“The trouble with Scotland is that it’s full of Scots….If we can’t get them out, we’ll breed them out.”
English King Edward I (Longshanks)
Dialog From The Film Braveheart
Part of the theme of Braveheart was the will of the Scottish people to retain their own unique ethnic identity over against the attempt by the English to destroy Scottish culture and ethnicity. This is a theme that is likewise picked up in the film “Rob Roy.” I’ll venture to guess that when most people viewed these films they were outraged by the attempt of the English to squash Scottish identity, ethnicity and culture as it was depicted in the film.
The attempted destruction of a set people and culture may raise the ire of movie goers but it seemingly barely raises the blood pressure of Americans as life imitates art in America. This week Americans were given a view of our end as a unique culture and people. News outlets reported that,
White people will no longer make up a majority of Americans by 2042, according to new government projections. That’s eight years sooner than previous estimates, made in 2004.
By 2050, whites will make up 46 percent of the population and blacks will make up 15 percent, a relatively small increase from today. Hispanics, who make up about 15 percent of the population today, will account for 30 percent in 2050, according to the new projections.
Asians, which make up about 5 percent of the population, are projected to increase to 9 percent by 2050.
People need to realize that this diminution of white people in the West is not some kind of freak accident. Indeed, it is not not anymore accidental then the plan of Longshanks in Braveheart to destroy the Scots. Ever since the Teddy Kennedy inspired immigration bill in the 1960’s there has been a concerted effort to destroy white ethnicity in America and the culture that is attendant with it.
This attempted destruction has not only been pursued through immigration policies but also it has been pursued through the government schools which have inculcated a mindset, through its educational and curriculum dominance, that embraces both cultural-cide and ethnocide. This idea has now likewise been picked up in Churches which have embraced the multi-cultural assumptions that are driving the elimination of the ethnic makeup that has made and makes the West, the West. The Church has taken it all one step further by wrapping the multi-cultural agenda in Christian jargon.
This drive towards the death of the West that we are heading for serves the agenda of globalist who are intent of building a uni-culture that reduces and flattens out all cultural, ethnic, religious and racial distinctiveness. What is coming in the West with the reduction of its historic majority population will either be a new mongrel ethnicity that results from the combination of intermarriage, or more likely what will occur is a balkanization where different people groups will cordon themselves into regional and demographic pockets with the peace being kept between disparate people groups by a strong centralized government.
It’s an odd thing that many Christians can watch Braveheart and cheer like wild when the Scots defeat the English attempt to crush their ethnicity and culture, and yet they get all contemptuous when some Americans desire to keep their ethnic and cultural identity accusing them of silly things like racism. Similarly, people would have understood that any ending of Braveheart where the Scots lose their ethnic, cultural and national identity would have been unsatisfactory but yet they have no problem with the prospect of America losing its ethnic, cultural and national identity.
The trouble with America is that it is full of Americans. If we can’t get them out we’ll breed them out.
I’ll admit… I’m still confused when I read you on this issue. Scot is an ethnicity, where as ‘white’ is not. Is there any room for you for cultural adoption? Is it not possible for ‘brown’ skinned folk to adopt an Anlgo-ethnic culture? There has to be some separation between how one acts and lives and their genetic pool from which they sprang.
Interestingly, the State often opposes the adoption of racial minorities by white families, even though the majority of adopting families are white and the majority of those needing adoption are racial minorities.
Dave,
It’s an issue easy to be confuse on.
First, I might ask…”Is American an ethnicity?” I would contend that it is.
Yes, there is LOTS of room for cultural adoption! One doesn’t have to be white to adopt Anglo-ethnic culture but one has to seriously wonder if Anglo-ethnic culture can be maintained without a majority of Anglo-ethnic people who embrace Anglo-ethnic culture.
This brings us to the issue of assimilation. In the 1920’s we severely restricted immigration in these United States with the understanding that the recent immigration wave at that time had to assimilate to the core culture. In the 1960’s we opened the immigration flood gates wide open again and have never closed the flood gates since. Now combine the reality of illegal immigration and what you have is the expectation that Anglo-ethnic culture will have to assimilate to a globalist multi-culture. Our culture is being bred out by the sheer weight of numbers.
My objections are not skin pigment oriented though I do believe that just as individuals are genetically informed (not dominated) so ethnicities are genetically informed, and that this genetic information accounts somewhat for the culture that any ethnicity builds. Now, certainly what a person or people think about God is the primary factor for culture building but even here Tutsi Biblical Christians are going to build different culture then Mongolian Biblical Christians than Irish Biblical Christians. And that’s OK because God loves diversity. We don’t have to be all the same. Further it is perfectly acceptable for a Tutsi Biblical Christian to prefer the culture his people have built over the culture built by Irish or Mongolian Biblical Christians.
So clearly there is some separation as you note between how one acts and lives and their genetic gene pool from which they sprang but also I would contend there is likewise some affinity.
Finally, I can’t help but observe what I observe because it is people of other races and ethnicities in America who go out of their way to distinguish themselves from other Americans. Just look at the quota laws as only one example.
In the end, I don’t think I’m as radical as you might be fearing. I have no problem with cultural adoption but in order for that to happen there must be a stable culture to adapt to.
That stable culture is being attacked.
This goes to my discussion with Dave.
Why do you think this is so?
I am willing to bet the farm that the reason this is so is because the State doesn’t want racial minorities to adopt to the culture of white people. If you give racial minority children to white families the result will be that those adopted children are not going to grow up with cultural affinity to their people. The State is opposed to that because the State is pursuing the destruction of a homogeneous people who find their identity in Western cultural categories.
I agree with you Bret. My original post was fodder for your fire. The current philosophical underpinnings of the State is that the Western world has been built upon corruption, pride, and the usurpation of others. Their remedy to that is to allow others to corrupt and usurp what has been built.
It is plain old retribution theology that has characterized humanity since the Fall.
Right Joshua and what it means is the death of that which some of us grew up identifying with — most importantly the Christian faith.
Yes, “American” is a culture and PERHAPS an ethnicity (although we are probably much too young to claim it to be as such), but not a race. I teach the children that we are culturally a derivative of England. And I would also affirm that there is some correlation with genetics and culture – but to merely use categories such as ‘white’ and ‘brown’ or ‘plaid’ is missing the point to a very large degree.
The State is not opposed to interracial child adoption, at least officially.
Every ethnic group belongs to some race right?
I didn’t merely use categories of ‘white’ and ‘brown’ or ‘plaid.’ I used them in relation to ethnicity and culture. I agree that if those color categories were used absent ethnic and cultural considerations it would indeed miss the point to a very large degree.
As it concerns the State and inter-racial adoption I don’t have any idea. My point was where there might be opposition it makes perfect sense.
We agree completely – the dialog has been helpful to get us there. -dse
The State is officially unopposed to a lot of things that it unofficially opposes.
My evidence comes from those with experience within the workings of State-run adoption services. For me it is second-hand.
LOL … I had to read that a few times in order to see what you were saying.
It’s a good point.
How is that blacks rise several percent to about 15% and whites fall to the 40’s?
This implies that blacks either though birth rate or immigration or both are also growing rather rapidly.
Therefor it would follow that there are likely to be only 3 whites to one black.
Given the the rapid increase of intermarriage or just plain sex between the two races this would imply a high rate of “breeding them out.”
They say that in the UK about 40% of black men are married or living with white women.
Since I see so many pictures everywhere showing happy young white women with happy ( I bet) young black men I suspect this behavior will be more a drain on the white race then most people suspect.
And, Obama will be the very model for future “breeding out.”
Three to one! That is just wonderful.
Yes, I think people over look the importance of miscegenation. But what are the projections after 2042? No one is saying that white stop declining after 2042 ( blacks stop increasing ).
Every one should get a copy of Robert Shufeldt’s book The Negro A Menace To American Civilization published about 1903.
Shufeldt’s work seems to be premised upon the validity of evolution. Never a good idea.
Jet, is there anything you like about it (his book)?
Is there anything that you find use full or informative in that book?
He can describe what it was to be alive in the 40 some years after the Civil War.
He completely recognizes the dangers of miscegenation to European peoples. Or does he support miscegenation some where that I am unaware of? Or is that by some logic supported here? Would you like to see “The Negro…..” gain a renewed popularity?
I, well, I find it useful, informative and would like to see it become better known.
Is there some one you would recommend reading from the same time period?
Max,
I looked the book up on line but haven’t read the whole thing. As a rule of thumb though I don’t put a great deal of credence in someone whose beginning premise is Darwinian.
I will try to give his text a closer look to get a fuller idea of what he is driving at.
What I would like to see the Negro gain is a repentance given to them by the Lord Christ so that they and their culture may be redeemed. This is the same I would like to see for all people groups.