Who speaks for us?
0 comment Sunday, July 27, 2014 |
After the article I linked to the other day, about the Chinese-American academic talking about immigrants replacing old White males, this kind of thing is becoming old hat.
Actually it's been 'old hat' (or should I say old hate) for some time now; it just seems to be receiving a tad more attention now than a few years ago, which is good, I suppose. Good, that is, if it results in people becoming more alert to what is being done. However, will that happen, or will the opposite happen, with people greeting this kind of rhetoric with a ho-hum? Another day, another diatribe denouncing old White males.
What can I say that hasn't been said many times?
I will say this: it's interesting (not surprising, though) that it takes 12 comments before someone notes the obvious: Mr. Rich's ethnicity. Obviously I know that to note his ethnicity is somewhat, shall we say, discouraged at AmRen; I gather that the idea is to court Jewish support, or perhaps not to alienate the more sensitive, politically correct readers. But it is disturbing to read comment after comment describing Rich as a self-hating White man, or a Disingenuous White Liberal.
I think that if we subtracted certain ethnic groups from those we call 'self-hating White liberals' we would find that there are far fewer actual 'self-haters' than is supposed. Or are there?
This reminds me of a recent post from Vox Day titled 'America A is no more', "America A" being what I have called Old America.
He notes how Tom Friedman of the NY Times laments the decline of this country, yet over the years, Friedman has avidly supported everything that contributed to this decline:
''This is extraordinarily ironic, coming as it does from an elite Jewish liberal. He quite clearly doesn't recognize that it is the very causes he has championed for decades, from diversity, equality, and secularization to free trade, immigration, and globalization, that have so weakened America in the manner that concerns him now. While he is correct in saying that a successful and powerful America committed to its core values could again become a world leader, his definition of those core values almost surely includes those values that have proven so pernicious to American success, power, and world leadership.
The North American landmass isn't going to disappear. There will still be Americans proper - descendants of the white Anglo-Saxon Protestants who founded the nation on principles derived from the Bible and the Magna Carta - as well as those who call themselves Americans but have no cultural, ethnic, or religious connection to the historical America that is now essentially gone. The results of the great experiment are now sufficiently observable that we can pronounce the failure of the Viral America hypothesis.
It is now clear that one cannot catch Americanism. Just as the Irish, German, Scandinavian, and Italian immigrants never fully grasped the English concepts of liberty and limited government*, thereby transforming what had been a voluntary union of sovereign states into an involuntary empire ruled by a sovereign central government, the subsequent wave of immigration from Mexico and other third-world nations has transformed what had been a rich and powerful empire into an impoverished and corrupt one.
From the New York Times: "In 1980, the foreign-born population in the United States was about 4.5 million. By 2000, it had reached 11.3 million, bringing the foreign-born population to about 13 percent of the total. In the early 20th century, after the last big wave of immigration to the United States, immigrants had reached 15 percent of the population."
Therefore, Friedman is wrong as one cannot expect to make America A work when it has been transformed into America A + (M+I2+G+S+J+3). America A no longer exists. This is the B-Ark nation.''
I read the comments on the blog piece when it was first posted, and I found it a depressing discussion, as the consensus seemed to be that Anglo-Saxon colonial stock Americans did not really have that much to do with America. And this from self-described descendants of the later immigrants. Everybody wants to create his own mental 'America' in which his ethnic group has pride of place: it was really the Scots-Irish who made America great, one person says, or the Germans, or the Irish, and on and on, which proves Vox's point to some extent.
There are many instances of people like Friedman, Rich, Wise, and so many other journalists, academics, and politicians, who see themselves as apart from and in opposition to historic White Christian America, and work to weaken it, consciously or not.
And in regards to the comments at Vox Day's blog on that piece, never do I feel so alienated from my 'fellow Americans' as when I am reading that my ancestors really had no significant contribution to this country. I never used to feel estranged from descendants of the later immigrant waves, believing what I was taught as a child, that we are 'loyal Americans all'. Once upon a time that may have been so, because people were taught the true history of this country, and everybody assimilated more or less to the existing culture and traditions -- which were Anglo-Protestant by origin. Whether one likes that fact or not, it is just a fact. But now, whether influenced by liberal rewritings of history along ethnic lines, or whether because many Americans now make up their own subjective personal history of America, there is just too little common ground.
So America A may be gone, never to return. And I agree with Vox that the old America cannot be sustained by other peoples who had no part or lot in the original. But if, IF we are ever to recover our country, or try to rebuild it from the wreckage, we will need some common basis on which to unite and build. As of now, I don't see much of that, except perhaps in the South. And coincidentally (or not), the South was the area which had the greatest degree of homogeneity among White people, having not been as affected by mass immigration.
But as of now, we have people like Rich, who feel estranged from traditional America interpreting events for us, claiming to represent us, claiming to be our voice. If America is ever to be resurrected, we will have to find our own voice, and a united one at that.

Labels: , , , , , , ,