First they said, “. . . the 1965 Immigration act won’t change the ethnic balance of the country.”
Then Bill Clinton said, “. . . by 2050 whites will be a minority” just as a fait accompli, with the implication that he is neutral about whether this is good or bad. Many people just shrugged along with Clinton, and didn’t see his smirk.
Now the “progressives,” feeling the winds of demographic victory at their backs, admit their vicious glee, such as Alternet writer Joshua Holland:
Joshua Holland 1 minute ago in reply to Jeronimus14
I can’t wait for whites to become a minority in in the United States 2050.
FYI: the U.S. has most definitely never been a “white country.” In 1775, the year before the Revolution, 20% of the Colonial population were Africans.
And while they obviously weren’t American citizens, within the territory that would become the United States, native Americans were plentiful.
A most excellent development! Let all the masks come off now! The whole premise of liberals/progressives was that they were the golden-hearted angels who didn’t wish genocide or even a scraped knee on any living creature. With Holland, we see what a “progressive” looks like when it thinks it sees the “finish line.”
There’s still millions of normal White Americans who would consider it “news” to find out that their very existence is evil and they need to be wiped out, according to an arrogantly arms akimbo racially indeterminate Joshua Holland grinning and heralding the extinction of YT.
Anyone who understands biology knows that a race that is declining isn’t going to stop declining; it’s going to go extinct. The race replacement policies of feminism and third world immigration and forced integration have been genocide in the name of humanitarianism. Progressivism, which is an ideology with a feminist and homosexual bent, has dominated because in a growing economy it was easy to “tolerate” a lot of filth and hypocrisy. Progressivism in a growth economy is like a shit sandwich — people tolerate the shit so long as its masked by a LOT of bread.
But now the taste, and smell, of “progressive” shit is going to become unbearable. Priceless quotes from “mainstream progressive writers” like Holland shall be Exhibit A to the fence-sitters about the gleefully genocidal intentions of these golden-hearted angelic liberal humanitarians.
Edit — Mr. Holland made a revision of the Bob Whitaker Mantra.
Joshua Holland 1 minute ago in reply to Jeronimus14
And I think whomever you’re quoting left off a word …
“Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white-trash.”
There, all fixed!
It always gives me a nice warm feeling to see the enemy get emotional and ad hominem. I think Holland is a textbook case of a mixed race individual with a major case of racial envy against unmixed Whites.
2050 is a bogus date set by the liberals and MSM to lull Whites into a false sense of security making us think we have more time than we actually do. Whites of European ancestry are only 60 percent of the population and the 65 percent figure from the Census is masked with numbers of Jews and other Middle Easterners. The truth is we have less than 20 years before we are numerically outnumbered.
<<>> Inferiority complex allowed a voice in a superior culture built by superior peoples.
Very good, segestan!
The only disagreement I have with you Kievsky, is your referring to Holland as a “mixed race individual.” The name Joshua Holland is as jew a name as jew can get.
The best way to respond to jewish racial taunts against the goyim, such as the Alternet article, and Frank Rich’s writings, is to disclose that the taunter is a jew. That has the same effect as sprinkling holy water on a vampire.
Why bother giving these left wing Jezebel, feminazi’s any attention? That’s what they want, for satan is their impetus and any time you give one of his spokesgirls any attention he just considers it worship. Who cares what they say? Why give attention to liars? And if you engage in verbal warfare with them you are using satan’s operating principles and just making he and they stronger. Ignore them. Let them bable amongst themselves.
Remove the second hyphen from Holland’s take on Whitaker and you have a much more accurate description of people like Holland: anti-white trash.
I disagree very strongly with Brandon. Pointing out the enemy’s anti-white race hate is productive and useful. Kievsky is doing great work here; he was the first to pick up on Amanda Kijera and her article is now circulating all over the internet. OD is high on the list of Google results for Amanda Kijera now (first, actually). (Kievsky: what about putting Joshua Holland in the title of this post to help lead searchers of his name here?)
Let them show their spots, I saw a nutball environmental type on a mainstream board cuss out a blue streak about “tea baggers” should all get chopped to pieces in propellers, etc. When people disagreed with his demands that the entire US oil industry be dismantled after one accident.(An accident that is starting to look like deliberate arson.) People were rationally pointing out the infeasability of the environmentalists Luddite plans, the least of which would be mass starvation when the diesel vanished on the farms that feed not only Americans, but the teeming 3rd world poor these fools purport to love. Instead of rational dialog they resort to vicious threats and name calling. Reminds me of what Keith Alexander talks about on the Cesspool about how despite media myths, most of this coarseness, vandalism, and violence is coming from the left. For every hitler nut on Stormfront there’s a thousand Molotov tossing beatnecks.
I didn’t write that in the post. That was a response to a white supremacist in the comments.
If you’re writing blog posts about offhand remarks I make in the comments while debating some troglodyte — and extrapolating from that exchange what “the left” thinks — you need to get a life.
And for the record, as it seems that determining one’s race is really important to you, despite the fact that I get out of the house and have a tan, I am purely of European descent, AKA “white.”
So, you went down swinging on this one: “I think Holland is a textbook case of a mixed race individual with a major case of racial envy against unmixed Whites.”
Kievsky,
I agree. Sometimes these “progressives” let their guard down and their true feelings come out. The same people who bitch about “racism” and “anti-Semitism” are often virulently, foaming at the mouth anti-White. They have no objection to discrimination or racial prejudice per se. They just hate White people.
Looking at the video of Joshua Holland below, I would guess that this man is a bit light in the loafers.
Joshua Holland Video
And for the record, as it seems that determining one’s race is really important to you, despite the fact that I get out of the house and have a tan, I am purely of European descent, AKA “white.”
What is your specific ethnic ancestry?
I can’t be the only one that doesn’t know this but, what in the hell is “YT?”
Joshua Holland is Jewish, that is to say a Jew. Google his name and “Jew” for example. I’ve heard sentiments such as Mr. Holland’s enthusiasm for White American dispossession termed “revenge porn”, a recent example being the film “Inglourious Basterds.” Why revenge would be justified or even thinkable against White Americans by Jews is beyond me, however.
‘according to an arrogantly arms akimbo racially indeterminate Joshua Holland grinning and heralding the extinction of YT.’
‘I can’t be the only one that doesn’t know this but, what in the hell is “YT?”’
I had guess that Kievsky meant “yours truly,” i.e. the presumed Jew Holland heralded the extinction of the white Kievsky.
Heh. Liberals have been telling us whites are inherently dangerous to non-whites for decades. The whole time, they’ve been doing everything they can to force non-whites into every white living space on Earth (yet another data point for the idea that non-gentiles aren’t whites).
So it isn’t as if we didn’t already have ample evidence for liberal psychopathy.
YT means “whitey.”
“Looking at the video of Joshua Holland below, I would guess that this man is a bit light in the loafers.”
Hey Charles, my sex life aside, who uses the expression “light in the loafers” in this day and age?
Horsefeathers, are you all wet! Have you been drinking the giggle juice or something?
What Jews like Holland (and self-hating whites) don’t get is that even when whites are a minority, they’ll still have command of the armed forces and will still constitute the majority of trained fighters. Intelligently-led and well-equipped white men can defeat numerically superior black and brown hoards with no problem. (Should that sort of scenario present itself, and I hope it does – Holland won’t have a very nice time of it to say the least).
So, you folks have wasted some of your Saturday with this lengthy post taking a snarky offhand quip in the AlterNet comments seriously.
I’d point out that elsewhere on the same thread I expressed my actual views of the matter. Contrary to this whole silly idea that I’m gleeful about whites like me becoming an ethnic minority in this country, what I actually believe is that it’s demographic trivia for a simple reason: whites will continue to be the largest ethnic minority in the U.S. We’ll continue to hold the majority of seats in government and on corporate boards, and it will have zero impact on the day-to-day lives of the American people.
Yes, racially-tinged political arguments will be less likely to gain traction, but that’s about it. One year, Americans of European descent will come in at 50.1% of the population, and the next year it’ll be 49.9%. Only noteworthy if you’re a demographer or statistician.
So if you want to know what I really think about it, the answer is this: not much, one way or the other.
Joshua,
You’re a fool. Demographics are trivial in places like Detroit, Los Angeles, Birmingham, Newark?
We need a database of every prominent person who has ever used the terms “white tash” (slander of White working class), “teabagger” (filthy sexual connotaions) or “shiksa” (slander of non-Jew White women).
If any person who uses any of these terms tries to critize someone else for being un-PC, they need to be shouted down as a hypocrite.
As a present majority, Whites don’t enjoy equal protection under the law – see hate crimes, affirmative action. There’s also the issue of cultural preservation, but sticking to the original point, why should Whites feel fine with minority status and the likely permanent entrenchment of preferential treatment for non-whites? Especially when we can reactivate our dormant racial and ethnic identities and networks to fight back politically? It’s only rational that we would.
Mr. Holland,
What is merely an offhand quip to you, is felt in the flesh and bone to us. We experience the process of preplanned ethnic replacement. The salaried writers such as you who provide ideological support to population replacement shall not decide what is an offhand quip or a “pc kosher racial slur” (“white trash”).
This is a life and death struggle to us. It’s a joke to you, but you’re not really a serious individual.
Hunter, you call me a fool, but engage in not one but two logical fallacies.
First, you’ve set up a strawman. I didn’t say demographics don’t matter at all. What I said was that the difference between an ethnic group being in the majority and being the largest of several minorities that still holds the most economic and political power is negligible. The difference between 50.1% and 49.9%. Now if you want to find two cities, one that’s 50.1% white and another that’s only 49.9% white, and extrapolate something from them, be my guest.
Second, you’re asserting that correlation is causation.
…Demographics are trivial in places like Detroit, Los Angeles, Birmingham, Newark?
‘True that’.
Oh, how wonderful, we’ll still be the largest numerical minority? But why should we even allow that?
All that aside, I’ll feel so comfortable and safe flying on Airlines staffed and maintained by this new non-white majority. Just do a little research on nations whose airlines the FAA bans from flying into the US. It follows a very similar pattern, yet one more piece of the puzzle that fits with Lynn and Vanhanens’ thesis in IQ and the Wealth of Nations.
My 70 year old mom uses light in the loafers, but I prefer the Aussie term “poof.”
Well, at least “poof” is current.
But, hey, isn’t that foreign? I’d guess that we don’t cotton to foreigners around here.
Joshua seems to be missing the point.
The issue isn’t the precise numerical majority of whites, that is, there is no practical difference between 49.9% and 50.1%, but rather that it symbolizes our growing dispossession and that losing our majority status is a sort of milestone in that regard. Presumably your quip about this statistical irrelevance would apply just the same to your own comments on AlterNet regarding 2050.
As communities become increasingly non-white, the environment for white people will become increasingly hostile and violent. That’s the point which you do not have an answer for, other than to repeat your mantra about evil racist whites and to denigrate working class white Americans as “white trash”.
Joshua,
You said that changing racial demographics were “trivia.” In your view, White majority status is trivial, or unimportant. You are also setting up a straw man. I didn’t say anything about the cause of the decline of those cities.
It is sufficient for our purposes to note that blacks are predominant there. Most White people don’t care why majority black areas are such horrible places to live. All they care about is that their own lives are impacted in a negative way.
Donald,
Anti-Whites can often harbor the biggest, and seemingly paradoxical, class and social prejudices.
Definitely not White by traditional North American and Northern European standards.
It is sufficient for our purposes to note that blacks are predominant there. Most White people don’t care why majority black areas are such horrible places to live. All they care about is that their own lives are impacted in a negative way.
Indeed, and even when blacks and mestizos aren’t committing crime, they’re littering, dressing and acting obscenely, playing obnoxious music too loudly and being rude. There are no positives to a non-White majority, even for non-Whites themselves. Gloating may be fun initially but it’s no fun living in a third-world environment, that’s why they moved to White countries in the first place.
Jake: “Why revenge would be justified or even thinkable against White Americans by Jews is beyond me, however.”
Maybe something as proverbial as the Polish saying: Give a Jew a ride in your wagon and he will push you out.
2050 is a bogus date set by the liberals and MSM to lull Whites into a false sense of security making us think we have more time than we actually do.
Right, and they’ve already adjusted and updated the date, it’s set for 2042, probably sooner, as the US Census Bureau includes many non-Europeans as White and some people self-identify as White when they are not such as Joshua.
“I didn’t say demographics don’t matter at all. What I said was that the difference between an ethnic group being in the majority and being the largest of several minorities that still holds the most economic and political power is negligible. The difference between 50.1% and 49.9%.”
And yet you are transparently being disingenuous in that you know our percentage of the population will not magically be arrested at the 49.9% mark if those trends that allowed it to slip to that point in the first place are not arrested. And, if it slips to that point, will it be easier or more difficult that it is now to stop it? Obviously more difficult.
Hunter: “I didn’t say anything about the cause of the decline of those cities.”
Come on, it was implied by the argument. I assume you weren’t notingthe racial composition of Detroit just in passing, like you might suggest it’s cloudy in Seattle.
Answer this question for me, Holland: If it is in the interests of non-Whites to increase their percentage of the population then why is it not in the interests of Whites to at least maintain their proportion of the population?
Mr. Holland,
Your statement that you are even predominantly White is comical. I recall when Madeleine Albright said that she didn’t know that her biological parents (she is adopted) were Jewish. I just stared at the TV and thought to myself: “doesn’t woman own a mirror?!”.
That aside, let’s assume there is no causality between race and behavior. Let’s assume that the misery is all due to socio-economic factors. Let’s assume that the whole victimization wah-wah fairy-tale of liberalism is true.
Ok, so here’s my question: why the h*ll should normal, honest White 21st century people accept it, deal with it and pay for it with money, blod and life?
Captainchaos: Let me explain something about demographic shifts: these are long-term estimates based on current fertility rates. Nobody believes that they’ll actually remain constant for eternity, so these are all just projections.
Now, the point I made is not complicated: white folks will still be the largest ethnic group, and will still hold the greatest economic and political influence.
Now, if you want to spend the next 32 years (or whatever) worrying about it, be my guest. I’ve got better things to do.
Flaming Jew seeks persecution. Finds it. Feels Chosen. Joshua Israel Holland, our (former) nation will be in a state of race war, Left/Right war, secessionist states vs. District of Corruption war within 2 years. This is what you Beasts of Chaos wanted when you stuffed our (former) nation full of black-brown socialist sturmtruppen, and this is what you are going to get. But you may not enjoy the outcome.
Joshua,
I honestly don’t care about the cause. This isn’t an HBD blog. We leave the why of the matter to those guys. All that matters is that blacks destroy our cities when they congregate in large numbers. When rats, fire ants, and cockroaches infest your home, do you remove the infestation or consult the peer reviewed literature on the subject?
Joshua,
I grew up in an area (Alabama Black Belt) where blacks are already the majority. A black majority means black supremacy. It means poverty, ignorance, crime, corruption, worthless schools, and social decline.
OK, Captain Chaos, let me answer your question two ways.
First, people don’t decide to have children based on how their ethnic groups will be represented 20 years down the road. Or at least non-crazy people don’t. So, we’re not talking about a group of people advancing their “interests,” we’re talking about differential birthrates among ethnic groups.
But while differential birthrates aren’t the result of people rationally pursuing their ethnic group-interests, I won’t deny that many minorities are happy to see their numbers grow.
So, another answer is this: population and power aren’t the same thing. It’s not like different ethnicities are allocated a certain number of seats in Congress proportionally, right? So a key difference is that minority groups have always derived cirtually all of their political influence from their representation in the electorate. Majority groups (not “whites,” because this is true of every country) have a variety of levers of power.
As I’ve said repeatedly, when whites become a minority, they’ll still hold most of the seats of political and economic power.
>>Normal people won’t notice any change whatsoever when whites drop to 49%. Mentally healthy people aren’t going care about that kind of demographic trivia.<< — Joshua Holland
‘Normal people’ as in those who consider John Stewart a worthy news source; who believe the First Amendment doesn’t really give anyone the right to say “hateful” things; who believe freedom means they can shop till they drop and the NFL is actually important; who think democracy is the real ‘core’ of the US Constitution? That kind of normal?
‘Mentally healthy’ as in intellectually crippled sheeple who’ve been sauteed for decades in politically correct media vectors and government schools and who vote; who will do whatever is fashionable at the moment, no matter how disgusting or self-destructive because everyone else does it?
That kind of mentally healthy?
Face it: you are terrified of having people understand what’s going on.
“Let me explain something about demographic shifts: these are long-term estimates based on current fertility rates. Nobody believes that they’ll actually remain constant for eternity, so these are all just projections.”
Let me explain something about a bullshitter, Holland. He will never answer a question directly, and frequently uses ploys such as feigned condescension towards his interlocutor to imbue said interlocutor with the impression that he should not question said bullshitter at all.
Two points in response to the answer you gave me that I did not ask for:
1. The fertility rate of mestizos is artificially high due to the largess they receive here. In Mexico their fertility rate is much lower. We are being forced to subsidize their population increase. Self-evidently, that is in their interests, but not ours.
2. No, current demographic projections are not alone based on present fertility rates of the people who reside within our borders now, but additionally upon the numbers expected to arrive via immigration as well. I’m sure you knew that, but didn’t say it. Bullshitter.
Hunter. Two more logical fallacies. And one repeat.
Here you do assign causation (“A black majority means …”). Logical fallacy.
Your personal observations growing up in Alabama represent anecdotal evidence, a fallacious “proof.”
And your claim that the social problems of Alabama blacks is solely a result of them being black is a fallacy known as affirming the consequent.
“First, you’ve set up a strawman. I didn’t say demographics don’t matter at all. What I said was that the difference between an ethnic group being in the majority and being the largest of several minorities that still holds the most economic and political power is negligible. The difference between 50.1% and 49.9%. Now if you want to find two cities, one that’s 50.1% white and another that’s only 49.9% white, and extrapolate something from them, be my guest.”
Holland, you’ve got to be kidding me (though I’ll give credit where it is due, your “horsefeathers” post was funny). Hunter hasn’t set up a straw man, you have. The issue here is hardly the ridiculous distinction between being 50.1 percent of the population versus 49.9 percent. That’s not the issue at all, and pretending otherwise is absurd. If you are going to set up and then attack straw men, you need to do better than that.
So, if you will indulge me, let’s talk some reality here. Firstly, we don’t have to get anywhere near 49.9 percent of the population to experience disastrous effects. We are ALREADY EXPERIENCING THEM. The crime, the murders, the rapes. A real yawner for you, eh? Nothing to see here, folks. Move along.
When I was a little kid in the 70’s, a white with a modest income could live in a safe, all white neighborhood. Good schools, friendly neighbors, a real place to call home. Now? In any metropolitan area of any size, you need to live in an upper middle class neighborhood to “buy” the social amenities that were available to all whites just a few decades ago (if you are a poor white, just forget it, non-whites scoop up all of the affordable housing). When I was in high school during the 80’s, almost all of the suburban schools around here were excellent. Now, only a few are, and you have to pay a huge premium to live in such a district. What changed? Demographics, and we didn’t have to hit 49.9 percent for it to happen.
My high school alma mater just recently got hit with the non-white tide. It was an excellent school for years, but now it has moved into the realm of the mediocre. If the demographic tide is not soon stopped, it will become just plain bad.
So, let’s see: I get to pay a 100,000 to 200,000 premium just to live amongst my own kind in a white school district, then I get to pay taxes that disproportionately benefit non-whites (and if I become poor, I’m screwed), then I get to lose a great deal of my freedom of speech, I get to watch my culture systematically eliminated, and my people steadily decline – and this only the tip of the iceberg.
Again, this is already happening, I don’t need to wait for some future statistical milestone.
Yep, nothing to worry about here! Just a big yawn, eh Holland?
Come on, man.
Further, the 49.1 percent mark is a mere moment in time. It will remain at that level for a few months or so, no longer. The process continues after that, and focusing on one small time frame is a straw man at best, and frankly disingenuous. You ain’t that dumb.
If current trends continue, whites will not only be a minority, but a SMALL minority by the end of the century. I’m seeing numbers that are very low, well under twenty percent. We will not be the largest minority for long, that’s for sure, and you shouldn’t be misinforming people about such things.
Beyond that, next century? Might as well call it extinction. Not trying to be overly dramatic, but that’s about what it amounts to.
But really, Holland, I’m not telling you anything that you don’t already know, am I? So why the charade and the silly straw man?
A common liberal fallacy is that race is only based on skin pigmentation.
Hunter didn’t claim the social problems of blacks are solely a result of them being black, that’s a straw-man fallacy.
The reasons behind black social problems are many, two of them are low average IQ and a higher rate of psychopathy. Both of these have been professionally studied.