America’s Future: Death by Immigration

What happens when the American people are replaced with foreigners? White Americans are learning the answer to this question as they see their numbers decline in their own country. The demographic and political changes we have witnessed over the last several decades are the legacy of the 1965 Hart-Celler Immigration Act. Since the law was passed, the United States has experienced a radical demographic transformation. This transformation was imposed on the American people through deceit. The racial group that has been most affected by this deception is, of course, the white majority. The Center for Immigration Studies has done a detailed analysis of the demographic changes brought about by the law and the dishonesty involved in selling it to the American people. In this post, I will also speak about the consequences of the 1965 Immigration Act and how the left embraces the changes it has brought. I will also explain how the law went completely against what the Founding Fathers wanted America to be. I will then talk about the changes I would like to see America make if it is to survive as a nation of Europeans.

Speaking about the bill, Senator Ted Kennedy said “the bill will not flood our cities with immigrants. It will not upset the ethnic mix of our society. It will not relax the standards of admission.” Each and every one of those statements have proven to be wrong. According to the Pew Research Center, in 1960, the demographics of America were: 85% white, 11% black, 3.5% hispanic and 0.6% asian. By 2011, those numbers were: 63% white, 12% black, 17% hispanic and 5% asian. The ethnic mix of the United States has indeed been upset. Most notably, the proportion of the population that is white has dropped precipitously. Hispanics and asians have increased in proportion very rapidly. This is to be expected since after 1965, immigration shifted away from Europe and more towards Asia, Mexico and South America. By 2050, the demographics are projected to be: 47% white, 13% black, 29% hispanic and 9% asian. Whites are projected to become a minority in the America around the year 2043 according to US Census Data. Nearly half of American children younger than 5 are minorities, and the number of minorities under 18 is expected to surpass the number of white children by 2019. The total minority population has grown 21 times faster than the white population. This is no surprise given the change in the countries where immigration is coming from. In 1960, the countries with the largest amounts of immigrants to the US were: Italy, United Kingdom, Germany, Canada, Poland, Soviet Union, Hungary, Ireland, Austria and Mexico. In 2016, those countries were: Mexico, India, China, Philippines, Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, El Salvador, Dominican Republic and Guatemala. This replacement of whites through immigration has been an intentional process on the part of the left to increase their constituency.

The Democrat Party understands that if whites remain a majority in America, they will be at an electoral disadvantage. For example, whites preferred Donald Trump to Hillary Clinton by a 21 point margin in the 2016 presidential election. Blacks preferred Clinton by 80 points and hispanics favored Clinton by 36 points. Seeing these numbers, Democrats have turned their party into the party of non-whites. Their policies are supported by largely by colored people, particularly colored women. The latest video by Now This celebrates the fact that the new congress will have a record number of “diverse” women. By diverse, they mean not white. Aimee Allison, president of Democracy in Color, says that “women of color are the saving graces of democracy.” Democracy in Color is an organization that is “dedicated to empowering the New American Majority—multiracial, multicultural, and progressive—through media, public conversations, research and analysis on race and politics.” This “New American Majority” is, of course, composed of non-whites. The Democrat Party has made politics about race. All politics are now identity politics. It is time that conservatives and white Americans as a whole pull their heads out of the sand and realize this. Allison goes on to tell white women to “follow women of color.” It is clear that the Democrats no longer want whites among their elected officials, but rather have whites as convenient allies who will vote for colored candidates until they inevitably turn into a minority. When that happens, America will cease to be the country that the Founding Fathers had envisioned once and for all.

The Founding Fathers wanted America to be a country made by Europeans for Europeans. They wanted to maintain the common European heritage that Americans had at the time the country was founded. John Jay wrote favorably about America’s common ancestry in Federalist No. 2. He was delighted that “Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people–a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs.” Jay saw the lack of diversity in America as a literal blessing. The common ancestry he was referring to was the British ancestry that the vast majority of whites shared at the time of the founding. The desire to maintain a European population was shared by other founders as well.

Alexander Hamilton said that “foreigners will generally be apt to bring with them attachments to the persons they have left behind; to the country of their nativity, and to its particular customs and manners.” He argued that “it is unlikely that they will bring with them that temperate love of liberty, so essential to real republicanism.” Hamilton also predicted the insidious influence mass immigration would have on America when he argued, “The influx of foreigners must, therefore, tend to produce a heterogeneous compound; to change and corrupt the national spirit; to complicate and confound public opinion; to introduce foreign propensities. In the composition of society, the harmony of the ingredients is all-important, and whatever tends to a discordant intermixture must have an injurious tendency.” We are seeing the fruits of a discordant intermixture today, with each ethnic group vying for its own share of influence, rather than each group living in a harmonious “melting pot.”

The “melting pot” is a myth that must be dispelled. It was not at all what the Founding Fathers envisioned for America, as demonstrated by the Naturalization Act of 1790. Passed by the 1st United States Congress, the Act limits naturalization to “any alien being a free white person” who lived in the country for two years. After the Constitution was ratified, the leaders of the new republic intended to create a distinct American nationality. It is clear that they wanted the United States to be a white country. This ethnic standard was reaffirmed in the Naturalization Act of 1795, with only the period of required residency being extended to five years. It was only in 1870 when a second racial category introduced. Naturalization was extended to “aliens of African nativity and to persons of African descent.” Note that citizenship was only extended to whites and blacks, not any other racial group. The racial standards were held by the Naturalization Act of 1906 and the Nationality Act of 1940, which extended citizenship to individuals of Native American descent. The Supreme Court case Takao Ozawa v. United States (1922) clearly showed that to be American was to be white:

“In all of the naturalization acts from 1790 to 1906 the privilege of naturalization was confined to white persons (with the addition in 1870 of those of African nativity and descent), although the exact wording of the various statutes was not always the same. If Congress in 1906 desired to alter a rule so well and so long established it may be assumed that its purpose would have been definitely disclosed and its legislation to that end put in unmistakable terms… If it be assumed that the opinion of the framers was that the only persons who would fall outside the designation ‘white’ were Negroes and Indians, this would go no farther than to demonstrate their lack of sufficient information to enable them to foresee precisely who would be excluded by that term in the subsequent administration of the statute. It is not important in construing their words to consider the extent of their ethnological knowledge or whether they thought that under the statute the only persons who would be denied naturalization would be Negroes and Indians. It is sufficient to ascertain whom they intended to include and having ascertained that it follows, as a necessary corollary, that all others are to be excluded.”

For half of American history, citizenship to the United States was restricted to whites. The country also pursued an immigration policy to keep the country majority white in accordance with what the Founders envisioned. The ethnic standards for immigration were destroyed in 1965, making way for the myth of the “melting pot.”

The idea that America is a racial “melting pot” is a recent idea that was created to make Americans comfortable with the idea of an invasion from the third world. Since the law was passed, there have been millions of people from alien and backward cultures that stream into America and change the culture. We are seeing the proliferation of thousands of little ethnic enclaves in our suburbs and cities, with each ethnic group retaining their own language, culture and customs. It is clear from this pattern of behavior that people prefer to associate with people who are like themselves. When there are a small number of minorities in a society, they must make themselves acceptable to the majority population if they are to be successful. However, the United States is on track to have no majority ethnic group in the United States within 25 years. Therefore, if current demographic trends continue, the United States will most likely devolve into a group of competing ethnostates. I would like to see such a racial division to take place peacefully.

To avoid further conflict, I propose granting blacks in the United States their own territory in the Southeastern part of the United States. It would be the most practical place, given that 55% of the black population currently lives in the Southeast. They can live amongst their people, have their own economy, make their own laws and control their own destiny free from the influence of any other ethnic group.

With regards to hispanics, I propose repatriating them to their countries of origin. There is already a legal precedent for this, with Eisenhower having deported thousands of Mexican immigrants during Operation Wetback in 1954. Many of them were American citizens. Just as blacks would be able to pursue their own destiny in the Southeastern United States, Mexicans would be able to do the same in their home country. I would also propose repatriating other hispanic groups to their home countries in a similar manner.

Asians, the smallest minority group, are perhaps the most well integrated into American society. They outperform whites economically and are not a major cause of racial tension in America. Given that they are a high-IQ group, they will and already have integrated well with a high-IQ European population. Therefore, I believe it will be to America’s advantage to keep them in the country as legal residents. The resulting country will be a predominantly white country with a small Asian minority.

If my proposals are adopted, I think the United States can avert a Civil War and remain a coherent political entity. Each racial group will also be better off living amongst their own people. I understand that my proposals will cause shock and dismay amongst many who read them, but it is a necessary step to conserve America and Western Civilization by extension. I believe that the changes I have proposed will inevitably take place. Whether they happen peacefully or through violence remains to be seen.