A “Minority Majority” Nation

With the DNC approaching, it is a good time to examine one very relevant recent piece of news that will surely impact my generation. The U.S. Census recently reported that by 2042, “Americans who identify themselves as ethnic and racial minorities” (NYT) will outnumber those who do not. This was earlier than the previously predicted 2050, and it is a trend that could have profound influences on all elements of American society. Here is a short summary of the demographic changes:

The census calculates that by 2042, Americans who identify themselves as Hispanic, black, Asian, American Indian, Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander will together outnumber non-Hispanic whites. Four years ago, officials had projected the shift would come in 2050.
The main reason for the accelerating change is significantly higher birthrates among immigrants. Another factor is the influx of foreigners, rising from about 1.3 million annually today to more than 2 million a year by midcentury, according to projections based on current immigration policies.
“No other country has experienced such rapid racial and ethnic change,” said Mark Mather, a demographer with the Population Reference Bureau, a research organization in Washington. (NYT)

Jeffrey S. Passel, from the Pew Hispanic Center, says, “Almost regardless of what you assume about future immigration, the country will be more Hispanic and Asian.” When it comes to Asian-Americans, “People who say they are Asian, with their ranks soaring to 41 million from 16 million, will make up more than 9 percent of the population, up from 5 percent” (NYT). Here is the brief Wall Street Journal analysis of how this will impact politics:

The growing share of retired white baby boomers are more likely to be concerned about issues like pensions and health care for themselves and their parents. The growing share of minorities will be concerned about issues like education and job growth. “You always get that generational shift, but now there’s a racial layer over it,” says Mr. Passel.
Shifting demographics may change everything from local and national elections to bilingual education and the rationale behind affirmative-action plans. Already, fast-growing states in the Sunbelt and West are seeing signs that shifting demographics could alter state politics. Barack Obama, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, is campaigning hard in Nevada and Colorado — two states that were carried by President Bush in 2004 but have grown more Democratic as the states have added more young and minority voters.

Articles like these, as well as this interesting article about the possible effect of increasing minority voter registration, emphasize that increasing minority populations in the United States will trend Democratic in voting patterns. The fact that, according to the Census, a significant majority of young Americans will identify themselves as non-Hispanic white by 2042, will certainly change politics in America if youth involvement continues to increase in elections, and young minority voters continue to vote overwhelmingly Democrat (see same CIRCLE link).

Honestly though, I don’t see this as a major tectonic shift in American demographics, but rather the continuation of a general historical trend – as this Week in Review piece notes, there was a time in our country’s history when “Irish Catholics, Italians, Eastern Europeans and even some Germans who arrived in droves in the United States” were considered cultural and political outsiders. Now, as this podcast notes, the descendants of many of those immigrants identify themselves as “American.”

What these demographic changes do mean is that our country’s cultural and political scene will subtly change over the upcoming decades. One of the most unique aspects about American society is how the different values and ideals that the various ethnic groups of the country hold eventually become part of the “American Idea.” As the number of people who identify themselves as Asian-American increase, ideas that are important to Asian-Americans, such as the importance of education, amongst many other priorities, will hopefully also increase in prominence across the nation. What do you think these demographic changes will mean for the country and for the South Asian community?

In the end, Harvard sociology professor Nathan Glazer has some observations and predictions in the Week in Review Article that I would say are definitely on target:

Professor Glazer predicted that in the decades to come, racial and ethnic distinctions would be further blurred by intermarriage (about one in three grandchildren of Hispanic immigrants marry non-Hispanic spouses; by 2050, nearly 1 in 20 Americans are expected to classify themselves as multiracial)….
“I don’t think a change such that the census category of ‘non-Hispanic white’ becomes a minority in 30 years is so momentous,” he said. “By then we may not even be using that census category and long before then people will be asking why Asians are still considered a ‘minority’ of any kind.”

Examples of “minority-majority” communities are already present through the U.S., in places such as New Mexico, Texas, California, Los Angeles, and New York City. Note: A book about immigration and assimilation trends that is often cited and looks as if it would be valuable reading to gain an understanding of the assimilation and interaction of different immigrant groups (despite it being quite dated) is Nathan Glazer and Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s “Beyond the Melting Pot,” which I am definitely going to look at to learn more about this subject.

39 thoughts on “A “Minority Majority” Nation

  1. Honestly though, I don’t see this as a major tectonic shift in American demographics, but rather the continuation of a general historical trend – as this Week in Review piece notes, there was a time in our country’s history when “Irish Catholics, Italians, Eastern Europeans and even some Germans who arrived in droves in the United States” were considered cultural and political outsiders. Now, as this podcast notes, the descendants of many of those immigrants identify themselves as “American.”

    And while they’re now seen as white, at the time they were seen not just as foreigners, but as aliens. Catholics were that era’s Muslims, inherently suspicious because of their religious practices, people questioned whether it was possible for Catholics to be loyal Americans at all because they also held loyalty to a foreign prince (the Pope).

    1. Ennis: Catholics were that era’s Muslims

    While I think that is a seemingly logical parallel, at the risk of sounding politically incorrect I would like to point out that it is an inaccurate one.

  2. While I think that is a seemingly logical parallel, at the risk of sounding politically incorrect I would like to point out that it is an inaccurate one.

    You’re right. In many ways it was worse for Catholics, since Muslims have benefited from Catholic struggles. Catholics were excluded from the franchise on basis of their religion until the middle of the 19th century.

  3. 3 · Ennis said

    Catholics were excluded from the franchise on basis of their religion

    Thats quite true, my friend’s grandpa was actually not allowed to move into a neighborhood in Chicago because he was an Italian Catholic…and funny story, when we were getting the house we have now – the landlord asked me where I was from and such. They were really enthusiastic/curious and asked me questions, when they asked the same of my roommate and he told them he was Sicillian they immediately got downcast…they warmed upto him soon though.

    I believe that not only did the Catholics have it worse, they also had ire directed at them in more manifest ways than the Muslims of today. Moreover, the reasons for this ire were more philosophical and historical rather than a product of contemporary behaviors.

    On another note, Samuel Huntington (whose logic has been on the downswing for quite a while now) makes the case for Catholics corrupting “The American Way” in his last book.

  4. From the post: Shifting demographics may change everything from local and national elections to bilingual education and the rationale behind affirmative-action plans. Already, fast-growing states in the Sunbelt and West are seeing signs that shifting demographics could alter state politics. Barack Obama, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, is campaigning hard in Nevada and Colorado — two states that were carried by President Bush in 2004 but have grown more Democratic as the states have added more young and minority voters.

    How so? Will bilingual education programs become more relevant & well-established (fingers crossed) or will affirmative action see a decline? Will non-whites start to actively challenge our society’s blatant Eurocentrism? When minorities become the majority, will we stop calling them minorities? Oh, boy, do I have questions.

  5. 6 · Radhika said

    ill non-whites start to actively challenge our society’s blatant Eurocentrism?

    Eurocentricism as in?

  6. Note: A book about immigration and assimilation trends that is often cited and looks as if it would be valuable reading to gain an understanding of the assimilation and interaction of different immigrant groups (despite it being quite dated) is Nathan Glazer and Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s “Beyond the Melting Pot,” which I am definitely going to look at to learn more about this subject.

    Try:

    Wages of Whiteness by David Roediger (19th century issues of the intersection of class, race, and culture in how the white working class was formed…excellent book) How the Irish became White (haven’t read it yet, but there’s a whole series of books like this one)

    One of the most unique aspects about American society is how the different values and ideals that the various ethnic groups of the country hold eventually become part of the “American Idea.”

    Great post – this is a serious question that made me think a lot. So far what’s happened, at least on a surface level, with “middle minorities” (Asian people, White Latinos, White GLB people, socially mobile members of the working class, upper/middle-class Black folks, etc.) is that they’ve been brought into the new “multicultural” elite – food, clothing, and other things that can be commodified, while “Values and ideals” have not been to the same extent. You’ll get a fist bump, but not loud and widespread condemnation of predatory lending. In this respect, what’s happening with race right now might be similar to what happened to the politics of the 1960s social movements – cooption (which is well described in Commodify Your Dissent – Thomas Frank).

    But, that doesn’t mean that this is a static state of affairs, so it is interesting how changing demographics will affect things like whether the U.S. is seen as a bilingual or monnolingual society, to what extent more radical politics will be able to enter the U.S. or if it will be filtered out by the immigration system as it has been in the past, to what extent racism will be discredited as a social hierarchy rather than only overt expression of racist sentiments, etc.

    When minorities become the majority, will we stop calling them minorities?

    You should stop now. “Disempowered groups” makes more sense than “minorities.” The key difference is not numbers (e.g. take a look at women who outnumber men) but which group memberships are associated with power (e.g. White, straight, male, English-speaking, etc.) and which ones are not (e.g. Black, transgender, female, non-English speaking, etc.) and which ones are in the middle (e.g. on race, Asian). The other thing is how all of these things intersect to make up a person’s social position.

  7. one major point is that i think these projections underestimate the number of “whites” because of admixture. in 2042 there is a high probability that i will have 3/4 european and 1/4 brown grandchildren. seeing as how many half-brownz can “pass” as white i suspect that racial identity will be a little more facultative than these projections make.

    (also, the numbers are predicated on a particular number of immigrants per year, that’s changeable due to legislation)

    I believe that not only did the Catholics have it worse, they also had ire directed at them in more manifest ways than the Muslims of today. Moreover, the reasons for this ire were more philosophical and historical rather than a product of contemporary behaviors.

    no. see catholicism and american freedom. there were religious riots across much of america based due to religious tensions. the catholic church wanted to be recognized as a corporate institution with a special relationship with the state. the protestant elites produced the public school system in large part to “americanize” the catholic immigration populations. the german catholic population wanted to continue to support a parallel german-language school system in addition to the irish dominated english-language catholic school system.

    the analogy to muslims is really weak in some areas, but not because there weren’t contemporary tensions and conflicts, some of them with geopolitical salience. a good point of evidence for this is catholicism’s relatively low profile up until 1840 and its “american” self-perception. that is, john caroll’s church. it all changed when the irish basically took over the church, and large numbers of germans also arrived and wanted to recapitulate the standard church-state relations which were operative in their homelands.

  8. Catholics were excluded from the franchise on basis of their religion until the middle of the 19th century.

    btw, i know franchise differs from state to state, but i’ve never read this anywhere (i’ve read a bit on the history of catholicism in the state). i know that blacks were disenfranchised on the basis of race, but i haven’t run into religious disenfranchisement after independence (the property qualifications went away after 1830 or so).

  9. btw, i think the canadian use of the term visible minorities highlights a structural difference between the past and the present. german catholics and jews were treated as non-white, but conversion to the christian religion could change that (as evidenced by the fact that there were jewish origin senators in the confederacy).

  10. There is a very real chancethat the Republican Party of today is doomed to irrelevance in a couple of decades as Texas goes the way of California for different reasons though – this time because of its majority-minority. The US is today a defacto bilingual nation. When you start hearing “marque do’Espanol” when you call a Federal or State government 1-800- number you know the times have changed. Isn’t it funny the old gas-bag Buckley Jr. who ran that rag – NRO – was a polyglot and fluent among other things in French and Spanish – but kept a bunch of dumb jerks on his payroll who continue to shoot their mouths off in utter ignorance?

  11. As someone who has lived in Texas most of my life, I can attest to the unfortunate fact that the majority minority presence has done little to change politics-as-usual. Minorities are still pretty heavily disenfranchised from politics in the state, and those who feel threatened by the growing minority presence have done quite a bit to keep them in the margins.

  12. 14 · jyotsana said

    Isn’t it funny the old gas-bag Buckley Jr. who ran that rag – NRO – was a polyglot and fluent among other things in French and Spanish – but kept a bunch of dumb jerks on his payroll who continue to shoot their mouths off in utter ignorance?

    William Buckley started the magazine, he didn’t run the website. It was the pace of change, he had a problem with. In my humble opinion, writers on his payroll are as ignorant or smart as those who disagree with them. His views were nuanced and erudite, and the wisdom in his views can be found in the unpragmatic “hands across the world approach” based on unsubstantiated notions of “Change”.

    But lets not go there now….

    There is a very real chancethat the Republican Party of today is doomed to irrelevance in a couple of decades as Texas goes the way of California for different reasons though – this time because of its majority-minority. Even on SM there were recent posts related to the rising homophobic attitude in California, the influx of Eastern European immigrants to California is actually shifting the Social Attitude slowly towards the Conservative side. And last time I checked, Social Conservatives leant towards the Republican party. It can also be theorized that the Economic Status of the children of these immigrants, will be much higher than that of their parents, so they will be fiscally much better off than the demographic that will vote for a Fiscally Progressive party.

    There are growing numbers of Log-Cabin, Ron Paul/Libertarian, IMC-PAC types who are also going to strengthen and change the party. But the biggest change in the Republican Ideology will come through McCain (if he gets elected). Other than the Judges he will appoint, he will set the wheels in motion of moving the party back to its true self.

    The idea that Minorities/Non-Caucasians will en masse vote for the Democratic party is truly against the ethos of the political system. This site has echoes of the same morally repugnant idea of finding commonality with Hispanics, Blacks or whoever else because they too “are a minority”, “he has a funny name, just like me”, “he is darker than him, just like me”, “he won’t attack my Muslim brothers”…aren’t we supposed to move away from ideas like that?… Or would you rather prefer a move away from a melting pot or “Euro-Centrism”, as someone put it and go India’s way of having 4 separate law systems and 20 languages on a currency note.

    Support Obama because he has values you share, not melanin percentage.

  13. 16 · RahulD said

    In my humble opinion, writers on his payroll are as ignorant or smart as those who disagree with them.

    Apart from John Derbyshire’s articles on mathematics and evolution, and a few other topics now and then, everything that is written on NR/NRO is pure garbage. Whether it is jackasses like Jonah Goldberg and Dave Kopel or a conceited moron like Nordlinger or sub-100 IQ types like Ka-Santorum is going to win-Lo NR/NRO writers are incapable of writing anything more than a few sentences of grammatically correct English. The public library is a great place to get started on a tour of Buckley’s “erudition”. One should start with his commentary from around the time of the trial of Adolf Eichmann all the way through the Civil Rights movement thru the the next three decades. It is hard to credit a man who was so spectacularly off synch with the times with anything close to even schooling, leave alone erudition.

    Voting preferences should not be guided by mlanin %. Try telling that to the GOP or even many of the centrist Democratic supporters. Plenty of criticism of Obama is a cover up for plain old bigotry. there are enormous numbers of young and old, men and women, and people of all ethnic backgrounds who are working hard to make this bigotry history. We shall see. A Democratic victory may see a return to the Supreme Court that Thurgood Marshal sat on. A McCain victory otoh will see the return of the robotic following of the law that passes off for “legal scholarship” these days.

  14. 17 · jyotsana said

    A McCain victory otoh will see the return of the robotic following of the law that passes off for “legal scholarship” these days.

    Other than Scalia, every Republican Appointee in the past 30 years has gone against the grain rather than a robotic interpretation.

    I think Obama will appoint justices who will stand up to the legislature better than McCain appointees, but will they be better justices…you just can’t predict that…as my previous reference and this one will show.

  15. In my humble opinion, writers on his payroll are as ignorant or smart as those who disagree with them.

    Dont be silly. No one can match K-LO and her brilliant insight into any topic under the sun. Who can forget the brilliance of alumnus like Steve Sailer and his brilliant analysis on anything related to negros.

  16. 18 · RahulD said

    Other than Scalia, every Republican Appointee in the past 30 years has gone against the grain rather than a robotic interpretation.

    Plain questionable. Some Scalia/Thomas decisions are almost comical in their defense of plain ignorance. Scalia’s originalism is pure farce. His claim to being a mind-reading genius who can uncover the “thoughts” of the framers is hogwash.

  17. An interpretation is exactly that. I’m no expert or even a layman in Constituional Law, but from what little I know of it, the Constitution is flexible and its interpretations reflect the mores of the times. There isn’t just one Supreme Court Justice, nor can they be appointed in such a way that all of them are of bent. Just Scalia won’t make a difference.

    Kathryn Lopez too represents a minority per se Conservative Catholics. Not all Conservative Catholics are wealthy now are they? nor are all the ones clinging to their religion ?

    I don’t have a problem with Spanish or Obama by it/themselves, nor do I have a problem with the fact that it is a cultural change…it is the pace of the change, it is a rapid change in the values that have formed the core of this society, the increased number of hyphenations and concocted identies of political expedience/convenience …someone has to stand on top of the mountain …

    but then again, lets not go there.

  18. We have only anecdotes to tell us if the pace of change is faster today than before, no evidence. But certainly over the last 150 years those who have tried to change things have succeeded spectacularly. Thanks for that.

  19. 14 · jyotsana said

    Isn’t it funny the old gas-bag Buckley Jr. who ran that rag – NRO – was a polyglot and fluent among other things in French and Spanish – but kept a bunch of dumb jerks on his payroll who continue to shoot their mouths off in utter ignorance?

    Uhh…conservatives aren’t against learning foreign langauges. Conservatives are arguing that English ought to be the primary langauge of the United States and that having a second, third or fourth official language weakens American values and national unity. They are also arguing that immigrants who arrive to the United States should be expected to learn English and bilingualism hinders immigrants from learning English.

    Of course there reasonable people who disagree with this position. But one should be informed of the conservative position before denouncing it lest they appear to “shoot their mouths off in utter ignorance.” 😉

  20. btw, i think the canadian use of the term *visible minorities* highlights a structural difference between the past and the present.

    Perhaps this is partially informed by the language used in contemporary U.K. “race” policy? (“Visible Ethnic Minorities”)

    I think part of the reason we haven’t seen a shift in those states that are already “majority minority” is that there’s a tacit assumption that minority communities share common goals/values or affinities that are manifested in their voting behavior, elected representatives, etc. There’s also a big assumption that the registered voting population parallels the resident population of a state (which is untrue in many states, including California, which (unsurprisingly) has a richer and whiter registered voter pop. than its resident pop.). Many states are not moving to a “majority minority” model, but rather, to a plurality model in which no one group dominates (although, in many areas whites are still the majority in pure numbers and proportions, even if they are <50% of the total population). This is interesting because this trend can either promote wedge politics / balkanization, or it could lead to strategic collaboration and a move away from overtly identity-driven politics. It’s unclear if one or the other is really preferable, although for many of us there’s a gut reaction that tells us a move away from “identity politics” is inherently a good one (debateable).

  21. Uhh…conservatives aren’t against learning foreign langauges. Conservatives are arguing that English ought to be the primary langauge of the United States and that having a second, third or fourth official language weakens American values and national unity. They are also arguing that immigrants who arrive to the United States should be expected to learn English and bilingualism hinders immigrants from learning English.

    I wish that conservatives in Canada had the guts to say something like this.

  22. 9 · Dr AmNonymous said

    filtered out by the immigration system

    This will be an important factor in future. Assuming that illegal immigration is somehow brought under control the kind of people who will be allowed to enter the US will dictate the future demographics. The State dept. policies and rules for US embassies abroad is important in this regard.

  23. 25 · Suki Dillon said

    I wish that conservatives in Canada had the guts to say something like this.

    I think we should also stipulate that all excessive comma usage, abuse of declarative sentences and all sorts of incorrect punctuation be punished with 50 lashes of a cane made from patriotic pine/maple.

    Being able to speak 4-5 languages shouldn’t be regarded as a sign of intelligence or as evidence of a ‘gift’ for learning new languages, but as a black stain upon that person’s soul–black India ink, leaving tell-tale signs of gross over-education as it tellingly drips from the craven polyglot immigrant’s breast, as it mocks the very constitutional values that made us a thankfully heterogeneous nation.

    Suki,

    you ever think of taking up a post at American Renaissance? I heard they’re looking for talent.

  24. 16 · RahulD said

    But lets not go there now….

    oh no, let’s go straight to the famous unsigned editorial:

    “The central question that emerges . . . is whether the White community in the South is entitled to take such measures as are necessary to prevail, politically and culturally, in areas in which it does not prevail numerically? The sobering answer is Yes — the White community is so entitled because, for the time being, it is the advanced race. It is not easy, and it is unpleasant, to adduce statistics evidencing the cultural superiority of White over Negro: but it is a fact that obtrudes, one that cannot be hidden by ever-so-busy egalitarians and anthropologists”

  25. I think we should also stipulate that all excessive comma usage, abuse of declarative sentences and all sorts of incorrect punctuation be punished with 50 lashes of a cane made from patriotic pine/maple.

    I have no problem with that Nayagan. Well you be in Vancouver anytime soon. But for some reason, I don’t think you have the guts to show up in Vancouver and be the one who gives me the 50 lashes.

  26. you ever think of taking up a post at American Renaissance? I heard they’re looking for talent.

    Thanks for the tip.

  27. 29 · Suki Dillon said

    I have no problem with that Nayagan. Well you be in Vancouver anytime soon. But for some reason, I don’t think you have the guts to show up in Vancouver and be the one who gives me the 50 lashes.

    I’m sure Mark Steyn or Ezra Levant would be able to accommodate this request. Or I could call up my polyglot relatives who are currently engaged in such anti-Canadian pursuits as ice hockey and accounting, but I doubt they’d find it acceptable.

  28. 23 · JGandhi said

    Uhh…conservatives aren’t against learning foreign langauges. Conservatives are arguing that English ought to be the primary langauge of the United States and that having a second, third or fourth official language weakens American values and national unity. They are also arguing that immigrants who arrive to the United States should be expected to learn English and bilingualism hinders immigrants from learning English.

    I refer to NR/NRO. There may well be many conservatives who are for learning foreign languages. For instance the Texas GOP opposes any public role for Spanish – its website does not have a Spanish version link, its platform demands a rollback of the official use of Spanish. The national GOP has a more friendly position towards Spanish, more realistic maybe?

  29. “Plenty of criticism of Obama is a cover up for plain old bigotry.”

    I will not repeat the contemptuous expletives with which a certain Native American advocate (also with Jewish ancestry) had for Mrs. Obama, her Ivy League oppression and her oh-so-Christian church. Obama she has little regard for, but thinks if he did a 4 year term, he’d do less harm than McCain. Anyway, this NativeAmerican advocate is congenitally unable to pull a Republican lever. However–just let anybody try and funnel her tax money to certain Obama causes. Well, I can’t be responsible for her fury. She’s got quite a mouth on her.

    Plenty of people are voting for him only because of his race. Race usually trumps everything else, depending on where you live and how many of “you” there are, percentage wise. I’ll have to check stats, but my observation is that black majority cities such as D.C., Detroit have not voted for a white mayor since the 70s, but mostly white Seattle has had a black mayor, as has San Francisco. Asians, desis and whites are most likely to vote for an “other race” candidate, whites because enough of them still feel they their system works for them (especially in places like San Francisco and Seattle) and Asians because they have little choice. However, the higher education level of desis might make it likely more of us “transcend” race–as long as we feel the system works for us. Still, it comes down to money and taxes. If people feel a lot of their taxes are going to support their “enemies” they get annoyed. To me, it is desirable to know your history, keep what’s worth keeping, and assimilate into the culture of country in which you are living. I think this country is seriously divided. People feel a low level of trust for persons of a different race in seats of power. People of working class and lower middle class especially have no trust for other races in seats of power. I don’t see that changing. Mistrust and suspicion of government is fully warranted, even when the race of the governors is the same as those governed.

  30. 32 · jyotsana said

    23 · JGandhi said
    Uhh…conservatives aren’t against learning foreign langauges. Conservatives are arguing that English ought to be the primary langauge of the United States and that having a second, third or fourth official language weakens American values and national unity. They are also arguing that immigrants who arrive to the United States should be expected to learn English and bilingualism hinders immigrants from learning English.
    I refer to NR/NRO. There may well be many conservatives who are for learning foreign languages. For instance the Texas GOP opposes any public role for Spanish – its website does not have a Spanish version link, its platform demands a rollback of the official use of Spanish. The national GOP has a more friendly position towards Spanish, more realistic maybe?

    You are conflating the issue of learning foreign languages with the issue of bilingualism. The National Review’s position is that English ought to be the sole national and official language of the United States. People can study Sanskrit or Spanish if they wish but that doesn’t mean Sanskrit or Spanish ought to be elevated to official languages.

    Just because one doesn’t support making a language an official language of the US doesn’t mean one is against people being fluent in that language. The distinction really isn’t that hard to grasp.

  31. 28 · Nayagan on August 19, 2008 05:32 AM · Direct link · “Quote”(?)

    oh no, let’s go straight to the famous unsigned editorial:

    Then why not quote other parts from it too…

    The problem in the South is not how to get the vote for the Negro, but how to equip the Negro–and a great many Whites–to cast an enlightened and responsible vote. The South confronts one grave moral challenge. It must not exploit the fact of Negro backwardness to preserve teh Negro as a servile class. It is tempting and convenient to block the progress of a minority whose services, as menials, are economically useful. Let the South never permit itself to do this. So long as it is merely asserting the right to impose superior mores for whatever period it takes to effect a genuine cultural equality between the races, and so long as it does so by humane and charitable means, the South is in step with civilization, as is the Congress that permits it to function.

    It is easy to take parts of a message and call it racist. Next thing I know, you’ll be calling Barry Goldwater racist. Al Gore’s dad said the same things, except due to political opportunism rather than due to any real libertarian notions or the idea that States should be able to make their own decisions.

    To the poster in Comment 34., Radhika, to me Eurocentrism is not a pejorative but is instead illustrated in the values of the Enlightenment. The values that formed the core of the values of this country and the constitution; free speech, separation of Church and state, homogeneity – the values that Europe is being deprived of right now due to its rising “minority” population.

    In our euphoria about imposing Spanish (which people like me learn on a voluntary basis, for reasons ranging from fun to an increased paycheck) and electing a fellow minority to office, we are letting go of more universal concepts like “equality.”

    As someone pointed out earlier – it is entirely delusional to think that in the majority of the constituencies of the United States Whites and to some extent Asians, vote based on color; so lets stop trying to make it out that we as people of Indian descent need to “get back at Europeans” for whatever reason or align ourselves with any other minority just because they are a minority too.

    And finally: 27 · Nayagan on August 19, 2008 05:11 AM · Direct link · “Quote”(?) Statement 1: I think we should also stipulate that all excessive comma usage, abuse of declarative sentences and all sorts of incorrect punctuation be punished with 50 lashes of a cane made from patriotic pine/maple.

    Statement 2: Being able to speak 4-5 languages shouldn’t be regarded as a sign of intelligence or as evidence of a ‘gift’ for learning new languages, but as a black stain upon that person’s soul–black India ink, leaving tell-tale signs of gross over-education as it tellingly drips from the craven polyglot immigrant’s breast, as it mocks the very constitutional values that made us a thankfully heterogeneous nation.

    That has got to be some of the most subtly jarring cognitive dissonance I’ve ever seen! ! ! !!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! !

  32. That has got to be some of the most subtly jarring cognitive dissonance I’ve ever seen! ! ! !!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! !

    judging by the amount of exclamation marks used, I guess so–but do explain.

    So long as it is merely asserting the right to impose superior mores for whatever period it takes to effect a genuine cultural equality between the races, and so long as it does so by humane and charitable means, the South is in step with civilization, as is the Congress that permits it to function.

    Color me young and unenthusiastic about Lew Rockwell.com, but how does this translate as ‘true libertarian’ thought? Were segregated lunch counters, public transportation and schooling the cultural norms necessary for a prosperous and peaceful South?

  33. i thOUght my !!!!! made It A dEclaratIve enOUgh stAtEmEnt tO ElIcIt cOndEscEnsIOn Over thE InabIlIty tO grAsp thE IntrIcAtE grAmmAtIcAl nOtIOns Of thE englIsh lAngUAgE while not impeding with the accompanying patronization of those who believe that learning Spanish is not an indicator of the cultural receptiveness or a measure of the egalitarian notions that they may harbor.

    I’m no minarchist when it comes to issues that affect a significant portion of the population, I believed that the Federal government was entirely correct in imposing the Constitutional interpretation of human values when it came to the civil rights act – the argument was over whether not whether the interpretation was correct or not, but whether the means to impose the interpretation were. I think it was due time to send in the National Guard, seeing how little progress there had been since Lincoln took the first step over a 100 years ago – but other people didn’t and that was the argument.

    Going back to Jyotsana’s reference to Eichmann; if you have noticed me before, I’m very pro-Israel but equating Buckley to a racist for saying that the Eichmann trail was happening at a wrong time is confusing realism and the socio-political situation at the time with the views based on the values and information of today. It is like the people at VDARE suggesting that Roanoke was an instance of anti-immigrant violence against whites. What we know as the holocaust was not well known or depicted separately from the 30 million deaths in EUrope during WW-II until well into the late 50’s and early 60’s. I don’t need to point out the importance of Germany during the Cold War, specially during its beginning. Buckley’s problem was with the media circus that was set up around someone, who at that point was seen as a “German War Criminal.” He believed that the political relationship with Germany should not be affected by bringing up wounds of the past. It was only during Eichmann’s trial that Holocaust survivors testified and their stories were finally heard by America and the world. After that, Buckley became a huge supporter of Israel and the “Zionist” cause. Buckley is a racist as much as the Pope is a Nazi.

  34. 38 · RahulD said

    with the accompanying patronization of those who believe that learning Spanish is not an indicator of the cultural receptiveness or a measure of the egalitarian notions that they may harbor.

    I was referring to Suki’s quote above . Now unless there’s some thriving national debate about whether to have 1 official language, or 4-5, I would say the quote is less than disingenuous–what Tancredo conservatives believe is that Christendom is threatened by an avalanche of cultures ill-suited to these conservatives’ varying visions of The West, not a conflict between foreign institutions (like speaking spanish in the spanish-speaking world) and American liberal institutions. Buckley seems to agree, from the quote you supplied earlier, and inferred that whatever you subjectively decide is a social norm must therefore be more conducive to harmony and prosperity. also, i never called Buckley a racist–but would love to hear, in a non-queeya-dismissing-manner, what principles and/or legal scholarship led him to approve of running those words?

    You could make a so-so argument against the methods of desegregation now (considering the success rate), but as you say, imposing the values of today on events of incredible historical import is sheer folly.