Pondering Patterson [VI]: Responding To The Reality Of Race


Pondering Patterson Series [
I
], [ II ], [ III
], [ IV ], [
V
]

What
can we do about the government`s racial and ethnic
classification system, which is key to making quotas
feasible?

As we`ve seen, a racial group is an extremely extended family that
inbreeds to some degree. This means there is a certain
amount of flexibility in the scale of how racial groups
are defined. For example, it would be nonsensical to
group Koreans and Nigerians together in any race smaller
than the human race. But Koreans could reasonably be
grouped racially with all other Northeast Asians or, for
that matter, with all East Asians, depending upon your
purpose. So, there is nothing written in stone that says
the current "Asian" and "Hispanic"
categories are inevitable.



A general rule of thumb is that narrowly-defined groups, such as the
Cubans, are more likely to get what they want from
American foreign policy than broadly-defined groups,
such as "Hispanics." That`s because the
constituent nationalities in the super-groups dreamed up
by the Nixon Administration – "Hispanics" and
"Asians" – are generally ancient or current
enemies. El Salvador, for instance, invaded Honduras in
1967 to avenge a soccer defeat (a brutal little war that
featured the last cavalry charge in history).

 

The exceptions to this rule are the not-yet-official super-groups of the
Arabs and the Muslims, who hate Israel even more than
they hate each other, which is saying a lot.

 

In contrast to foreign policy, you can`t get in on the domestic racial
spoils system if you aren`t part of a big group.
Consider Armenian-Americans, who number only one million
or so. They have induced a remarkable 96 U.S.
Congressmen to join the Armenian Caucus, which dedicates
itself to sticking it to the Republic of Armenia`s
Muslim neighbors, Turkey and Azerbaijan. But
Armenian-Americans are too isolated and thin on the
ground to win affirmative action designation for
themselves, outside of Pasadena, California, where they
have a critical mass.



If you are Asian or, especially, Hispanic, though, you can have your
cake and eat it too. Thus, a wealthy white
Cuban-American is "Cuban" when he`s demanding
that his Congressmen vote for keeping the embargo on
Castro going for a fifth decade, but he`s
"Hispanic" when his kid is trying to get into
Princeton on a quota.



As countless examples from around the world show, in the long run
government discrimination tends to lead to civil war.
The current American system is based on the assumption
that the legally disfavored non-Hispanic white majority
is so large and so wealthy that it can afford to put up
with these programs forever. And, indeed, white America
could probably afford to subsidize indefinitely
America`s two historical minorities: African Americans
and Native Americans. Because whites dramatically
outnumber those two groups, and the ratios will never
change too much, the burden on individual whites would
always be tolerably small.



Unfortunately, extending legal privileges to one group automatically
increases demands from other groups for the same
privileges. Political opportunists quickly realize the
short-term advantages of pandering to those desires.



The Nixon Administration invented racial quotas in 1969 for the not
unreasonable purpose of punishing Philadelphia`s
all-white, all-Democrat crafts unions for blatantly
discriminating against blacks. But the Nixonites soon
established two far-reaching precedents. They allowed
affirmative action to be extended to immigrants and in
1973 created the non-racial category of
"Hispanics." These seemingly minor
bureaucratic maneuvers transformed affirmative action
from a system limited to a few tens of millions of
American beneficiaries to one with billions of potential
beneficiaries worldwide. Combined with the 1965
Immigration Act that opened the doors to mass legal
immigration (along with the mass illegal immigration
that typically follows legal immigrants, because most
illegals won`t make the attempt without legal relatives
to help them out when they arrive in America), this
started us down a dangerous path.



When the Census Bureau discovered recently that there were at least six
million more people in America than it had previously
believed (presumably, most of them illegal immigrants),
this showed that the legally disfavored non-Hispanic
white majority will probably cease to be a majority
significantly sooner than the Census Bureau`s earlier
mid-century forecast. As the ratio of legally privileged
to legally disprivileged individuals rises steadily, the
second-class citizens will tend to become ever more
discontented with their lot. To keep them intimidated,
the government and cultural institutions will mount ever
greater propaganda campaigns to badger non-Hispanic
whites into agreeing that their race`s historic guilt
justifies penalizing them. The side effect of this
official hate-mongering against whites, however, will be
to inspire more and more anti-white pogroms of the kind
we`ve already seen this year in both Seattle and
Cincinnati, even before the Long Hot Summer of 2001 has
arrived.



How do we get America off this treadmill toward ever worsening communal
violence?



Dismantling the government`s "Asian" and "Hispanic"
demographic classifications would be a good start.
Prudent dominant powers normally wield a "divide
and conquer" strategy toward potential rivals. But
the Nixon Administration`s 1973 demographic labeling
guidelines instituted what`s turned out to be a
"unite and surrender" policy. The sheer
massiveness of these synthetic pressure groups is one of
the prime culprits in the Balkanization of America.



Here`s a seemingly symbolic first step:

 

·        
Change the
imperialistic name "Asians" to the more
accurate "East Asians." Asia is an enormous
place, and it makes no sense for the people who used to
be called "Orientals" to monopolize the name
of an entire continent that they share with over one
billion Caucasians.

Once that eminently reasonable step is taken, it would become obvious
that the South Asian Indians don`t belong with the East
Asians, with whom they share practically nothing other
than a tendency to eat a lot of rice. For the sake of
American unity, Indian immigrants are too fast-growing,
too smart, too hard-working, and too articulate in
English to be allowed in on the racial spoils system. We
need them on the Caucasian side, officially legally
unprivileged along with the rest of the non-Hispanic
Caucasians.



While it may seem ridiculous for higher-IQ Asian groups to support
quotas that benefit lower IQ groups, it makes perfect
sense to self-interested "Asian activists" who
see the racial racket as the royal road to cushy jobs
for themselves. Check
out this amazing article from AsianWeek.com for vivid
examples of "leaders" selling out their
peoples for their own benefit.
Imagine how utterly
entrenched quotas would be without the long Jewish
neoconservative assault on them. Well, the Indians are
going to be the Jews of the 21st Century, and we`ll all
be better off if, like Jewish-Americans,
Indian-Americans are classified as unprivileged
Caucasians.



If Indians, however, remain officially favored, then all sorts of other
bad things will also eventually happen. Their racial
cousins, the Pakistanis, will have a perfectly
reasonable claim to be legally protected. Privileging
the Pakistanis would then lead to demands for a
non-racial pan-Muslim classification, similar to the
non-racial Hispanic category. By sponsoring pan-Muslim
consciousness in the U.S., the government would be
undermining Jewish interests, such as support for
Israel.



Next:

 

·        
the
"East Asian" category should be deconstructed
into its constituent nationalities, such as the
Japanese, Koreans (ruled by Japan until 1945), Chinese
(invaded by Japan 1931-1945), Vietnam (invaded by China
in 1979), and Cambodia (invaded by Vietnam in 1979).

Most importantly, though,



* the Hispanic category has got to go. There are plenty of ways to
justify this. There`s
no single coherent rationale behind this category

other than to lump together the largest hodgepodge of
people for the purpose of raising the loudest clamor for
special privileges from the government.



The definition of Hispanicness is often thought to have something to do
with the lands where the
Conquistadors
raped and pillaged (although why America would want to
commemorate
those
events, or offer privileges to descendents of the
conquistadors
and
conquistadees alike, is baffling).

But nobody knows how far "Hispanic" extends. Are
Portuguese-speaking Brazilians "Hispanic?"
Nobody seems to know. How about Spaniards? Well, Antonio
Banderas is always being celebrated as a
"Hispanic" actor. What about the
"Spanish-surnamed" but All-American blonde
actress Cameron Diaz? What about my friend Steve Valles,
who is sometimes offered advantages in bidding for
contracts because of his Spanish surname, which he
inherited from an admiral in the Spanish Armada who was
shipwrecked on the coast of Ireland, where he found a
wife among his fellow Catholics? (Steve turns down such
offers on ethical principles.) How about non-Hispanic
women who take their husband`s Spanish surnames? In
fact, you don`t even have to have a Spanish surname, as
shown by a Polish-born man named Liberman, who won a
substantial tax-break when buying a radio station
because some of Senor Liberman`s ancestors were
Sephardic Jews expelled from Spain in 1492.



"Hispanic" is not a racial category. It allows the occasional
immigrant from the ruling white castes of Latin America
to become an affirmative action hire at an American
university, where he can pretend to be an intellectual
spokesman for the darker masses that his family back
home would only employ to sweep up after their polo
ponies.



Nor is "Hispanic" a language category. It lassoes in millions
of American-born citizens who speak no Spanish. It also
seems to include millions of New World Indians who speak
only indigenous languages.



Hispanics should be divided up by both nationality and race. If
Nicaraguans want their own quota, well there should be
separate ones for white Nicaraguans, Indian Nicaraguans,
black Nicaraguans, and all the various combinations.
Obviously, this would render many discrimination
lawsuits laughable. No employer smaller than Wal-Mart
would have to worry much about being sued for not
filling its quota of Nicaraguan zambos (black-Indian
mixes).



Well, this has been a fun fantasy. Is any political will out there to
carry out any of these reforms? The first step is to
think clearly about them – something that Orlando
Patterson
,

and The
New York Times,
have not yet begun.


[Steve Sailer [email
him] is founder of the Human Biodiversity Institute and


movie critic
for


The American Conservative
.
His website


www.iSteve.blogspot.com
features his daily
blog.]

June 28,
2001