we are expected to support further Hispanic immigration lest we be considered racist. Sotomayor was clearly picked to appease the Hispanic community and she will use her vote on the Supreme Court to support discrimination against whites.

  • Soire||

    Lily, it's simple.

    You either believe that White people have a right to exist in the future, or not.

    You're anti-White, or not.
    That's the way it is today. Things are changing, and you will have to make a decision.

  • Soire||

    Then why don't you move to a non-White country then? Stay there and NEVER come back.

    Why do you choose to live in a majority White country?

  • ||

    All 1st world countries have immigration problems/threats. Countries like Japan, Singapore, South Korea, Denmark, Switzerland, Norway and yes ISRAEL control immigration in many ways - these 1st world countries are run/ruled by intelligent leaders who want to protect their own people in their own countries. So isn't it time that we do the same here in the USA? Outside of some idiot liberal/Libertarians - the overwhelming majority of Americans want are demanding strict immigration controls, it's just common sense. Kindness means being kind to your own kind. You 100% true believer Libertarians who demand open borders, few if any laws, rules should move to Somalia, where there is no government, everybody has guns - must be libertarian heaven.

  • EMp||

    Good one...

  • Amakudari||

    North Korea controls immigration too.

    As for Japan, how the hell would anyone characterize its leadership as intelligent? If anything, Japan's demographic issues mandate either massive immigration to shore up the welfare system or ultimately defaulting on its debts. And Singapore has to be one of the easiest countries in the world in which to take up residence for work (43% of the country is immigrant).

    And then there are countries like Canada and Australia that have more open immigration.

    And then there are immigrant groups with significantly higher IQs than Americans, like Jews, Chinese and Indians. Shouldn't we be letting more of them in?

    Somalia is poor but better off than it was under Siad Barre. Belgium has spent over a year without a central government, but no one brings that up as a libertarian counterexample.

  • Slap the Enlightened!||

    Belgium has spent over a year without a central government, but no one brings that up as a libertarian counterexample.

    Correction: Belgium has been without a NEW government following elections. Its old government is still in place even if reduced in the kind of decisions it can make. And its public services are completly uneffected. There's no shutdown of public services. Hardly comparable to Somalia, or even Libertopia.

  • ||

    I thought Libertarians were against labeling people in terms of their race and believed in equality without regard to special privileges and affirmative action. But after reading some of the racist posts on this Reason article that resembles a Stormfront message board rather than a libertarian site, I know realize what a joke Libertarianism really is. I liked Ron Paul and was going to vote for him--but now I question whether those racist newsletters were actually legit and he supported those views after reading some of the comments here from supposed Libertarians.

  • Amakudari||

    Uh, clearly the article got linked to on Stormfront and they flooded this post, and well after it had disappeared from the Reason front page. Look for any of the names of the white supremacists above on other Reason posts and you won't find them.

  • ||

    J seems to be just a lame concern troll.

  • ||

    Indeed.

  • Slap the Enlightened!||

    60 percent of the current population is not "white." And that's a good thing.

    Sounds like somebody has a truly awesome case of "Passover Syndrome"

  • EMp||

    That's a great site, Slap... :-)

  • ||

    Stupid. Vapid. Vacuous.

    Everything Bailey says about the White race applies equally to Bailey personally. If the weakening or replacement of the White race is of no consequence, the same goes for Bailey. In effect, Bailey is arguing that is okay to murder him. And, of course, it is. He is committing genocide.

  • Amakudari||

    Uh, by any metric the number of white people in the US is expected to increase. This is what a real genocide looks like.

    You probably haven't met any Cathars, so maybe this isn't too relevant, but there's a reason why you've never met any Cathars. Yet the US should have around 20 million more whites in 40 years.

  • ||

    No, the number of White people and -- more importantly -- their proportion of the population will surely decrease in the next 20 years barring an expulsion of unwanted immpgrants. Your claim is utter lunacy.

    There is virtually no White immigration, White women are averaging under 2 children each, and there is a lot of miscegenation.

  • Amakudari||

    First off, white fertility is a bit over 2.0. That's a bit below replacement level, but you also have to consider the precipitous decline in death rate (Δpopulation = births - deaths, obviously). For reference, the birth rate for blacks is around 2.2. The white birth rate fell to Europe levels in the 70s, but it's among the highest rates for whites in the world.

    Anyway, here are the Census projections, which estimate a 10 million (there are other estimates, of course) person increase in the white, non-Hispanic population, with most of that coming without immigrants.

  • ||

    It should be obvious to you that those projections count non-Whites as White.

  • kim||

    Indeed. Aren't Algerians considered white according to the census bureau?

  • Slap the Enlightened!||

    That's what genocide looks like? Don't be a chickenshit. If you want to show us what genocide *looks* like, here's how you do it.

  • Amakudari||

    Haha. You actually think 3,000-4,000 murders in any way matches a medieval conflict in which 20,000 civilians were murdered in one raid, and 200,000 were killed in total. Whatever. The point is that "miscegenation" is not genocide by any reasonable definition. Genocide is where a people are exterminated through systematic violence.

  • kim||

    You are wrong. Genocide is defined by the UN much more broadly. Look it up. One of the definitions is "deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part".

  • kim||

    That standard is arguably satisfied by the fact that the government allows black immigration to this country, knowing that blacks are nine times more likely to murder whites than the reverse. As a result, whites are reduced to nomads constantly moving around to escape black mayhem.

  • kim||

    We are forced to move further away, spend more on housing, gas, and schooling. Just to avoid murder. You think this might cause some white folks might limit their family size because of these issues?

  • ||

    99% of the Hispanics coming to the US are not white:

    http://sociobiologicalmusings......anics.html

  • ||

    “We’re all the human race”.
    So you’re saying that race doesn't matter, and therefore their countries should be flooded with hundreds of millions of immigrants, and then have these immigrants assimilated until my people become minorities, because according to you “Race doesn't matter”???

    Nobody is doing that to the Black people in Africa.
    Nobody is doing that to the Asians in Asia.
    Nobody is doing that to the Muslims in the Middle east.
    Nobody is doing that to the Mestizo people in South America.

    You anti-Whites ONLY ever argue for this to be done to EVERY White country and ONLY White countries. You are demanding and justifying the GENOCIDE of my people.

    Anti-racist is a code word for anti-White.

  • ||

    If the future existence of an ethnic group is at risk due, entirely, to the deliberate actions of Government. What word would use to describe that?

    The factors affecting White genocide are ALL Government actions, and that of Government-influenced Media/Industry.

    1) Mass non-White immigration.
    2) White Guilt "education".
    3) Discrimination against Whites.
    4) Race-Mixing propaganda.
    5) Elimination of White-majority areas. Multiracial schools.

    It all points to the DELIBERATE reduction in the number of White births. You couldn't possibly concoct a recipe for Genocide like this by "accident" or through "negligence". All of these things are targetted ONLY at White people, in White countries.

    The evidence is all on our side. The only place left for people like you to go is to openly justify White Genocide.

  • ||

    I normally start breaking before I reach the stop sign. For an anti-white any argument will do to insure WHITES becoming a minority by 2050 or sooner.

    White countries are being flooded by non-whites. We are told to be
    TOLERANT. We are forced to integrate. With assimilation we see the
    extinction of one race only, the white race.
    Its not funny, not? comedy, its white genocide

  • kim||

    Hey Mr. Bailey,

    Are you following this debate? I notice you think that America is "an ideal, not a tribe." You don't say what you mean by "ideal" but I would assume it includes free expression, right? Well what do you think we ought to do with this immigrant chap who assaulted an atheist dressed up as a "zombie Muhammad" in order to defend the Pedophile Prophet's honor in front of his 9 year old son? You can read about it here:

    http://www.nationalreview.com/.....c-mccarthy

  • kim||

    The reality is I don't think you would agree with taking any action to remove this criminal, because that would be nativist. I think your brand of civic patriotism is really just cover for an open borders ideology that would rather there be no sovereign nation-states at all.

  • Slap the Enlightened!||

    At least England is starting to wake up... better late than never, I suppose....

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/deb.....z1n5t1OJQP

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new.....egacy.html

    Especially, read the comments. This "happened naturally and organically without interference or compulsion"? Really? Would any nation on earth have passed a referendum to do this to themselves? Naturally and organically without interference or compulsion, my shiny white ass!

    If you want to buy the world a Coke, do it on your own dime, buddy.

  • kim||

    Well Slap it looks like this thread has gone quiet.

  • EMp||

    Instinctively, most people know this, and are voting with their feet. Inner cities were abandoned, suburbs grew like mushrooms - til now, the deomgraphics are shifting so much there's nowhere else to go. Most conservatives keep their mouths shut and, I think, will come out in droves to vote for the 'R' this election - the TEA party was a spontaneous response to GWB and his crony-ist over-reach and the Immigration fiasco as well as his/ Obama's hyper-spending & a fear of Obama's desire for taxes via cap-and-trade, etc. as well as disregard for the 2A. They realize that Obama is too big a threat to allow a second term. JMO...

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement