Will whites remain in control of a Mestizo-ized U.S.?
Gilbert B. writes from the Netherlands:
Here is an issue I am pondering.
Mexico is a multicultural society and its ethnic composition is intricate: indigenous peoples, Spanish, Mestizo, blacks, mulattos and whites. Mexico does NOT have a white majority culture: Mexico’s 100 million people are only nine percent white.
But, despite the fact that the whites are a minority in this country, they are Mexico’s ELITE.
It is hard to understand how this can be explained.
For example, recently Gintas warned (and I suppose you share this opinion as well): “Do liberals think that they will enjoy, when they are a white minority, the status they do now?”
Is there an explanation to this seemingly contradiction with the situation in Mexico?
LA replies:
What you’re saying is, since the nine percent white minority rules Mexico, why must whites lose their dominant position in the U.S. when they become a minority here?
Interesting question.
We know that Mexico has an almost feudal-type hierarchy that is manifested in racial terms. America (notwithstanding the left’s fantasies about her) is not like that. Mexico is a Third World, stratified society, a stratification largely based on its racial stratification.
Now, it is often said by immigration restrictionists that if Hispanic-Mestizo immigration is not stopped we too will turn into a stratified, third-world type society. But the stratification scenario, as bad as it is, actually implies that even after being reduced to a minority, whites will remain in charge of a Hispanicized U.S. Thus Gintas’s warning of a loss of white status would not be entirely correct, since whites would still be at the top. But, of course, it will no longer be America as we’ve know it, and it will no longer be white Americans as we’ve known them. America will no longer be a white-majority, middle class society with a common culture and an extraordinary degree of individualism and mobility. It will have become a permanently stratified, Third-World-type society. This is because when there is a lower class that is entirely distinct in race, culture, and abilities from the higher class and thus not upwardly mobile and potentially middle class, and, further, the lower class is the numerically dominant group in the society, the organization of the society along lines of permanent class stratification, defined by race, becomes inevitable.
America’s lower-ability blacks, at 13 percent of the population, did not prevent America from being a middle class society. Even the combined black-Hispanic population of 26 percent that we have today does not mean the end of America as a basically middle class society, because the white majority, though shrinking in relative terms, is still the majority and is still seen as representative of the country as a whole. But if blacks and Hispanics become the majority, that will certainly mean the end of the middle class society. Whites, instead of being middle class, the numerical majority, and the typical Americans, will out of sheer necessity organize themselves into an elite permanently distinguished from a vast, lower-level, black and Hispanic majority. So, some kind of white culture will survive, but it will be as an unrepresentative elite lording it over, and keeping themselves carefully apart from, a low-level, Third-World type society, not as the representative majority of middle class, democratic America as it has historically existed.
Is that answer satisfactory?
Gilbert B. replies:
Thank you for replying. This is indeed a very good and satisfying answer to the problem outlined in my question.
The German term “Herrenvolk” (people of the ruling class), also describes a multiracial society, with one race occupying a position of supremacy over the other(s).
Maybe, the scenario of a possible feudal-type hierarchy, explains the fact that some leftists are critical towards diversity! For example, Slavoj Zizek rejects both postmodern relativism and liberal multiculturalism, and Walter Benn Michaels, in his book The Trouble with Diversity, claims that modern liberalism, by making respect for diversity central to its politics, has forgotten the obligations of equality.
- end of initial entry -
Gintas writes:
You write:
Whites, instead of being middle class, the numerical majority, and the typical Americans, will out of sheer necessity organize themselves into an elite permanently distinguished from a vast, lower-level, black and Hispanic majority. So, some kind of white culture will survive, but it will be as an unrepresentative elite lording it over, and keeping themselves carefully apart from, a low-level, Third-World type society, not as the representative majority of middle class, democratic America as it has historically existed.
It sounds like that’s the plan that’s working out. We all know that the elite liberals despise middle class and proletarian whites as a mindless rabble. Once the non-elite whites are swept away, the elite liberal whites can ease comfortably into the position reserved for them, exactly as you’ve described.
Posted by Lawrence Auster at December 01, 2008 12:04 PM | Send