Gregory Rodriguze (via Steve Sailer):
Latinos, whose history has been one of mixture and among whom mestizos are the rule rather than the exception, understand hybridity, a notion that America's discourse on race desperately lacks. ... Perhaps once we have fully adopted the concept of mestizaje into our racial dialogue, we will recognize that Los Angeles is well on its way to becoming a mestizo metropolis.
As goes Los Angeles, so goes the nation? Rodriguez, and many like him, seem to be anxiously awaiting the future browning of America. Is it coming?
The model most bandied about is that of South America, specifically Brazil. Why Brazil and not Mexico? While Mexico has West Euros and Native Indians, it is largely missing Afros. But Brazil has all three. So does the U.S. It is thus assumed that if the U.S. continues to let in tens of millions of mestizo (largely Indian) Mexicans, its demographic and, perhaps, political future will resemble that of Brazil.
Is this a viable hypothesis? On what assumptions is it based?
I. Inter-marriage
Many believe that Euro-Americans will be as open to inter-marriage with Indians/mestizos as Euro-Brazilians or Euro-Mexicans have been.
The famous 'great brown middle' in Brazil, held up as an ideal of future humanity by our multicult activists, did not happen by accident. A great many Euros had to procreate with a great many natives for it to come about.
As E.B. Reuter put it in 'The Mulatto in the United States' (1919),
Of the white races, the Spanish and the Portuguese have mixed most easily and in largest numbers. They have mixed, moreover, with almost equal readiness with the Malay, the American Indian, and the African Negress ; and with less repugnance than any other people with whom these lower races have come in contact. "They had never acquired, or had lost as the result of experience, any aversion to race mixture." ... The English have crossed with all the lower races, but much more slowly than have the Latin peoples. Moreover, the English mix less readily with the Negroes than with the Indians, and more slowly with these than with certain of the brown races.
Why haven't Euro-Americans massively intermarried with mestizos or Indians? Some possibilities:
* Most Native peoples were massacred by our germs, leaving very few of them with whom to intermarry.
* The English came with wives in tow, to form settlement colonies. Spanish and Portuguese came as soldiers of fortune, mostly single males, to strike while the gold-mining iron was hot. Thus inter-mingling was less surprising.
* Many Central and South American natives were already settled and civilized, and thus perhaps perceived as less 'other' than the primitive hunter/gatherers the English were mostly exposed to.
* For nearly all of its history, New England/the U.S.'s mestizo population has been negligeable. Only in the last forty years have we seen the explosion we now consider 'normal.'
* North Euros have traditionally been more hesitant to 'marry out' than Mediterraneans have been. Why? Further genetic or cultural distance from the 'sun peoples'? Some inborn character trait proper to the Teutonic race? Whatever the reason, and despite the recent 'fashion' for intermixing (the famous 2012 London Olympics montage will likely be puzzled over by future historians), Teutonics have not shown great openness for crossing the race line.
But could all that change?
There are over 60 million Latin Americans in the U.S. today (the entire population of Mexico during the Carter era). Is there any evidence that we're on the cusp of a great 'browning'--a mixing of Euros and Mestizos--today?
[Caveat: 'Hispanic' or 'Latin American' is used to refer to anyone from a hispanophone or lusophone Western hemisphere country. Ethnically, thus, it is a near-useless term. A 'Hispanic' could be anything from a full-blooded white Spaniard to a Huichol Indian fresh off the mountain.]
Two peas in a pod
For our purposes, we'll use 'Hispanic' to mean anyone from that 'great brown middle'-- that is, anyone who has enough indio blood to be recognizably Latin American.
So, the 'great browning': On its way? Or already underway?
A useful metric may be to see if the attitude towards 'marrying out' has shifted significantly in the U.S.
Americans who 'marry out,' over the last thirty years:
Which ethnic groups are most likely to 'marry out'?
Who is marrying whom?
In which regions?
The exact numerical breakdown:
Marriage is one important indicator, but so is dating. Are we more willing than before to 'date out'?
A more precise breakdown (2005 Gallup data):
Steve Sailer's 1997 classic Is Love Colorblind? has explored the Afro-Euro-Asian mating patterns in some detail. On the question of 'browning' America, he sees a wholesale importation of the Latino pigmentocracy system--the elite will get whiter, the underclass will get browner:
Likewise, the Hispanic influx into California seems to be simply recreating the racial hierarchy of Latin America - rather like the freed slaves who went to Liberia and set up an imitation Southern slave-owning society there. America's leading Latino politicians tend to marry Anglos (for example, the last two Latino Cabinet officers, the head of the Hispanic Congressional Caucus, and the last two presidents of the Mexican-American Legal Defense and Education Fund [MALDEF]). Thus, the Mexican-American elite is likely to become even whiter over the generations.(See also Sailer's rib-poking at the 'conquistador-American' Hispanic class.)
On the question of Euro intermarriage with Hispanics, then, for the moment the evidence is inconclusive, but pointing towards greater openness on the horizon.
II. Political convergence
The second assumption often bandied about is that Euro-Americans and Euro-Brazilians are somehow destined to end up with a similar political system. Is it possible?
* The ethnic make-up of the two groups is quite different. Euro-America includes English, German, Scottish, Irish, Dutch, South Italian, and Polish blood. Euro-Brazil includes Portuguese, Spanish, North Italian, German, Native Indian. (There's been considerable Levantine and Japanese immigration as well.) If genes are (partly) destiny, than there's no prima facie reason to believe that two such disparate groups will somehow converge in attitude and in political culture.
* The political history of England is quite different from that of Spain, or Portugal, or Italy. Idem for its colonies. Though white (or mostly white) Euros have run every country south of the Rio Grande for the last 500 years, one can hardly say their political fortunes have resembled those of their Anglo cousins in Canada and the U.S.
On measures like corruption, political freedom, economic freedom, rule of law, and human rights, Latin- and Anglo-America have followed quite different paths:
The rampant corruption in a place like Mexico or Brazil--is that our future? Policemen with a hand out for a bribe, government ministers on the take? In the absence of a massive takeover of the U.S. government at all levels by Latin Americans, it seems unlikely the political models of these two worlds will converge. On a local level, however, things may be up for grabs.
* * *
'Demography is destiny,' it has been said. A transcontinental powerhouse of 350,000,000 people, the oldest continuous democratic republic on earth, with an Anglo political culture that is the envy of the world-- can we hope to believe that upending the racial makeup of such a place will leave it untouched? We cannot, of course.
But the question is no longer there. In 40 years North Euros will be a numerical minority in this nation, for the first time in its history. The 'browning' is not going to happen--it has already begun. The only question left is exactly what shape it will take: A North Euro minority clinging to power while the brown underclass agitates? A Hispanization of our political elite, followed by descent into Latin American-style corruption? Something else?
'Our posterity,' in any case, is quickly drawing to a close.
See also:
9 comments:
Truly brilliant, not to say scary. And thanks for the reminder about Steve's old article.
The German sections of the Great Lakes would have held for centuries if Big Ag had not been such panders for cheap labor. And there's not one chance for a Teutonic-American uprising.
Alas.
Franz--
Thank you. I myself grew up in the Great Lakes region, partly descended from Germans. They're good stock.
I'm less pessimistic than you on the possibility of a Teutonic uprising. The Germans in Europe used to put the fear of God into all their neighbors, today they seem to have succumbed to the great feminization and pacification. But when pushed far enough, I think their old warrior spirit could come roaring back, on either side of the Atlantic. Time will tell.
Thanks for reading.
Nice to read your writing again. Also, you might want to update the date on your copyright notice.
cur^ly--
Thank you, and thanks for the reminder about the copyright. I've updated it.
One of the things people don't take into account is that Brazil is only Brazil because White people in America controlled a military superpower.
When the threat of retaliation from America evaporates racialized leftist movements will start up across Latin America.
Yes, a couple people made that point in the comment thread on 'Were You Assimilable?':
When people talk about America becoming like Brazil i don't think they're taking into account the effect of western military superiority on the way countries like Brazil currently are.
The world has been operating on the assumption of western military dominance for centuries. If the big dog becomes like Brazil and therefore no longer poses a threat then people like Chavez will be on TV waving machetes with full intent to see them used.
If America becomes like Brazil Brazil won't be like Brazil anymore, Venezuela won't be like Venezuela any more etc. It'll be revenge time all over encouraged by the mass media.
And also
"I wonder what will happen there when we start to decline"
It will vary by country but i think indio-majority countries in Latin America will see ethnicity based revolutions and that will give other people ideas. The main form will be race-tinted versions of communism similar to the ones flying around during African de-colonization with a lot of individual YKW behind the scenes like in South Africa. It will be genocidal in effect if not idealogy.
I can only agree, the weakening of U.S. military power in our hemisphere is going to mean big transformations south of the Rio Grande.
Don't forget South Gate. They traveled down the same road as Maywood.
I've observed noticeable variation in behavior and aptitude among mestizo colonists of different origins, with South Americans (I am one of these) functioning somewhat better than our Mexican and Central American cohorts. You rarely, if ever, hear of intense gang violence in Colombian or Peruvian neighborhoods.
Of course, this can owe to any number of things. Maybe smaller populations of South American mestizos--relative to the Mesoamerican bulk--simply won't exhibit alarming rates of the unpleasant tendencies not uncommon in their nations of descent. Perhaps immigration from south of Panama is marginally more discriminating.
Another plausible factor is admixture proportions. Mexican and Central American mestizos in the U.S. seem heavily Amerindian whereas the rest of us are often a hodgepodge of that, East Asian, Arab, and God knows what else.
Regardless, growing ethnic conflict in the Founders' vaunted experiment will probably unite all said colonists against the remnants of the previous order. Any opportunity to humiliate Nordic folk and all that.
Ivan M.--
That was a scary link, thanks, I've added it to my bookmarks.
Mexican and Central American mestizos in the U.S. seem heavily Amerindian whereas the rest of us are often a hodgepodge of that, East Asian, Arab, and God knows what else.
Hodgepodge is right. It is nearly impossible to say anything meaningful about 'Hispanics' as a group; they are simply too ethnically diverse. That's why I don't write on the topic often, my ignorance is too great. There is a Hispanic blogger, Nelson, who is dipping his toe in the HBD waters though.
Your point about South vs. Central Americans is well taken. My impression is that the former simply don't migrate to the U.S. in anything close to the numbers the latter (+ Mexicans) do. This site gives the following numbers for immigrants in the U.S. in 2011:
Mexico:11.7 million
Caribbean: 3.8 million
Central Amer: 3.1. million
South Amer: 2.7 million
Their pie chart also shows that half of all S. American migrants come from only Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru. I think the average Euro-American thinks 'Hispanic = Mexican,' because that's mostly who he has rubbed elbows with in daily life.
Re: the future, it's so hard to say. We're really in terra icognita demographically speaking in the U.S. today. I lean towards a model of growing regional autonomy, with an increasingly broke federal government's hold on power getting ever smaller. I also think some type of regionally enforced apartheid will make a comeback at some point, though many disagree with me on that.
Yes, the future of America is brown, and nobody will be able to do anything about it. Amerindian people and people with Amerindian heritage will control the Western Hemisphere from Alaska to Tierra del Fuego. It is the manifest destiny of La Raza. We take people onboard though. Everyone is welcome along for the ride.
Post a Comment