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?
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.