Skip to comments.Demographic Tipping Point: Whites Now Less than Half of US Births
Posted on 05/19/2012 6:13:21 AM PDT by Paladins Prayer
Bill Clinton once said that he looked forward to the day when whites were a minority in America. While he won't live to see such a time, a demographic milestone that should send a tingle up Slick Willie's leg was just reached. Writes The New York Times:
After years of speculation, estimates and projections, the Census Bureau has made it official: White births are no longer a majority in the United States.
Non-Hispanic whites accounted for 49.6 percent of all births in the 12-month period that ended last July, according to Census Bureau data made public on Thursday, while minorities - including Hispanics, blacks, Asians and those of mixed race - reached 50.4 percent, representing a majority for the first time in the country's history.
Obviously, a big reason for this demographic shift is migration -- and mainly the legal variety. As a result of Ted Kennedy's Immigration Reform Act of 1965, the level of yearly immigration increased from approximately 250,000 prior to '65 to about 1,000,000 afterwards. And its nature has changed also: 85 percent of our new arrivals hail from the third world and Asia. This radical departure from America's traditional immigration patterns has created a demographic transformation possibly unprecedented in world history -- except for cases of actual invasion.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Could it be they just popped up out of the ground?
Why do some groups have a lower birth rate than others? Promiscuity is one reason.
An even bigger reason is our permissive birth control laws. Birth control is more widely used among some groups, lowering that group’s birth rate.
Why do we allow people to interfere with God’s role when it comes to procreation?
You’re missing the point. The article is about how groups that vote for socialists are taking over numerically. it isn’t about racial friction.
And spare me that social conservative stuff. Hispanics’ social conservatism is very shallow, which is why they place it below fiscal liberalism when making voting decisions. No true social conservative could vote for an anti-marriage, pro-abortion skunk like Obama. But true to form, a majority of Hispanics will cast ballots for him again this election. Wait and see.
And the Latino National Republican Coalition of the State of Texas is generally, well really specifically Latino just as LaRaza, MEChA, the Hispanic Caucus and literally hundred/thousands of other raced based groups.
Yes, you just happen to keep getting Democrat majorities. It’s magic. It has nothing to do with the majority Hispanic population! Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!
Well, cheer up after the collapse the pendulum will swing back. How many non white preppers have you heard of?
The first settlers had some members who relocated from Spanish camps/forts on the Carolana/Virginia coast!
America got it's start earlier than most folks realize ~ 1598!~
The earliest Jamestown records report on people who'd gotten to there earlier ~ even give dates. Then there's the Los Indies Passajeros ~ or list of travelers to and from La Florida to Europe and back. Virginia's "VIrginia Rooms" in main libraries each have a copy!
There was no really great influx of white folks until the 1800s when numerous famines hit Europe.
I see youre in Idaho. Maybe you need to live in southern CA for a while to place things in perspective.
I will admit that I've lived in Southern California; however we have a good number of farm workers and such here that are Hispanic. There are plenty of small farming communities that during the summer, have white as a minority. I mean no disrespect, but great horrors in history have been committed due to perceived racial differences. I do not doubt the Egyptians in Moses time, the Democrats in south in 1850's, and the German people of the 1930's; would have bid me come and see to understand why their actions are justified. If you have not read The March Morons by Kornbluth, the answer was genocide against the idiots.
I ask then, what you see as a solution to this "problem," I can think actually change the birthrate which appears to be your beef that are in line with the principal of this country. If you say take away the welfare from illegals aliens and quit paying for their extra children. Then we are on the same side.
I accept the voting pattern aren't changing, why do you expect people to turn down a handout. The problem is the government is offering them a "free" lunch, at our expense. I would not expect that to change until we quit offering it. The same offer that is being extending to all of us by the socialists in power or running for office. It is the road Greece has taken with France following behind. The problem is, as Alexis De Tocqueville chronicled would be our downfall, the people are voting themselves the largess of the public coffers. It is the love of money (see 1 Timothy 6:10), not some sort of devoltuionary dumbing of the masses.
As for your statement that there is indeed some underlying difference in the races in forms of intelligence and what not. I have to ask if you are really serious? I see no reason to accept the idea that any race holds a superiority in intelligence. Maybe in the ability to perform the tests (usually designed by whites)we give them. You have to consider what sort of education system they are in. The Asians for instance are stereotypically considered better at Math etc. Look at the emphasis their culture puts on it. The Declaration of Independence begins "All men are created equal..." -enough said.
I would take him over Obama at this point...
For a long time, the government has been driving an agenda that whites are the new minority. Since half of all Hispanics are white, it will be awhile before this statement is true.
Accepted, and thank you. BTW, if you haven’t seen the movie, the opening 10 minutes is priceless. It confirms that Idiocy is by no means solely owned by any race.
Hate to break this to you, but the Declaration of Independence doesn’t determine reality. And by the way, the founders generally did not believe in the exact worldly equality of all races.
Also realize that world IQ charts do show a fairly profound difference among groups’ intelligence. Oh, this is all cultural bias? You may want to ask yourself why Asians score higher than whites, if it’s just because IQ tests were designed by whites, for whites.
It’s pretty clear that most differences among people are due to both nature and nurture. Only ideology can blind a person to this obvious truth.
Certainly not. Putting that truth aside, I suppose that Hollywood fiction is the guide for reality now?
An excellent article, well worth taking the time to read.
Here are some critical excerpts:
“Many will say in response to this that assimilation is the answer. Ah, it’s a nice dream.”
“Moreover, asking for assimilation becomes less logical all the time. After all, how is it a meaningful statement to say, “All people have to do is become American” when there’s no agreement on what it means to be American anymore?”
“The Western man has forgotten that a nation is essentially an extension of the tribe.”
“This is why, unlike most, I don’t expect America to ever become majority non-white.
Our republic won’t last that long.”
The last one is the most interesting. For some time now, in other postings here on FR, I have been suggesting that at some point we will see what amounts to a “Great Migration” of Euro-Americans, who will leave the “multicultural” areas of the country, and re-segregate themselves into “majority-white” areas. In time these “UNIcultural” areas of the country, perhaps entire states or groups of states, will reach a point where they become actively hostile to the federal government in Washington. We are currently seeing “hints” of that in the ongoing struggle between Arizona and the Obama administration.
At some point, the Euros are going to decide that they have to “take a stand” for their culture that is openly rebellious to what will become the “emerging hegemony” of the “multiculturals”.
This “last stand” may be peaceful, or it may be otherwise. But it WILL happen and will result in consequences that forever change the map of North America.
Finally, a quote that is NOT from the above article, and not written by me, either. It was posted in a reply here on FR (I forgot to save authorship, I only saved the quote). Perhaps the most cogent argument of all:
“ Ultimately a Conservative must either be a racial nationalist or cease being a conservative.
The only logical reason for conservatism is to preserve a genetic entity, a race, or a nation, intact - all other reasons given are mere circumlocutions. “
“The thought that only whites are conservative is frightening. I would hate to think my children would be excluded from that for their color.”
Not all whites are conservative.
But the overwhelming majority of conservatives are white.
I predict that this will not change in the future, your children notwithstanding.
“Hate to break this to you, but the Declaration of Independence doesnt determine reality. And by the way, the founders generally did not believe in the exact worldly equality of all races.”
A very good observation.
Of course, everyone in this forum knows who wrote the words:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that ALL MEN are created equal...”
But do you know that the very SAME person also wrote THIS:
“Nothing is more certainly written in the book of fate, than that these people are to be free; nor is it less certain that the two races, equally free, cannot live in the same government. Nature, habit, opinion have drawn indelible lines of distinction between them.”
I always classified morenos as white, but with better tans.
This is deceptive, to say the least.
America only has one “real” minority, who can be described as a “minority in perpetuity”. These are slave-descended black people, who strive to remain a minority, because they are caught up in feelings of oppression, racism, incapability, and entitlement. Because of numerous reasons, again all self inflicted, they may be dying out as a minority.
Otherwise, if you look what “white” means in America, it is as nonsensical a term as “Hispanic” or “Latino” for not meaning anything.
There are 50 internationally recognised sovereign states with territory located within the common definition of Europe. Within these are a vast number of distinct ethnic groups, languages, cultures, etc. Lump them all together, however, and the end result is “white”.
And lump them all together, mix with American Indian and Hispanic, and you end up with a “white” American. Unless one of the direct parents is Hispanic. Then you have a “white Hispanic”.
Oh, and Hispanic is just as diverse as “white” is.
As is Asian. And African.
So there you have America. A mostly mongrel nation, with a self described slave-descended black minority, who don’t even get along with Africans, who do not have all the SD black emotional and cultural baggage and craving for self destruction and entitlement.
So along with the mongrel whites, Hispanics mixing with mongrel whites, Asians mixing with mongrel whites, and a still relatively small number of Africans; you have the SD black minority, which is dying out.
The only problem here are those leftists like Bill Clinton who want to keep racial segregation.
Color is literally irreleant, except when selecting make-up tones and clothing colors, and --- OK --- computing optimal sun exposure. Members of my beloved family have roots in Asia and Africa, and so do members of my beloved America.
People: it's not "the color of skin", but "the content of the character." You know that.
“Otherwise, if you look what white means in America, it is as nonsensical a term as Hispanic or Latino for not meaning anything.”
That’s very nice, really. Hey, you know those black gangs that are assaulting whites all over the nation? If one of them accosts you, just tell them that the white designation is “nonsensical” and meaningless. While you’re at it - if you can still speak with the blood dripping down your throat - be sure to mention that race is just a “social construct.”
Unfortunately, yef, most of the world just doesn’t see things the way you do. And denying the reality of human nature is not only what liberals do, it’s disastrous.
That was a good comeback to Idaho Cowboy (post #26).
And I agree with your general thesis, i.e., it appears from what is happening that the prospects for America are quite bleak. I sure wouldn’t want to be a young person of the white persuasion right now.
Sounds like you need to re-read what I wrote instead of what you assumed I wrote based on the first half-sentence.
Even with your response, pointing out the obvious about black gangs, fails because the minorities that are increasing in the US are mostly Hispanic and Asian. And these people are not forming gangs to assault whites.
Heck, Spain “owned” most of Mexico, Central and South America. They pillaged and killed the indigenous Indians worst that the “white” Europeans. The Indians down there had whole cities and lots of gold. The American Indians just had land, no real material riches. The sold Manhattan for cheap beads. At least the “white” Europeans tried to compensate the American Indians for the land.
Not me. Clinton's only saving grace was the economy, and that was due to factors he had nothing to do with like the tech jobs created by the advent of eccommerce and Y2K, not having to budget for the Cold War, and doing little in the WOT.
Clinton's failure in leadership may have costed us a chance to get Bin Laden bloodlessly, which both Bush and Obama have had to pay for. The MSM tries to frame the WOT as starting in 2001, but Bin Laden attacked us throughout the Clinton years, too. The MSM successully kept our attention off of Bin Laden's attacks and on all of those jobs created by ecommerce and Y2K, thus the memory of the "peace and prosperity of the Clinton years".
Take away the tech boom, throw in the cost of the WOT, and Clinton's economy would have been no better than Obama's. At least Obama made the call to get OBL when he had the opportunity, so I'll take him over Clinton.
Idaho Cowboy -
The fight you are bringing is the same one as between the “race realist” John Derbyshire and the more politically correct Conservative editor, Jonah Goldberg, of the National Review - who fired him a few weeks ago for a column he wrote about what White parents have to tell their kids about Black people.
Like other race-blind Conservatives you assert as “facts” opinions that don’t have a basis in reality. It is true that all Humans are Humans, but it is also true that the Black, White, Asian and other human races do exist. Race is not a social construct, it’s a biological one, which is why race can be easily determined with DNA and other medical tests.
Pit Bulls and Poodles are both of the same species, but no one would claim they are the same in capability or temperment.
There are large variations in individuals of different races. It would be stupid to say either “all Asians are short” or “there are no tall Asians”. But it would be equally stupid to say “Asians are as big as Europeans”. Race isn’t everything, but it’s not nothing, either.
The “propositional nation” is one of the theories of the NeoCons. “Everyone wants the same thing we want”. Hopefully, after our two wars in the Middle East, we can admit that not everyone values the same things we do.
Other groups value: their 9th century religion, their clan integrity, their indepndence of foreign influence, the supremacy of men over woman, the ability to marry their cousins, the habit of using boys for sex, and other strange proclivities of the tribes of Afghanistan and the people of Iraq.
What is “the proposition” that you imagine binds us together? “Freedom”? “The Pursuit of Happiness”? The truth is that when we were a strong vibrant nation we had huge majorities that shared a commone set of beliefs: we were Christian, we were devout, we were thrifty, we believed in hard work (”the Protestant work ethic” - when was the last time you heard that?) we admired the Founding Fathers, all of whom were men, most of whom were of British or Dutch stock.
We believed in fairness, truth and sobriety. We understood concepts like debt and credit and contracts and intellectual property.
All of this was a part of our heritage, our cultural heritage, but our racial heritage too. So we were a propositional nation, but we were an organic nation too.
Have you ever known any Western person to deeply immerse themselves in Japanese culture? Learn the very difficult language (not the childrens version Westerners are usually taught to get by, but the entire language with all of it’s hierarchy as spoken by native Japanese), and all of the cultural queues and habits of the Japanese. And, after all that for the few who do that - are they Japanese? No Japanese would say so.
So perhaps, if you agree with my analogy there are two types of nationalities: there are organic nations, like the Japanese of Irish, which are full of people who are genetically related and have a common culture and then there are synthetic nations that are made of up different groups slammed together. In 1950 America was still a syntheic nation but it was well on the way to becoming an organic one - with only the segregated Black minority still not assimilated.
Everything since then has made us much more a synthetic nation, one that people like you insist is based on “propositions” at the same time the leading institutions are actively destroying every common value and shared understanding we have: from “homosexuality is wrong” to “America’s founders where Great men”. So what comonality is left for us to “synthesize” the nation around.
As for your sarcastic claim that without enough white people we can’t maintain our civilization, that might make sense in Idaho to hold that view.
I’m from Detroit. Believe it or not Detroit was still a beautiful wonder when I was kid. After 40 years of black majorities and black rule it resembles parts of Africa. (I recently saw a slide show on Kinsasha circa 1965 when the Belgians still ran it, and today. It was errie the similarities.)
Propositional Nation Consevatives, like the NeoCons over at the National Review love to say “Democrats ran Detroit into the ground”, but, really, do even they believe it? I live in Portland, Oregon now. Dems have been in control here since the 1960s too, but it’s a wonderful vibrant city. A lot of the still prosperous and lovely suburbs of Detroit have had Democratic mayors as long as Detroit has, but are not in ruin.
One could say that Detroit is a special case, but then one looks at Jackson, Birmingham, Baltimore, Memphis, Flint and New Orleans. All majority black and black run cities. There is not a lot of existence proof from Black majorities creating stable, vibrant nations. There are about 40 nations in Africa. By most accounts the best one is South Africa.
I know you are well meaning, and you are preaching from the catechism we were all brought up believing in. But there’s a lot of counter-factual evidence to suggest that holding on to these ideals in the face of reality is a major part of our undoing as a nation.
If America were to go from 65% White today to 65% Middle Eastern in 2112 do you think it would be the same as if it went to 65% Hispanic? Would the laws, customs, morality, food, politics and education of kids born in 2112 still be representing “Traditional American Values”.
As a self-described conservative I would urge you to think more about what it is that you are trying to conserve, and what are the real (not idealistic) requirements to see those things conserved. If you are honest I think you will have to give up a lot of your “propositional nation” beliefs.
White western civilization/culture did not decide this. This was decided by your federal government, regardless of what you or others want.
Divide the united.
It's all part of the plan by the U.S. Government, U.N. and super wealthy globalist/world order types.
If history is any judge they are no better and no worse on a moral level. For a very brief span of recent history we have achieved a higher level of technology and living. Does that mean we are genetically superior?
Considering I said nothing about assimilating, I'm confused. But I'll say this. American Exceptionalism is a belief. Think of the immigrants that made America the great melting pot of the world. They came seeking freedom willing to work hard to get ahead. That's the American dream that's what makes America different.
That part of culture is what is missing. It's taught and handed down generation to generation, and its in danger today no matter what race of American you are. America is supposed to be the land where race and background don't matter where people can chart their own destinies. That's the dream and you can't pigeonhole people in hyphenated categories.
Are we as conservatives truly proposing we judge men not on their character, but on the color of their skin? Are we really smarter than Patrick Henry and the founding father's that longed for an end to slavery because they believed all men were equal. Do we really have more wisdom than Martin Luther King Jr.?
Joy Behar gloated on the View that we can no longer be called a white Christian nation. Well, I am in agreement with you, I think white Christians should have ten babies and teach each and everyone NEVER to vote Democrat as long as they lived.
White Christians should be telling their children that we need to increase our numbers—at least three children per family. And we need to start asking some tough questions of our Republican politicians of what they are doing to reduce legal immigration. Any Republican who falls back on that “we are a nation of immigrants” crap should be soundly booed. Why don’t we ask our “leaders” why European immigrants are being kept out of this country while everybody else is let in?
What a choice we have between a white president who hates whites and a black president who hates whites. Matter of fact, it seems that the whole Democrat establishment hates whites.
The pre-1965 immigration law had it right, a nation should preserve its heritage for its children any others may be welcome but only in small numbers. We have to stop being so chicken about talking about race.
And who are the racists here?The racists are whoever the media says are the racists. That's the number one lesson of the George Zimmerman arrest and trial.
I am wondering if you have any children.
Brazil is probably the country that comes closest to this but no one is singing kumbaya. In fact, they have many unwanted kids living in the streets and there is still a race continuum from black to white. When people of different races interbreed on a large scale there will be a *rainbow* effect as some take after one side of the family and others take after the other. Even within the same family there will be marked racial differences, as a result the Brazilians have developed an elaborate system of catergorizing people by race. Race never goes away no matter how much you try to *blend* people.
The Bible also teaches that circumsion was a way of distinguishing the Jews from the gentiles. The Jews were told to keep away from the pagans and to avoid their pagan ways. Nations are the best and organic way for people to organize, it is the natural way that people have lived as they have settled in a land many thousands of years ago. We can have people of different races living in this country but the question is how many are too many? When there is a tilt in the balance of power then there is no large or powerful enough group to hold the center together. All the different groups will fight for dominance as we are seeing.
It comes back to the old “if white people don’t notice race, then we will all get along like God and the angels.” So what happens when other people notice race?
The Founding Fathers were trying to have something almost new under the sun-a form of government in which the power wasn’t automatically passed down though the tribe, the clan, the aristocracy, the nobility, the monarchy.
The founders of these groups had indeed done deeds of great bravery or goodness to have won their palms, and it was accepted in their era that part of the prize was to easily be able to distinguish your progeny for posterity on this one basis (though the concept of “noblesse oblige” did more than pay lip service to the idea that those descendants were expected to add more gilding to the laurel leaves won by the founder of the house (though the inbreeding necessary to keep the bloodlines “worthy” had a tendency to produce either greatness in man (the Drakes, Walter Raleighs, etc), or the “chinless wonders”, or the few mediocrities in the middle.
It was a system not designed to make room for newcomers based on pure merit, and after the Industrial Revolution, a new class was rising-the “middle class” who were often well-educated and even well-traveled (the “Grand Tour” was the finish of many upper-middle-class young men’s education). As of yet, there was no room for these men with merit in the halls of power, even under such a relatively enlightened monarchy such as the British style of reigning.
All that to say, that when the American Revolution was gaining speed, it was early agreed , once the stage was reached of speaking about a brand new government for this new nation, that it would be based on merit and the will of the people though their elected or appointed representatives (republican form of government).
For a government like this to suceed, to thrive, requires especially many men of merit and goodness (by which I mean integrity and character). They went straight to the source, rather than hoping each generation of the monarchy or the nobility would produce these exceptional men. These men would come from many classes(though, this being the 18th C, the power would still temd to accrue into the hands of the more educated upper classes (education still being a thing which any man could attain-if he MERITED it, of he was smart and studious enough). Abraham Lincoln was one of the earliest best examples of this new man.
I say all this to say, that when the Founding Fathers said that “all men are created equal”, they still were men of their time. They were saying that all men were equal before God and the law, not that all men should be required to be equal in condition. That’s not even possible under Communism, as they well knew themselves.
All men are NOT, even now, equal in condition, nor can they be made to be except by lowering everyone to the lowest common denominator. That’s the ONLY way THAT kind of “equality” can ever work, because a person can be prevented from reaching their highest potential, but you just can’t someone inherently smarter than they are. I could never be a Stephen Hawkings if I studied for a hundred years, because I do not a capacity-of freedom, of spatial cognizance, that he has. Should we therefore teach to a curriculum that will make sure, “in the name of equality”, that a Hawking or a Carl Sagan or an Einstein can never happen again?
That is also one reason that the greatest innovations have come from the west and not the east, in spite of their higher iqs. Conformity is a fundamental of their culture-the nail that sticks up, gets hammered (interestingly enough, the Russians also have that saying).
A theory has been proposed, offering something called “the Hercules quality”. It describes a quality which makes men do daring deeds of bravery, explorarion, and discovery, even at the conscious and accepted risk to their lives, in the name of just “wanting to know”. The first balloonists-fliers-astronauts-deep sea divers in tiny submersibles that are the men’s only protection against unbelievable pressure outside if only one tiny crack goes deep enough. I’m talking about the pioneers in these efforts,when the dangers were hardly understood and therefore all the more terrifying. These pioneers have all been white males.
OK, dismiss all of this as just “a tiny part of history”. Then what of the fact that when whites leave, for whatever reason, thriving cities or countries they’ve built up to First World status, and turn them over to black rule-always leaving the infrastructure in place, not “scorching the earth” in resentment (as is done by blacks to innocent home and shop owners in their “riots”), the blacks never fail to NOT maintain the citiy/country (see South Africa, Detroit). All the time before the white presence has been lessened, there would have been blacks working in these enterprises, some of them had to have learned how things work-WHY can they still not teach others and keep things running up to the standard they had under white government?
Could it be that the Founders were indeed wise and knew that equality under God and before the law is as good as it can ever get, considering they were planning a form of government based on meritocracy instead of monarchy or aristocracy?
Whichever race is dominant, it’s culture will be dominant. Frankly I don’t want to live in a nation that has the same third world culture which these people fled, only to proudly recreate it here. England already has problems with Muslims attempting-and in some cases suceeding-to impose sharia. I don’t see Mexico’s culture as especially worthy of emulation, especially now. Black culture in general-what can I say? Has there ever been an irreplaceable, useful field of endeavor in which they’ve led the world to the benefit of all mankind? If any of these cultures are the future dominant culture of America, whites should PRAY to be gone from here one way or another, because if we are so weak as to succumb to these cultures we don’t deserve to live and won’t want to live in them. Whites are “altruisming” ourselves out of existence.
Cultures are what people have made of them. Consider South America compared to Spain and Portugal. The South American countries have so many more social problems than the Iberian countries. There is so much more crime in South America than in the Iberian countries because there are two cultures blended in the South American countries. All we have to do is see how people live in their own countries and we will see how they will live in our country.
These are the end times for America.
Not necessarily, but with the Great Recession still with us, it's certainly time for revisiting our immigration policies.