Katie’s Dad 2.0

It was just another ho-hum day, then this caught my eye…and almost put it out!

Minorities Now Form Majority in One-Third of Most-Populous Counties - New York Times

In a further sign of the United States’ growing diversity, nonwhites now make up a majority in almost one-third of the most-populous counties in the country and in nearly one in 10 of all 3,100 counties, according to an analysis of census results to be released today.

As usual, the New York Times presents facts using language preferred by the multiculturalists. It starts by creating a basis by inferral that immigration is always good (in PC speak, “diversity” is always good), regardless of the source, regardless of the numbers, regardless of the need, and it must never be challenged. To do so would be racist, bigoted and xenophobic; to the liberal media there can never be any good in the heart of someone who wishes to nurture the gifts of heritage.

If this lede were written by someone who actually cared about things like tradition and heritage it probably would’ve gone something like this:

In a further sign of the United States’ shrinking traditional heritage and cultural power base, people who can claim no ancestral link or handed-down understanding of Western civilization’s traditions now make up a majority in almost one third of the most populous counties in the country and nearly one in ten of all 3100 counties, according to an analysis of the census results to be released today.

As published, those of us with more traditionally conservative sensibilities can easily discern that the Times piece begins with a pretty slick and disingenuous maneuver. Unfortunately, we’ve gotten used to it; but, it still serves to reaffirm my belief that the overall mindset of the journalist class has become far more dismissive of American heritage than it was when I was in journalism school 25 years ago. Reading this sort of drivel makes me really glad I switched from the straight journalism track to the public relations track before it was too late!

While I was trying to read between the lines of this article to extract meaning for those of us who care about our ancestry, I was reminded of something that Lawrence Auster wrote a while back that dovetails nicely with a point I’m trying to make here:

Exposing the Open-Borders Arguments

The idea of “balance” (so beloved—in theory!—by the news media) is supposed to mean that the pros and cons of any issue must be given a formulaic equal weight, regardless of their inherent merits. To get an idea of how misleading and dangerous this notion can be, consider the following statements:

‑ “Third‑World immigrants are not assimilating.”
‑ “Third‑World immigrants are assimilating.”

Let us imagine that we accept the first statement (that Third-World immigrants are not assimilating) and radically reduce immigration. If it turns out to be wrong, no permanent harm will have been done to the country. But if we accept the second proposition (that the immigrants are assimilating) and continue our current immigration policy, and if that statement turns out to be wrong, we will have irretrievably damaged the country. Thus the two statements are not of equal importance. To put it another way, if it is true that many immigrants are not assimilating, that fact would not be “balanced” by the fact that other immigrants are assimilating, since the net effect of immigration is to introduce a non‑assimilating population into this country.

Another specious “balancing” device used by immigration proponents is the non sequitur, in which some negative fact about immigration is countered by some positive—but wholly unrelated—fact about immigration. For example, if you say that “Immigration is balkanizing America,” you’re likely to hear responses such as these:

‑ “Hispanic immigrants are better workers than blacks.”
‑ “Diversity enriches us.”
‑ “Immigrants are needed to fill jobs.”
‑ “Immigrants strengthen the economy.”
‑ “Immigrants bring good family values.”

Even if all of those assertions were true, they would be completely beside the point. If you learned that a glass of milk you were about to drink contained an ingredient that would make you seriously ill, the fact that the milk also contained lots of vitamins and minerals would not matter to you. Similarly, if current immigration is causing irreversible harm to our country, then the fact that immigration may also provide some benefits is irrelevant. It is the total impact of immigration that matters. Immigration proponents who stress the positive, transient effects of immigration while ignoring the negative, irreversible consequences are engaged in a dangerous con game.

This backs up my contention that it is the duty of every American who wants to fulfill his or her obligations as a cultural steward for future generations to speak up and act out now to avert disaster. It is time that the burden of proof be placed where it belongs. It is clearly not our responsibility to prove our contention that current and recent immigration policy and practice will make America less great and bring harm to future generations: We are not the ones seeking radical change!

It is the responsibility of the the ethno-Marxists, the corporatists, the neo-conservatives, the compassionate conservatives and their left-leaning church heirarchy allies to prove unequivocally that the continued mass immigration they desire will bring no harm to us in our lifetimes or to the future generations of citizens of this nation. And failing to provide such proof, their desires must be allowed no consideration whatsoever in our much-needed and too-long-delayed dialog about “who we are” and how it relates to what sort of immigration we allow.

To put these immigration radicals in their rightful place, we must remain diligently unafraid to speak American truths as they were transmitted to us by our families. We must remain fearless in our conscious and consistent repetition of our messages. It is the only way to break the grip that political correctness has has had on rational dialogue in America for about the last 40 years. Fear of having any label of political incorrectness affixed to us must not deter us. The left and it’s gaggle of useful idiots only deploy their PC toolkit when they know they are losing an argument, so we must find ways to remain strong when they resort to their typical, shrill name-calling.

Now, back to the NYT article:

The shift reflects the growing dispersal of immigrants and the suburbanization of blacks and Hispanics pursuing jobs generated by whites moving to the fringes of metropolitan areas.

If this sentence were written for publication in the New York Times anywhere except immediately after the first one above, it would never have made it to print. Inherent in it is a contention that “whites”are necessary for job creation in America. Considering the source, it’s shocking that this sort of honest language was allowed at all.

“The new melting pots are not large international gateways,” Professor [William] Frey said, adding, “Rather, many are fast-growing suburbs themselves.”

It is interesting that the author, Sam Roberts, manages to slip a “melting pot” quote into his mess. Any reasonable idiot ought to be able to figure out that what’s happening now with immigration is not a “melting pot” scenario at all; it’s not even “salad bowl.” It’s something radically outside the realm of historical precedence.

What we have is the consistent march of various intransigent, alien Diasporas chasing opportunity created by this nation’s traditional majority. It continues even though many of us in the traditional majority keep feeling compelled to relocate our families to escape having the “joys of diversity” imposed upon us. What the article should tell us is that eventually, and probably soon, there simply won’t be places in America for Americans of Heritage to enculturate their children in the manner they are obligated. “White flight” may soon no longer be a legitimate recourse; other alternatives will have to be considered.

In a new study for the Population Reference Bureau, Mark Mather and Kelvin Pollard found that Hispanic people were increasingly attracted to job opportunities and lower costs outside major metropolitan areas.“Between 2000 and 2006, the total population in small towns and rural areas increased by 3 percent, but the Hispanic population in these counties grew from 2.6 million to 3.2 million, a 22 percent increase,” the authors of the study wrote.

So far this decade, they added, “there are also new areas of growth, including exurban counties in the Atlanta, Chicago, New York, and Washington, D.C., metropolitan areas, plus parts of Texas, central Florida, and a few other states.”

There is a lot in this that should be cause for concern, even for those of you who might claim a long American heritage or have family roots set in Western Civilization but do not care to nurture them. The points made by the Population Reference Bureau should give you pause if you have dreams of living happily in America through your golden years.

Immigration is not just growing our population, it is replacing it. It’s been 110 years since one of this nation’s most noted scholars, General Frances Amasa Walker, noted that immigration caused native birth rates to fall and warned of the likely harm in it. Fjordman recently raised the same theme and outlined more completely the contemporary and similar reasons why Americans of Heritage aren’t replacing themselves by having enough children. But he doesn’t take the next step. Only by removing illegal aliens through legal means of attrition and enforcing a complete time-out on net immigration for a period of years, even generations, will Americans be likely to start having more children.

If Walker was correct, and I believe he was, then greater than replacement-level procreation cannot occur until a sense of cultural continuity has a chance to be restored over time. This appears to be a key motivator for people, well, at least Americans and other Westerners, to have children. At the very least, it’s a place for us to start trying to maintain ourselves. Of course, encouraging our citizens to have more American kids to accept the baton of heritage isn’t the only reason why we should have a time out.

Despite all the “nation of immigrants” nonsense we have foisted upon us constantly, history actually shows that periodic and lengthy time outs are important for assimilation to work, especially after surges of mass immigration. Experience should inform us of the need for taking extraordinary measures to deal with those encultured in any way significantly different from ours if they arrive in any significant numbers. No immigrant group should ever be allowed to feel safe in retaining and transmitting its culture or language to its American-born children.

I’ve often referred to this necessary process as “hitting the cultural reset button.” It can’t happen if people aren’t provided the real facts by those who promote themselves as “experts.” For instance, the Brookings Institution’s Bill Frey, who quote-mongered in his contribution to the New York Times piece, has a history of being disingenuous with the facts about immigration. For example, I dug up a Los Angeles times Op-Ed he contributed last fall.

In it, he wrote:

Yet, there is actually little need to worry about immigration. It adds a needed youthful element to a population that would become stagnant if it had to rely on the far-below-replacement fertility of the nation’s aging native-born whites. Their infusion into the workforce will be especially useful to retiring boomers who wish to be supported in their golden years.

The low immigration years, through which most of today’s adult population grew up, were atypical in our history. The “pull yourself up by the bootstrap” attitudes of the early 20th century foreign-stock generations, who survived the Depression and World War II, created the circumstances that made way for the baby boomers.

The first part, thanks to General Walker, I’ve pre-Fisked above, but the notion that low immigration years are somehow “atypical” is hilarious. Plus, Frey completely ignores the fact that the reason for the low net immigration years experienced early in life by the Baby Boomers was a direct result of the great immigration pause that started in 1924, which was brought about by the same sorts of problems with immigrants we gripe about today.

The last part regarding the attitudes of the early 20th century foreign-stock generations is offensive; it was earlier generations of Americans that endured far greater hardships to lay a foundation.  Without it, later immigrants would have had no firmament upon which to stand to get a grip upon their boots. Frey’s frivolity might ring true to some, but it’s no more than another disgusting platitude seeped from the festering brain of an open-borders automaton.

The fact of the matter that I want to address most clearly is that near net-zero immigration has been at least equally important to our national greatness as mass immigration has ever been. There has never been a “typical” mode of immigration except that it has been relatively low. For the most part, there have been two moderate extremes. Let’s take a look at the numbers:

Might something prescriptive be gleaned from the fact that in 13 of 23 decentennial census reports, the foriegn-born population was less than 10% of our residents and no official census has ever reported that as many as 15% of our residents were born in other lands? Is there something to be learned if today we have not only surpassed that benchmark, but the upward trend line looks to have no end? Anyone with the capability of switching to a conservative mode would believe so!

If trends are not reversed, the first generation of Americans ever to live its entire life among an “atypically sized” foreign born population is the one being born today;  this will be the first generation in which the percentage of foreign born residents will have surpassed and sustained a percentage more than one standard deviation (4.94%) greater than the historical mean (8.27%). For those who don’t like statistics, that means that past anomalies in immigration haven’t been all that great…and today’s are notable.

I added those last two rows in the table to point out that if there is anything that the baby boomer generation will have experienced when it passes on that might be deemed truly “atypical” when it comes to immigration is that they will have lived during the time that America allowed its leaders to get extraordinarily stupid and cavalier about it. If there are 20 million illegal aliens here today, and there probably are millions more than that, then our nation already has reached an unprecedented new high percent of foreign-born residents. And it least half of them by their actions have proved they don’t give a damn about our laws.

It is just plain stupid to believe that there will be any sort of “net good” that comes of it. Perhaps it will. But, damn it, I’m not willing to stake my child’s future on it. And I sure don’t want to be forced into politically haggling with poorly assimilated ethnocentrists with split loyalties (at best) about getting back what I’ve paid into the system for my retirement. The multiculturalists think that I’m crazy for being suspicious of what the leaders our current crop of newcomers will elect might do to me on their behalf.  I’d be foolish to listen to them.

With all the demographic destiny being played out today, Americans with any sort of Westernized roots better wake up or they’re going to be in for a shock. If we don’t fix this, we’re going to find our “golden years” are not joyous or fun-filled at all. Once the Diasporized children of today’s resident-aliens have learned to use political power, they will control access to many of the social goods today’s Americans will have accrued over their lifetimes and, rightfully, feel entitled to use.

If mass immigration carries with it the poison pills to screw up my retirement, and it surely does since I’m still in my 40’s, what kind of hell on earth will it mean we leave for our children?  And why would they ever forgive us for being so careless with the franchise?

There is still time for mass immigration disaster to be averted if we return to sanity regarding immigration policy, practice and enforcement. But that time is running short. Don’t believe for an instant that the New York Times, or any mainstream media conglomerate (even FoxNews) is going to shoot straight with you about this stuff.

We’re on our own, but I can feel us getting stronger…and less cowed by fear of being called silly names.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Assimilation, Culture, Demographics, Diversity, Immigration, Multiculturalism, Political Correctness