By: Duncan Smith
Here’s some thoughts on a taboo subject, race. Everyone has (usually very strong) opinions on it, yet not a lot of people have taken the time to think about it. Nor is it something that is openly discussed because: 1) It’s generally an uncomfortable topic, 2) You can lose your job or friendships very easily if you get called the r-word (Racist). Which that itself is interesting because if you ask ten people what ‘racism’ means, you will get ten different answers. Usually what can be agreed upon is racism involves either HATE (advocating for violence against, or wishing failure upon), or SUPREMACY (feeling one’s own group is wholly superior, or the dehumanization of another racial group). I have what I believe are interesting points of discussion about race, that don’t fall into the territory of ‘racism’.
* The racial demographics of America. When my parents were kids, the US was around 90 percent White. In the present day, it’s around 60 percent. In 40 years, it’s projected to be around 40percent.
This is a very dramatic shift from what was once a majority-white country. And it was never discussed or voted on by whites. There was an Immigration Act in 1965 that began this process, switching our immigration policy away from Europeans. Back then, those who introduced the change promised it wouldn’t have any noticeable effect on demographics. But lo and behold, it did (and likely wouldn’t have been permitted had it been known this would be the case). So what’s the general consensus on this radical change? Indifference? What percent are we okay with whites dwindling into? 30%? 10%? 5%? 0%?
* In this sort of loosey-goosey Melting Pot attitude of Civic Nationalism we currently have (ie: ‘It doesn’t matter what the racial demographics become…who cares! As long as they call themselves AMERICAN and believe in America, then they’re American!’) That’s a very wholesome and lovely idea… but let’s put at least a little thought into this concept:
– For example, let’s say we end up with a pro-Open Borders Democrat as President, and thru migration transform into 90 percent Mexican. 1) Would you still consider it ‘America’ at that point? Or a conquered territory? And 2) Would that 90 percent Mexican population feel any sort of CONNECTION to US History? Or would they flip through the history books and see a bunch of ‘old dead white dudes’? Is there any importance for the people living within a nation to have a connection to its history?
– Is a nation simply IDEALS & CULTURE or is there a racial component to it? eg: Let’s say I move to Japan. I marry a lovely Japanese woman and learn their language so well that I could be a poet. We have children and I adapt to the intricacies of their culture to the point it’s second-nature. Would you consider me then ‘Japanese’? Why not? Could I ever truly be ‘Japanese’? Also would our children have the same feeling of connection to Japan as the natives do? Or would they feel ‘foreign’ even though they were born and raised in Japan, and are part-Japanese?
– In a DEMOCRACY, of course DEMOGRAPHY matters. And racial groups tend to have predictable voting patterns (with non-whites voting in a more homogeneous manner than whites do), and much of the time non-white group’s voting patterns conflict with the interests of white’s voting patterns.
* Why is it that (Gentile) Whites are the only racial group that have no sense of solidarity, or any advocacy for their group’s own self-interests? Every single non-white group not only has this, but it’s seen as completely natural, moral, and innocuous. Yet the thought of white solidarity or group self-interest tends to evoke a Pavlovian-like response of extreme aversion, deeming it as immoral and wicked. Why is that? How did whites end up thinking that about themselves? Why would we celebrate and encourage the idea of a blacks-only university, but feel our skin peeling off our bodies at the horrid thought of a whites-only university? Could there be some sort of influence in our media or academia that has led us to think this way? I wonder…