What Will America Be Like As A Minority White Nation?

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on May, 16 2006 @ 01:11 PM
link   
Ever since it’s Westernization a few hundred years ago the image that comes to mind of your stereotypical American has been a white somebody. Fact is (and this really isn’t racist) nearly half of all U.S children under five are non-white. news.bbc.co.uk...
And of course I guess the balance will be tipped in favour of a minority white situation should you include immigration.

Well the above is the facts.
What I want to know is what difference (if any) will it make to the international as well as domestic face of America? I’ve heard (could be wrong) that black people are on average more likely to vote Democrat than whites. So there’s just one consideration for you (not that in many peoples eyes there’s that much of a difference between Democrats and Republicans anyway).

Personally I'm racist in the sense that I believe some races outperform others on average (apparently this has been known since the Second World War; careful!! Some people may find the following link offensive in some way(s). www.mugu.com...
But I don’t believe in racial discrimination ether because there are far more just and better ways of judging people than race (things like a conversation, employment record, criminal record, I.Q test ect). Nevertheless I do believe that when you’re talking about millions of people becoming part of a nation their race is bound to make some difference to the character of that nation.

And when we are talking immigration race is only one of many factors e.g…
1. Education
2. Family financial wealth
3. Social status & Acceptance by wider society
4. Work ethos
5. Religion (usually not too much of an issue unless its fundamentalist in some form)

So to save on causing any offence let’s just stick to how America may change due to non-race things like those above? Of course anyone who does talk about race must be very considerate and make sure that they do not offend anyone from any particular race.


On a Separate Note: I'm not aware in recent history of any non-white superpowers (apart from the regional one of South Africa). Could someone please point a few out to me with reference to when they might have existed?

China and India are defiantly going to become superpowers and according to that upstream website they on average happen to be smarter than Europeans. If true would it mean things like their society-culture where what held them back in the past in the past (more than some notion of a racial abundance in any general abilities)? Communism certainly didn’t help the Chinese, and regional-political issues have often played against the Indians people’s welfare and national interests.

Oh well I leave it to you, think about what you write, and remember causing offence is a real offence!!! (It may quite rightfully of course lead towards being banned).


[edit on 090705 by Liberal1984]




posted on May, 16 2006 @ 04:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Liberal1984
Ever since it’s Westernization a few hundred years ago the image that comes to mind of your stereotypical American has been a white somebody. Fact is (and this really isn’t racist) nearly half of all U.S children under five are non-white.

Right, so whites are still the overwhelming majority and will be for the long term future. And long before whites are a minority, they'll be a very large plurality.


A minority is a group that is smaller than the largest group. "Whites" are the largest group now, and by that statistical demographic data, will be the largest group for a heck of a long time. And then, after than, they will only be a "minority" if we could all non-europeans as a class called 'Non-white'. That group will be made up of a collection of other minorities; its not really a group.


that black people are on average more likely to vote Democrat than whites.

But whites are more likely to vote. And hispanics tend to vote republican in large numbers, not to mention that middle easterners and indians also tend to vote repulibcan. Immigrants in general tend to vote republican on a lot of issues.


I do believe that when you’re talking about millions of people becoming part of a nation their race is bound to make some difference to the character of that nation.

Doubtful. Look at Sierra Leon. After the anglos left, there were blacks from outside of the country and native blacks. The blacks from inside the country were pracitcally indistinguishable, culturally, from teh anglos. They looked to england for their culture, they were overwhelmingly in support of freemasonry, they even condescended how england was 'radicalizing and liberalizing' in the 60s. The native blacks were entirely different.

Race is meaningless, culture is everything.



On a Separate Note: I'm not aware in recent history of any non-white superpowers (apart from the regional one of South Africa).

There have only been two superpowers, America, which is a diverse multi-ethinic nation, and the SOviet Union, which had slavs, rus, tartars, mongols, arabs, etc, within it.
History shows that the most diverse nations are the most powerful. Compare the British Empire with its natives in the colonies to the ''german empire' of the Kaiser. Or the british in south africa to the rabidly zenophobic boers. Or compare the arabs during their expansion to the europeans, who were less able to incorporate native influences and ethnicities, and went into a dark age because of it.


If true would it mean things like their society-culture where what held them back in the past in the past

Held them back from what? Global Domination?

[edit on 17-5-2006 by Nygdan]



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 04:34 PM
link   
The white's will still "own" the country.

It will not be any different. The US Con preserves the "rights" of minorities. And etc. Rich people may not be smarter than poor people, but they have far more opportunities to work mischief.



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 11:04 PM
link   
For the sake of clarity please define "white" I've never met a racist who consistently could.



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 08:46 AM
link   

posted by boogyman
For the sake of clarity please define "white." [Cute race bait ignored.]



I'd say "white" means a person who is lighter in skin tones than say, you are, boogyman, using “you” in the imperial sense.

I am under the impression even Hitler did not go back past the 3rd generation? Your (or mine) great-grand-parents. 8 people.



[edit on 5/17/2006 by donwhite]



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by boogyman
For the sake of clarity please define "white"


The USA law USED to say that if someone was 1/32 anything
other than white (black, latino, asian, indian, islander, etc.)
then they weren't 'white'.

I have no idea what the law says now. I suppose it differs
by state and by country.

www.fedstats.gov...

US feds say this - The concept of race as used by the Census
Bureau reflects self-identification by people according to the
race or races with which they most closely identify

So I guess it's what you are most comfortable identifying with -
not any % of your racial background.

And they say this - White. A person having origins in any of the
original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa. It
includes people who indicate their race as "White" or report entries
such as Irish, German, Italian, Lebanese, Near Easterner, Arab, or Polish.






[edit on 5/17/2006 by FlyersFan]



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 04:27 PM
link   
Year 2100: I think the USA will look more like Texas, the Carolinas, California, or NYC.

Whites will still control a lot of power, but hispanic, black, and asian leaders will probably be side by side with them or leading them. The NE will remain white and parts of the Midwest. Those in power will regardless of their skin color have to still be "white" in culture. Chocolate town mayor Ray Nagin from New Orleans will never be the type of person elected president. Condi Rice is the "white" non-white type of person you will see elected, as are a lot of hispanic leaders in the southwest right now.

What will be interesting is that when the white guy is no longer the majority, how long will it take for the other minorities to find a new "the man" that's holding them down? Will it be "the bad hombre" that's holding them down? "The man from Japan?" that is hoarding the power?

I grew up as a White Minority and I laugh at how good some white people have it in their majority world. They don't get it. And I laugh at those that hate white people because I've seen it where non-whites are just as corrupt.

The nice thing is that the "race card" has almost been dealt its final hand and no longer is accepted by whites and non-whites. Mexico is trying to play it now and people aren't buying it.





new topics
top topics
 
0

log in

join