Alternet writer “can’t wait for whites to become a minority in 2050”

First they said, “. . . the 1965 Immigration act won’t change the ethnic balance of the country.”

Then Bill Clinton said, “. . . by 2050 whites will be a minority” just as a fait accompli, with the implication that he is neutral about whether this is good or bad. Many people just shrugged along with Clinton, and didn’t see his smirk.

Now the “progressives,” feeling the winds of demographic victory at their backs, admit their vicious glee, such as Alternet writer Joshua Holland:

Joshua Holland 1 minute ago in reply to Jeronimus14

I can’t wait for whites to become a minority in in the United States 2050.

FYI: the U.S. has most definitely never been a “white country.” In 1775, the year before the Revolution, 20% of the Colonial population were Africans.

And while they obviously weren’t American citizens, within the territory that would become the United States, native Americans were plentiful.

A most excellent development! Let all the masks come off now! The whole premise of liberals/progressives was that they were the golden-hearted angels who didn’t wish genocide or even a scraped knee on any living creature. With Holland, we see what a “progressive” looks like when it thinks it sees the “finish line.”

There’s still millions of normal White Americans who would consider it “news” to find out that their very existence is evil and they need to be wiped out, according to an arrogantly arms akimbo racially indeterminate Joshua Holland grinning and heralding the extinction of YT.

Anyone who understands biology knows that a race that is declining isn’t going to stop declining; it’s going to go extinct. The race replacement policies of feminism and third world immigration and forced integration have been genocide in the name of humanitarianism. Progressivism, which is an ideology with a feminist and homosexual bent, has dominated because in a growing economy it was easy to “tolerate” a lot of filth and hypocrisy. Progressivism in a growth economy is like a shit sandwich — people tolerate the shit so long as its masked by a LOT of bread.

But now the taste, and smell, of “progressive” shit is going to become unbearable. Priceless quotes from “mainstream progressive writers” like Holland shall be Exhibit A to the fence-sitters about the gleefully genocidal intentions of these golden-hearted angelic liberal humanitarians.

Edit — Mr. Holland made a revision of the Bob Whitaker Mantra.

Joshua Holland 1 minute ago in reply to Jeronimus14

And I think whomever you’re quoting left off a word …

“Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white-trash.”

There, all fixed!

It always gives me a nice warm feeling to see the enemy get emotional and ad hominem. I think Holland is a textbook case of a mixed race individual with a major case of racial envy against unmixed Whites.

22 Comments on "Alternet writer “can’t wait for whites to become a minority in 2050”"

  1. Josh Holland – “Look at it this way: if you sat down 100 Americans and asked them, 99 would say I’m white. Yet I don’t count as a real European according to you because one branch of my family were Jewish Europeans. The 1 out of a 100 who didn’t consider me white would probably read this site. So I’m checking “Caucasian” on the census and the majority of the people in this country would say I’m white.”

    It doesn’t matter what the majority (99 out of 100) thinks – the majority are ignorant of the facts, and they always have been. It doesn’t matter what they “think,” it matters what the facts are. And the U.S. Census is arbitrary, with racial/ethnic definitions and so on changing constantly.

    DNA tests show clear and detectable ethno-racial differences between Jews and Europeans — not to even mention all of the various cultural differences. For instance:

    “A scan of half a million variable sites across the genomes of several hundred Europeans and Americans, each aware from their family history of having had a recent Jewish or a non-Jewish ancestry, gave an absolute separation between Jews and others: even a single Jewish grandparent was enough to provide an unambiguous identity, written in DNA. A carefully chosen sample of just 300 of those sites does almost as well, and a test based on that would be cheap.” – http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/7346496/View-from-the-Lab-Who-is-a-Jew-DNA-can-hold-the-key.html

    “This SNP study (and others) also shows that Ashkenazim are genetically distinct from other Europeans, which allows fairly accurate identification of group membership. Almost perfectly distinct, if you look at Ashkenazim whose grandparents are all Ashkenazi (the violet dots). Obviously, there was low inward gene flow for a long time, but that has increased a lot in the last century.” – http://www.gnxp.com/blog/2008/04/snps-dont-lie.php

    “In conclusion, we show that, at least in the context of the studied sample, it is possible to predict full Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry with 100% sensitivity and 100% specificity, although it should be noted that the exact dividing line between a Jewish and non-Jewish cluster will vary across sample sets which in practice would reduce the accuracy of the prediction. While the full historical demographic explanations for this distinction remain to be resolved, it is clear that the genomes of individuals with full Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry carry an unambiguous signature of their Jewish heritage, and this seems more likely to be due to their specific Middle Eastern ancestry than to inbreeding. … There have been other papers which show that Ashkenazi Jews form a separate cluster from gentile whites in the United States.” – http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2009/01/how-ashkenazi-jewish-are-you/

    The verdict is clear — Jews are primarily Semitic/Oriental, though some have a smattering of recent European/Occidental admixture.

  2. While the following quotes are old hat to many here at OD, the left’s guardian angel regarding immigration, Ted Kennedy (and his Semitic handlers) said:

    1965: “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. It will not cause American workers to lose their jobs.”

    1986: “This amnesty will give citizenship to only 1.1 to 1.3 million illegal aliens. We will secure the borders henceforth. We will never again bring forward another amnesty bill like this.”

    2007: “Now it is time for action. 2007 is the year we must fix our broken system.

    So now we find whites in America nearly a minority, after being nearly 90% of the population when that [email protected]@rd spewed those lies in the 60’s. He hated this country and spent his life trying to destroy it.

    And the truth is he clearly undermined our people and nation inasmuch as the UK’s own versions of this traitor were operating.
    At least since 2001 their plot was to deliberately “open up the UK to mass migration” from the Third World in order to behead British identity its culture and people; to replace them with something else for the sake of political expediency.

    As far as we should be concerned, Mr. Holland, we are having this “discussion” because the evidence shows what we see taking place demographically (in the West, US, etc) has been deliberate, along with all of the appropriate conditioning in order to make people actually LIKE it, if not FEAR standing up to it.

    My guess would be Alternet and others like them approve of this scheme.

  3. ben tillman | May 2, 2010 at 5:31 pm |

    Heh. Liberals have been telling us whites are inherently dangerous to non-whites for decades. The whole time, they’ve been doing everything they can to force non-whites into every white living space on Earth….

    This just can’t be repeated often enough.

  4. Edison Carter | May 2, 2010 at 9:40 pm |

    First, people don’t decide to have children based on how their ethnic groups will be represented 20 years down the road. Or at least non-crazy people don’t. So, we’re not talking about a group of people advancing their “interests,” we’re talking about differential birthrates among ethnic groups.
    45 Joshua Holland

    It is against the interest of Whites to allow non-Whites to increase their numbers in any way. That’s why immigration is such a hot issue. Without immigration Whites would remain a majority of the population in 2050, as even the US Census admits:

    Under a purely theoretical “zero immigration” scenario in which the U.S. effectively does not take in any immigrants, whites would remain the majority in 2050, making up a solid 58 percent of the U.S. population. In such a case, the share of Hispanics would increase to 21 percent because of high fertility rates and a younger population.
    White Americans’ majority to end by mid-century
    By HOPE YEN

    Whites don’t have to make a theoretical decision on family size, they need to get politically active and stop the non-White invasion of their homelands today by calling for a moratorium on immigration, toughening employer sanctions on those who hire illegal immigrants, cutting off all government aid to illegal immigrants, militarizing the southern border making it almost impossible for illegals to cross, ending all guest worker programs until unemployment is much lower, and deporting as many illegals as we can find.

  5. Edison Carter | May 2, 2010 at 9:44 pm |

    Link for the story on Whites losing their majority that admits we could stay a majority with an immigration freeze.

    http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jO8jbAnwaP-wLfs93UGI-l_-llMgD9CKGBS00

  6. Edison Carter | May 2, 2010 at 10:11 pm |

    The topic at hand is this: ethnic minority groups have, on aggregate, a somewhat higher birthrate than Americans of European descent. If those rates remain constant for the next 3 or so decades, and factoring in immigration, whites will represent less than 50% of the population.

    My argument is that you shouldn’t care about this, so your question makes absolutely no sense.
    84 Joshua Holland

    Lists of the worst cities in the country invariably feature those with a very high black population. But it’s not just 80% black cities like Detroit that suffer. There’s a noticeable erosion in the quality of life in a city when it has as little as 10% non-Whites. That’s my experience. Yours may vary, but mainstream sociologist Robert Putnam has found a correlation between diversity and social breakdown.

    The problem isn’t 2050, the problem is now.

  7. Edison Carter | May 2, 2010 at 10:30 pm |

    MGLS, stop and listen to yourself for a moment.

    Who in the world could be “unshakably committed to the destruction of their own race?” And why? What could possibly cause someone to embrace such a bizarre unshakable commitment?
    113 Joshua Holland

    It’s a living, as George W. Bush, Bill Clinton or John McCain might admit if you got them drunk enough.

  8. Fifty-eight percent White is a very uncomfortable margin for a majority. You have to understand that when the Census counts people their immigration status is irrelevant. There are millions of illegals, foreign students, green card holders and asylum seekers added to the totals. If we were to remove these people from our population and establish a zero immigration policy or ideally one that allows Western immigrants only, our demographics would return to 1980s levels. It’s all very doable with the right politicians in office and the will to do it.

  9. Whites becoming a minority is irrelevant in terms of politics. I mean, nothing would stop to limit to franchize, even in a non-racial way to a certain age group that has no record, is married, has children, is a net tax payer, owns a home/business and the like. In the same sense, citizenship and the like can be restricted. I really don’t get why you people really care about what Joshua writes so much. And not just Joshua, but any other group, Jews or blacks or anyone else – they don’t matter to me. The most important thing is to deconstruct all the idiocy developed in the last 200 years(French revolution ideals, equality, universalism and so on) and rebuild from scratch. The future economic situation will actually lead to this since governmental bankruptcies and drastic living standards drops lead to unrest and in the pyramid of loyalties, the citizenship of the world claptrap in which most white people believe in is the least strong and it is maintained only with a strong economic situation.

    Joshua, I’m quite sure that 60 years ago most people wouldn’t have supported the kind of immigration that the US has now. The present is more or less irrelevant and cultural shifts happen quite fast.

  10. What Joshua Holland wants is really a genocide of Germanic/Celtic people in America. That is what his ideology will lead to. Similar to what is happening in South Africa to the Afrikaaners. His fellow cohorts at the jewish run Alternet feel the same way. It is a real, visceral hatred that Jews have toward Germanic/Celtic people. This type of jewish hatred towards Germanic people has existed for centuries. In Germanic Visogoth Spain, Jews helped the Muslims from North Africa invade. Jews are doing the same thing here in the USA and in Europe, helping foreigners invade Germanic/Celtic areas to destroy that society. It is genocide.

  11. Charlemagne | May 3, 2010 at 12:13 am |

    I’d point out that elsewhere on the same thread I expressed my actual views of the matter. Contrary to this whole silly idea that I’m gleeful about whites like me becoming an ethnic minority in this country, what I actually believe is that it’s demographic trivia for a simple reason: whites will continue to be the largest ethnic minority in the U.S. We’ll continue to hold the majority of seats in government and on corporate boards, and it will have zero impact on the day-to-day lives of the American people. – Joshua Holland
    —–

    Joshua,

    The facts already on the ground do not bear this out, since America’s Founding Stock population has already been disproportionately dispossessed from so many of America’s seat’s and levers of power — from the country and the political tradition that their ancestors built and guided since America’s inception. (And I say this as a Catholic and someone whose family has been in the country for just over 100 years.)

    … “You have to wonder at this situation: white Protestants, of course, essentially invented the United States. As Phillip Roth says in one of his novels, [American Pastoral, p. 311] “Let’s face it, they are America.” But they’ve completely lost control of the government.

    “Obama doesn’t have 43% of his appointees white Protestants, in fact I don’t think even 4% are white Protestants. So you have to ask yourself what’s going on here. How can the founding stock of the country have so completely lost control? They could reasonably regard the Obama administration as kind of an occupation government: a coalition of united minorities that succeeded in uniting the minorities and dividing the majority.” …

    http://vdare.com/pb/090402_judges.htm

    *I can just imagine in another decade or two the United States government looking like a meeting of the Los Angeles or New York City Council. No recipe for running a country — let alone a city — let me tell you.

  12. The first thing Joshua needs to do is stop referring to himself as White, stop saying “we” and “us” as if he is speaking for Whites. He’s not the first delusional mischling to post here.

  13. Charlemagne | May 3, 2010 at 1:22 am |

    “…what I actually believe is that it’s demographic trivia for a simple reason: whites will continue to be the largest ethnic minority in the U.S. We’ll continue to hold the majority of seats in government and on corporate boards, and it will have zero impact on the day-to-day lives of the American people.” – Joshua Holland
    —-

    As well, it looks as if there will be no more Protestants — let alone White NW-Euro ones — on the Supreme Court.

    What do you think about this and these unfair and ominous trends, Mr. Holland? Does these facts not challenge the central premise of your hypothesis?

    Is the article I cited above correct? Has America’s Founding Stock population almost completely lost control of the government of the country their fathers created?

  14. “Obama doesn’t have 43% of his appointees white Protestants, in fact I don’t think even 4% are white Protestants.”

    And as for White Southerners, it’s on camera front boy Robert Gibbs and that’s it.

    I’m pretty sure that not so much as a single Human Being making decisions in the Obama White House is a White Southerner.

    This isn’t the sort of thing you normally see in a Democracy, to say the least.

    You just don’t see that big a Region have not even the illusion of having a say in the Executive Branch.

  15. Stuff White People Like author Christian Lander comes out in approval of the darkening of America and Canada. He considers himself an immigrant, he’s from Canada. Ah, so that explains it, eh!

    Ov vey! He goes on to affirm liberal memes of Whites being inherently evil, how Whites purposely killed Amerindians with infected blankets, and deconstructs race as simply skin color and a social construct as some Europeans were not considered White (false, they were not NW Euros). His recollection of history is that Whites were never oppressed, always had a cushy lifestyle, and non-Whites are never collectively blamed for any of their misdeeds, they’re completely innocent!

  16. Hey Reg, Judas must have been a prolific polygamist, because we have so many traitors today. I bet Christian Lander is one of his descendants.

  17. John Walters | May 3, 2010 at 5:42 am |

    137Joshua Holland
    How are you going to deal with the reality of the all-powerful human sex drive?

    If the human sex drive is all-powerful, it ought to be able to raise people from the dead.

    The human sex drive impels young humans to have sex. It weakens considerably with age. It is far from all-powerful.

  18. Charlemagne | May 3, 2010 at 6:10 am |

    And as for White Southerners, it’s on camera front boy Robert Gibbs and that’s it.

    I’m pretty sure that not so much as a single Human Being making decisions in the Obama White House is a White Southerner.

    This isn’t the sort of thing you normally see in a Democracy, to say the least.

    You just don’t see that big a Region have not even the illusion of having a say in the Executive Branch. – Reginald
    —-

    Absolutely and utterly correct Reginald.

    Never before in the history of the world has the descendants of the founders of a nation, state, empire or polis of any kind been so utterly and completely dispossessed from the centers of power in the land of their forefathers — especially one as powerful and as dominant as the United States (once) was.

    Very perplexing.

  19. Charlemagne | May 3, 2010 at 6:16 am |

    …He goes on to affirm liberal memes of Whites being inherently evil, how Whites purposely killed Amerindians with infected blankets, and deconstructs race as simply skin color and a social construct as some Europeans were not considered White (false, they were not NW Euros). … – Mark
    —-

    Also correct, Mark. The Americans of those previous generations never denied that certain other Europeans, immigrants or otherwise, were White — just that the dominant American ethnicity and culture was Anglo-Celtic in ethnicity and Protestant in religion.

    Of course, this behavior, which the Liberal Left AND the ‘aracial’ race-denying ‘respectable’ Right today derides, was really no different, and just as ‘normal’ as any other human society that ever existed: that of binding together ethnicity and religion in defining what was considered the norm for what constituted American culture and nationality.

    Leftists and ‘respectable’ Rightists love to see, and, more importantly JUDGE THINGS they don’t agree with rather anachronistically — don’t they?

  20. They like to cite Noel Ignatiev’s book “How the Irish Became White.” Which is really a small account of their history in Philadelphia. The Irish faced discrimination in the North, but not in the South. Of course Ignatiev is an anti-White, Marxist Jew who wants to “abolish the White race” and sees race as a social construct. He conflates ethnic and religious conflicts with race. It’s just more Jewish mendacity.

    Some defend him saying he just wants to abolish the concept of Whiteness, not the people. As if that is reasonable. What would Jews and Muslims say if we wanted to abolish them, their religion and cultural identity, and claim that it’s just a social construct. It’s absurd.

  21. Charlemagne | May 3, 2010 at 9:40 am |

    They like to cite Noel Ignatiev’s book “How the Irish Became White.” Which is really a small account of their history in Philadelphia. The Irish faced discrimination in the North, but not in the South. Of course Ignatiev is an anti-White, Marxist Jew who wants to “abolish the White race” and sees race as a social construct. He conflates ethnic and religious conflicts with race. It’s just more Jewish mendacity. – Mark
    —-

    Interesting point. Steve Sailer really and effectively called out Ignatiev (and the usual suspects like him) on his hypocrisy in his article The “Whiteness Studies” Status Game.

    “Whiteness’ Studies” on college campuses are insidious guilt-and- shame games that Marxist professors like Noel are legendary for founding.

    White anti-white racism is a broadly fashionable attitude that extends far beyond loonies like Ignatiev. I don’t believe I’ve ever seen it formally explained, although Tom Wolfe’s novels show it in action.

    The usual explanations of what drives whites like Ignatiev are “white guilt” or “self-loathing.” But does Ignatiev appear as if he personally feels guilt or self-loathing?

    No—he sounds like he’s having the time of his life arguing that you
    should feel guilt etc. He comes across as an arrogant, hostile jerk who thinks the world of himself.

    He wants to feel that he’s better than other whites and to rub their faces in it. The bad guys in his book are Irish Catholics* and Anglo-Saxon Protestants. Ignatiev himself is neither.

    And this is typical, in my experience: whites who proclaim their
    anti-white feelings don’t really care much about blacks or other minorities, pro or con. What they care about is achieving social superiority over other whites by demonstrating their exquisite racial sensitivity and their aristocratic insouciance about any competitive threats posed by racial preferences.

    To these whites, minorities are just useful pawns in the great game of clawing your way to the top of the white status heap. Which, when you come right down to it, is the only game in town.

    http://www.vdare.com/sailer/whiteness.htm

    *Interesting as well that Ignatiev wrote that book “How the Irish Became White” on how the Celtic Irish were once supposedly perceived as ‘not White’ — yet, as Sailer points out, lumps the Irish Catholics in with the “bad guys”, the Anglo-Protestants, when it suits Ignatiev’s anti-White hate agenda.

    I suppose the Irish or any other group in the professor’s Marxist weltanschauung are ‘White’ when they serve his agenda of being the ‘bad guys’ — and ‘not White’ when they can, conversely, fit into the stereotype of being the ‘good guys’ — further serving his agenda of playing off one group of Whites against the other.

  22. Kasimir Petrenko | May 3, 2010 at 3:31 pm |

    How are you going to deal with the reality of the all-powerful human sex drive? – Joshua Holland

    It’s rather simple, you pass anti-miscegenation laws (which we used to have) and all of a sudden there’s an incentive to mind your genitals. That probably isn’t very appealing to you since you non-whites tend lust after white women, we know. But we don’t care.

    Of course, in my opinion that would be a temporary measure. Because I’m all in favor of repatriation of all non-whites from white land.

    Some defend him saying he just wants to abolish the concept of Whiteness, not the people. As if that is reasonable. What would Jews and Muslims say if we wanted to abolish them, their religion and cultural identity, and claim that it’s just a social construct. It’s absurd. – Mark

    In light of this, the amazing thing is that whites aren’t outraged about it. No other group would ever tolerate these sorts of attacks. More than outright hostility, the largest obstacle to the success of racialism is a mazed, clueless majority.

Comments are closed.