0 comment Tuesday, September 2, 2014 | admin
This story broke last week.
Texas Hispanics Fuel State's Population Growth
HOUSTON � A phenomenal surge in Hispanics has fueled the population growth in Texas, which gained more people over the last decade than any other state, according to United States Census Bureau figures released on Thursday.
People who identify themselves as Hispanic accounted for two-thirds of the state�s growth in the last decade. Hispanics now make up 38 percent of the state�s 25.1 million people, up from 32 percent a decade ago.
At the same time, demographers say, the growth in the population of white people who are not Hispanic has slowed markedly, rising by only 4 percent. Non-Hispanic whites now make up just 45 percent of the Texas population, down from 52 percent in 2000.''
This story is not surprising, since Texas became majority nonwhite a few years back.
There's been some gloating around the conservative discussions about this online, since so many people from other immigrant-saturated states were criticized by Texans for letting mass immigration overwhelm them. Texans are advertised to be of sterner stuff, and more willing to defend their territory which was so hard-won.
So what happened to the famed Texan spirit?
Naturally I have a bias toward Texas, but I can be objective enough to say that in a sense Texas has been weakened by a couple of factors. The first one that comes to my mind is that Texas, like much of the South, has been heavily colonized by Northerners, even before illegal (and legal) immigration began to be utterly out of control. For economic reasons many Yankees came to Texas and other Southern states probably starting, in earnets, during the recession of the 70s. The high-tech industry in Texas was a magnet for a long while, luring many people from outside the South and eventually, outside the U.S.
The population started to grow a lot then, and this influx alone started to erode the old Texas culture and demographics.
One way and another, there are fewer descendants of the old Texas colonist stock now, while there are vastly increasing percentages of immigrants from all over the world, some who came legally, most illegally. But a great many people in Texas, it's probably safe to say, have no ties whatsoever to the core events of Texas history and no part in the heritage of that state.
Another element in this story is the fact that there has always been a Spanish-speaking population in Texas, considering that it was once part of Mexico. However there is a mistaken belief that Texas was heavily populated by Mexicans who were then conquered by Anglo colonists and made subject to them. This idea presupposes that the Mexicans you see in Texas today are the 'original' indigenous people, the rightful owners of the land, in much the same way that the liberal storyline makes Indians the rightful owners of the Americas, and our ancestors evil interlopers. The fact is, it's probably likely that the average Spanish-speaker you see in Texas is a relative newcomer, if he hasn't just swum the Rio Grande.
Yes, there was a Spanish-speaking (though not necessarily Mexican) population in Texas at the time of the Anglo-American colonists' arrival. I have read estimates of the total population as low as 20,000, and if that sounds like a lot of people, the territory in question was even larger than the present-day state of Texas, so that number shows it was sparsely populated. And it must also be remembered that many of the Spanish-speaking residents were of actual Spanish, meaning European, Iberian blood, very dissimilar to most of today's Mexicans.
And the fact that there has always been a certain percentage of Hispanic people in the state of Texas has led to a certain complacency about their presence. Most people in Texas take the presence of Mexicans for granted, and many Texans, especially today's politically corrected ones, will vociferously defend Mexicans, and will tell you emphatically that ''they fought at the Alamo alongside the Anglos'' or similar stories. Yes, there were some who did fight against Santa Anna's troops at the Alamo, but you can see the defenders' names listed, and note that there was hardly a 50-50 partnership.
I count roughly twelve names, of all those listed, who were Mexican or of Spanish descent. They were far outnumbered by Anglo-Americans.
Incidentally, the list is one of the 'revised' ones, which has added names that were not included in the original roll. (Interestingly for me, at least two of the new names are known kinsmen of mine, though I was already aware of another kinsman who died there.)
If you are interested, this link tells the story of how the list was 'corrected', although I can't help wonder if some of this was political 'correcting.'
For example, this quote is telling:
"The Alamo problem, as in all of history, is that we think what happened in the past is static," said Stephen L. Hardin, a historian at Victoria College, who wrote about the Alamo battle in the revised handbook. "When evidence to the contrary pops up, it shakes up things and we deny the new because it challenges long-held beliefs."
Oh, yes, all the history we know has been biased and colored by our prejudices, and let's remember, there are many versions of the truth, and who are we to try to exclude 'conflicting narratives?'
As usual, I'm digressing. My point was that Texas has been politically corrected to some extent like every place else, and the schools have been dumbed down to accommodate multiculturalism.
I will say, too, that in recent years, the social sanctions against intermarriage, which used to be very strong, have largely disappeared. And what happens when people marry out of their group is that group bonds and allegiances are weakened and eventually disappear. That's why all advertising and entertainment pushes the outmarrying meme so relentlessly these days. France's Sarkozy has come right out and said we need more métissage.
So yes, more Anglo Texans have Mexican-American neighbors and Mexican-American spouses and half-Mexican children or grandchildren, etc. And this makes people excessively optimistic that in time, ethnic conflicts will evaporate away and we will all get together and wonder why we used to be so mistaken, and we'll all have a good old laugh about the bad old days.
It's true that many Mexican-descended Texans have roots in the state that go back at least a few generations. Most of these are people who speak English accent-free, or close. They are fairly well assimilated to American (Anglo/White) ways, and they do not present the culture clash problems posed by recent immigrants. Some (few) may side with the older-stock Texans on matters of immigration, but I sense that many of the younger people may suddenly discover their Hispanic roots and reverse-assimilate, as has happened with many young European-born descendants of non-European immigrans. Why not, when the host culture is too cowed to defend itself, and the natural inhabitants of the country seem willing to capitulate? Exotic roots have a certain cachet in this multicult-dominated world, and in the last analysis, blood will out. Blood is thicker than water. It's thicker than 'assimilation.' Blood is thicker than civic citizenship.
I think some Texans may begin to realize that they have been too sanguine about the presence of millions of immigrants, and too quick to assume that they will all 'fit in' and be good neighbors . I suspect that there are some clueless people who think that the Latinos will be magnanimous in victory if we are accepting of them and affable towards them. I don't share that optimism.
One more factor that has enabled this situation to grow out of hand is that Texas is a big state, and there are still pockets where immigrants have not come to be a sizeable presence -- yet. As long as people still have a familiar and homogeneous community to retreat to, they will not feel the pressing nature of the problem.
We will see in the next few years whether Texas submits to Californication or whether the old Texas spirit that motivated our ancestors reasserts itself. Time is growing short; if people remain inert, then Texas will go gently into that night.
Texas Hispanics Fuel State's Population Growth
HOUSTON � A phenomenal surge in Hispanics has fueled the population growth in Texas, which gained more people over the last decade than any other state, according to United States Census Bureau figures released on Thursday.
People who identify themselves as Hispanic accounted for two-thirds of the state�s growth in the last decade. Hispanics now make up 38 percent of the state�s 25.1 million people, up from 32 percent a decade ago.
At the same time, demographers say, the growth in the population of white people who are not Hispanic has slowed markedly, rising by only 4 percent. Non-Hispanic whites now make up just 45 percent of the Texas population, down from 52 percent in 2000.''
This story is not surprising, since Texas became majority nonwhite a few years back.
There's been some gloating around the conservative discussions about this online, since so many people from other immigrant-saturated states were criticized by Texans for letting mass immigration overwhelm them. Texans are advertised to be of sterner stuff, and more willing to defend their territory which was so hard-won.
So what happened to the famed Texan spirit?
Naturally I have a bias toward Texas, but I can be objective enough to say that in a sense Texas has been weakened by a couple of factors. The first one that comes to my mind is that Texas, like much of the South, has been heavily colonized by Northerners, even before illegal (and legal) immigration began to be utterly out of control. For economic reasons many Yankees came to Texas and other Southern states probably starting, in earnets, during the recession of the 70s. The high-tech industry in Texas was a magnet for a long while, luring many people from outside the South and eventually, outside the U.S.
The population started to grow a lot then, and this influx alone started to erode the old Texas culture and demographics.
One way and another, there are fewer descendants of the old Texas colonist stock now, while there are vastly increasing percentages of immigrants from all over the world, some who came legally, most illegally. But a great many people in Texas, it's probably safe to say, have no ties whatsoever to the core events of Texas history and no part in the heritage of that state.
Another element in this story is the fact that there has always been a Spanish-speaking population in Texas, considering that it was once part of Mexico. However there is a mistaken belief that Texas was heavily populated by Mexicans who were then conquered by Anglo colonists and made subject to them. This idea presupposes that the Mexicans you see in Texas today are the 'original' indigenous people, the rightful owners of the land, in much the same way that the liberal storyline makes Indians the rightful owners of the Americas, and our ancestors evil interlopers. The fact is, it's probably likely that the average Spanish-speaker you see in Texas is a relative newcomer, if he hasn't just swum the Rio Grande.
Yes, there was a Spanish-speaking (though not necessarily Mexican) population in Texas at the time of the Anglo-American colonists' arrival. I have read estimates of the total population as low as 20,000, and if that sounds like a lot of people, the territory in question was even larger than the present-day state of Texas, so that number shows it was sparsely populated. And it must also be remembered that many of the Spanish-speaking residents were of actual Spanish, meaning European, Iberian blood, very dissimilar to most of today's Mexicans.
And the fact that there has always been a certain percentage of Hispanic people in the state of Texas has led to a certain complacency about their presence. Most people in Texas take the presence of Mexicans for granted, and many Texans, especially today's politically corrected ones, will vociferously defend Mexicans, and will tell you emphatically that ''they fought at the Alamo alongside the Anglos'' or similar stories. Yes, there were some who did fight against Santa Anna's troops at the Alamo, but you can see the defenders' names listed, and note that there was hardly a 50-50 partnership.
I count roughly twelve names, of all those listed, who were Mexican or of Spanish descent. They were far outnumbered by Anglo-Americans.
Incidentally, the list is one of the 'revised' ones, which has added names that were not included in the original roll. (Interestingly for me, at least two of the new names are known kinsmen of mine, though I was already aware of another kinsman who died there.)
If you are interested, this link tells the story of how the list was 'corrected', although I can't help wonder if some of this was political 'correcting.'
For example, this quote is telling:
"The Alamo problem, as in all of history, is that we think what happened in the past is static," said Stephen L. Hardin, a historian at Victoria College, who wrote about the Alamo battle in the revised handbook. "When evidence to the contrary pops up, it shakes up things and we deny the new because it challenges long-held beliefs."
Oh, yes, all the history we know has been biased and colored by our prejudices, and let's remember, there are many versions of the truth, and who are we to try to exclude 'conflicting narratives?'
As usual, I'm digressing. My point was that Texas has been politically corrected to some extent like every place else, and the schools have been dumbed down to accommodate multiculturalism.
I will say, too, that in recent years, the social sanctions against intermarriage, which used to be very strong, have largely disappeared. And what happens when people marry out of their group is that group bonds and allegiances are weakened and eventually disappear. That's why all advertising and entertainment pushes the outmarrying meme so relentlessly these days. France's Sarkozy has come right out and said we need more métissage.
So yes, more Anglo Texans have Mexican-American neighbors and Mexican-American spouses and half-Mexican children or grandchildren, etc. And this makes people excessively optimistic that in time, ethnic conflicts will evaporate away and we will all get together and wonder why we used to be so mistaken, and we'll all have a good old laugh about the bad old days.
It's true that many Mexican-descended Texans have roots in the state that go back at least a few generations. Most of these are people who speak English accent-free, or close. They are fairly well assimilated to American (Anglo/White) ways, and they do not present the culture clash problems posed by recent immigrants. Some (few) may side with the older-stock Texans on matters of immigration, but I sense that many of the younger people may suddenly discover their Hispanic roots and reverse-assimilate, as has happened with many young European-born descendants of non-European immigrans. Why not, when the host culture is too cowed to defend itself, and the natural inhabitants of the country seem willing to capitulate? Exotic roots have a certain cachet in this multicult-dominated world, and in the last analysis, blood will out. Blood is thicker than water. It's thicker than 'assimilation.' Blood is thicker than civic citizenship.
I think some Texans may begin to realize that they have been too sanguine about the presence of millions of immigrants, and too quick to assume that they will all 'fit in' and be good neighbors . I suspect that there are some clueless people who think that the Latinos will be magnanimous in victory if we are accepting of them and affable towards them. I don't share that optimism.
One more factor that has enabled this situation to grow out of hand is that Texas is a big state, and there are still pockets where immigrants have not come to be a sizeable presence -- yet. As long as people still have a familiar and homogeneous community to retreat to, they will not feel the pressing nature of the problem.
We will see in the next few years whether Texas submits to Californication or whether the old Texas spirit that motivated our ancestors reasserts itself. Time is growing short; if people remain inert, then Texas will go gently into that night.
Labels: Diversity, Ethnic Cleansing, Ethnic Competition, Illegal Immigration, Race Replacement, Texans, Texas History