Saturday, January 17, 2009

White America's Nightmare Vision

Jason at The Western Experience alerted me to the Atlantic's new cover story, "The End of White America?"

I see the story as a preview of things to come, as a premonition of at least four years under President Obama where the hordes of multi-culti PC guilt-mongers hammer the "evils" of white supremacy until the cows come home, all the while shaking down the "white power" system for endless race preferences and set-asides for the generations of "post-white" hip-hop coolsters who can barely read and to whom the term "
four-in-hand" is about as familiar a term as "a hand-written post-interview follow-up letter."

Yep, the times sure are a-changin'.

In any case, I've read
the article and what's really bothersome about it is all this discussion of white America "losing control" amid a "post-racial, multicultural landscape." While there may be some scholars and cultural pundits who are struggling with questions of white identity in the coming minority-majority era, it's frankly leftists who are all-consumed by these trends, and it apparently never occurs to the author of this piece (Hua Hsu, mind you, not James Hsu or Stephanie Hsu, but "Hua," all that much better for multi-culti authenticity), that whiteness is not going away anytime soon. Yes, there's the obligatory reference to cranks like Patrick Buchanan who have sounded the tocsins of the culture wars for decades. No, it's simply that by basically announcing that white culture's "got to go" they're preparing the coffin of America's history of achievement, greatness, and power.

Jason
has more:

The leftist and secular parts of the liberals in America are beside themselves over the election of Barack Obama. They see it as away to erase the past of America with a chance at a new beginning to remake America. That, of course, means destroying, forgetting, rewriting, replacing — however you choose to look at it — traditional America how it was and how it is today. In order to form a more perfect union, the current one is got to go.

That means doing away with the supposed hierarchy, the traditional image of America. I am talking about removing our “Whiteness” from the face of America. The liberals and the multiculturalist advocates have the hose and can’t wait to give the country a good white-washing.

To the leftist, the election of Obama can not be about the positive aspects and enduring qualities of an open democratic government based off Western culture. When in fact, the results of his victory are enabled because this country puts a premium on equality and opportunity for all. A man or woman can achieve the highest reaches of human possibilities by playing by the rules, working hard, and preparing for success. It is called progress. It is called the “American Dream.” And may I dare say, it was created, governed, reformed, fought for, bled over, and advanced largely by White People.
Yes, white people, and, particularly, their dominant culture of Anglo-American Protestantism, what the late Samuel Huntington described as the "American national identity."

That identity is not proscribed by skin color. As Jason makes clear at the post, it is that identity that made it possible for this nation to overcome the extreme hierarchies of racial inheritance that consigned generations of blacks and people of color to horrendous discrimination and depredations of slavery and segregation, internment and persecution. That we have overcome is of no consequence to writers like Hua Hsu and his/her multicultural brethren. What is good is we now have a black man in the White House who will be more sensitive to cries of "racism" and outrages of race and class "exclusion" than any president in American history. By training and inclination, Barack Obama is one of "them," and that's not to mention the president-elect's skin color, not the color purple, quite - he not having slaved as a cotton-picker or a share-cropper - but dark enough for him to wear the thorny crown of racial guilt upon his brow.

Just today I read a piece at CNN entitled, "Race is Still an Issue for America." And of course it is. Race will be an issue as long as power is to be gained from racial identity, as long as dividends are paid from the politics of racial reparations.

In this sense, it's somewhat counterintuitive that the first black man to ascend to the Oval Office will simultaneously set back race relations to the days of the lunch counter sit-ins. It's that bad in America today, although we no longer have the de jure racial indecencies and injustices of decades and centuries ago.


White America's "nightmare vision," mentioned in the Atlantic's piece, is not found in the loss of "white majority power," but instead in the ideology of the multicultural left, an ideology that will never let white America live in what should be the coming of true multi-racial accomodation and peace.

25 comments:

TRUTH 101 said...

Why am I not surprised that deluded right wing kooks would call the election of Barack Obama a setback for race relations. Do you really read this stuff before you paste it on your site Professor?

Donald Douglas said...

Truth101: Can you really say that after reading the essay. How much guilt do white Americans have to bear? This man, Obama, is in power. Is that not what MLK sought, a color blind country. The racial preferences racket is sick, and you abet it if you can't see straight on this.

TRUTH 101 said...

You're confusing guilt with empathy Professor. We both want an America free from the bitterness of racism. It won't go away simply because we choose to ignore racist behavior or villify Blacks that speak out against mistreatment as ungrateful.

Donald Douglas said...

And what racist behavior is that?

Requiring inner city blacks to get an education? That's racist, right, because we hold them up to the same standards as "whitey".

Van Zan said...

Re education... I seem to remember a reading a post here way back slapping down Obama for sending his daughters to a prestigious school, labeling it as elitist. Funny that. Oh of course that reaction had nothing to do with racism... in a pig's eye.

What irks me is the right-wing reactionary intellectualization of race as an issue accompanied by simultaneous accusations that is actually the left who start it all with so called guilt complexes...etc etc.

"Yes yes, real Americans, let's trumpet how far we have come - but oh dear let's not talk about where we came from".

Rich Casebolt said...

Actually, Van Zan, our consternation over the Obama children going to Sidwell Friends is the same as that we had when Chelsea Clinton started to go there ...

... their parents were able to choose a better school for their kids because of their wealth, yet have supported, indirectly or directly, the denial of that choice to others by insisting that the relatively-meager resources of those others be sucked up to support the public schools.

That smacks of elitist hypocricy ... the kind of elitism statist politics empowers as much or more than wealth does, only without recourse for the rest of us.

It isn't racism that bugs us here.

OTOH, it is the multiculturalist penchant for throwing out much of what has made this society work for ALL of us, simply because white people were the first to benefit from it ... and/or standing by as detrimental practices are condoned (if not actively imposed upon our society) in the name of "promoting cultural diversity", that does smack of irrational prejudice and racism.

Norm said...

Local left wing radio is full of when and how white America will write a big check to black America for slavery "resitution".

They are completely ignoring the fact that Obama busted his rear end to get to Columbia and Harvard. I hope with this background Obama believes more that if you want something, you can get it by working hard and not a handout.

Great post again by Jason. I am not too worried. Been listening to this crap for years. Americans, as this election showed, are a fair and wonderful nation, not crazy.

Van Zan said...

So if it was a candidate who did not support public schools you would not have any consternation, and by virtue of less tax we'd all be rolling around in the wealth needed to do what, say, Bush senior did, and send our junior to what may be the oldest boarding school in the United States?

Donald Douglas said...

Van Zan: Are you calling me racist?

The Obamas are hypocrites, and that's what my post on their children's private school was about.

I've been called racist many times, of course, which is the standard ploy of the left to shake down the "white power" structure for more giveaways. Minority kids don't have to work hard when they have all kinds of set-asides that will guarantee them a free ride ...

Donald Douglas said...

"They are completely ignoring the fact that Obama busted his rear end to get to Columbia and Harvard. I hope with this background Obama believes more that if you want something, you can get it by working hard and not a handout."

So far, I haven't seen Obama repudiate affirmative action, Norm. He did work hard, but I doubt he expects others of similar background, or less, to work as hard.

repsac3 said...

Your problem seems to be with income level, not hypocrisy, Rich. I never heard Clinton or Obama say wealthy people couldn't or shouldn't send their kids to prestigious private schools. Everyone, including wealthy people--and even wealthy liberals like Clinton & Obama--pay taxes that support public schools for America's children. Then they, along with their Republican counterparts, send their children to private schools--often for reasons having at least as much to do with security as prestige & educational excellence.

What's preventing most of us from sending our kids to Sidwell Friends & similar institutions isn't any act or ideology of Clinton or Obama; it's the fact that when compared to the folks we elect as President, our resources are relatively meager.

Theoretically, anyway (I wonder whether it's actually true in practice... I hear some have waiting lists that can last years, and that at others, applicants are evaluated to be sure they are "____ Institute material," which isn't limited to their intellect & abilities...unofficially, anyway) anyone who can afford to pay the tuition & travel expenses can send their children to any private school they wish. But every parent who does, also supports the public education system in their neighborhood, just the same as you & I, and everyone else who owns property. (Because the President doesn't own the White House, he prolly isn't paying for the DC public schools... But since many of 'em maintain their "western White Houses"--whatever they call 'em--they're still supporting local public education, just like the rest of us.)

Those who want a private school education for their kids should work harder to pay for it, not take money out of the public system, set up for the good of all. Alternatively, they can work to improve the public system, so there would be little benefit in leaving it, rather than just whining about it.

Some things here in America are done for the public good--rather than for "my" benefit, whoever "I" may be--and taxes are the means by which we pay for those things. It might seem like a good idea for each of us to only pay taxes for those things that we each personally use or support--you don't pay your school taxes, I deduct my share of the Iraq war, ...--but it just doesn't work that way... Public roads, public schools, common defense... Sometimes it's about "us," rather than "me."

(Yeah, I agree with the guy--Biden, was it?--who said paying one's taxes is patriotic... Fight like hell to add/remove those things you think belong in the budget & don't, but then pay your taxes for those things that "we" (by virtue of our representatives) agree are "common goods." And then start fighting over next year's budget...)

Jason said...

Thanks for the link professor and I'm glad you decided to comment on it yourself.

When topics like these come up its easy to react and defend yourself. But it isn't about defending my "Whiteness." That would mean I believe in an opposition -- a threatening competing force. I don't. I believe in America and its most powerful and precious resource, and that has always been her people.

But I will argue against the central theme of this piece of hate literature and illuminate its amazing pointlessness.

However, in some respects it did hit home on a lot of levels. It is hip and mainstream to marginalize, attack and smother the WASP culture. And sadly, in some ways, it has had an effect on our country. That is what gives weight and provides talking points for this kind of trash in the first place.

But, more than anything this is a direct result of Obama's election and the drive and thoughts of the truly dangerous, radical, and (traditional) America hating coalitions that helped guarantee his victory.

I've never come across such filth written after Bush's victories. Why the need for any of this now?

Sometimes I get worried, America. Will we just end up moving to our own ethnically pure region in the country and still call it America? If you ask these people that may be exactly what they have in mind.

TRUTH 101 said...

Good thing to require any kid to get an education Professor. Great thing to fund and staff inner city schools so they have the ability to teach and instill pride in kids. I'm not blind Don. I know there are bad parents and bad kids. Always will be. Iwon't judge a whole group of people based on the actions of a few bad ones. You're the Professor Don. Come up with an idea befitting a man of your intellect and staus in academia to get all kids on board with education. I expect better of you than just oversimplifying a problem that has plagues America for longer than both of us have been alive.

This is a great subject Professor. I disagree with what I perceive the message of the original post. I do appreciate your bringing it up.

Donald Douglas said...

Thanks for keeping this comment thread on point, Jason. This part of your comment is kind of ominous:

"It is hip and mainstream to marginalize, attack and smother the WASP culture. And sadly, in some ways, it has had an effect on our country."

It does ... big time.

Grace Explosion said...

I think we're seeing black hate for "white Amerikkka" as Rev. Wright put it. It's a "code word" for "socialism", alright. Inner city black people tend to be taught that "white Amerikkka" has oppressed them so then they have the right to demand the wealth of those who worked for it - while they do not get into the system and compete with the equal opportunity before them. They don't want equal opportunity. they want what someone else earned. They want socialism and they don't want to work and they want to call all that "racism".

"Racism"... a "code word" for "socialism".

I think it really is what people were taught... and it's going to add race to the ideological split - because so many blacks are hero worshipping Obama and wanting socialism and him as a dictator, imo. So the blacks may possibly really become divisive against the whites and tie that to hate for our former political system, free enterprise, democracy, and really push for socialism and Obama as dictator. Minorities may see this as a way to "beat" "white Amerikkka" as they see democracy and our Constitution as a form of "racism" as they confuse all definitions and look only skin deep - at skin color - and want to overthrow our nation's heritage and history constitutionally as well as politically.

This is NOT a "good thing". Obama is NOT advancing MLK's dream. This is a nightmare politically and ideologically - and I've been gathering people who once thought secession was extreme. But they're beginning to pray for State secession for a restoration of our former nation. We've been overthrown as a nation. This is not our nation or government - and it's not cause the color of Obama's skin - it's his policies - but unfortunately - people are making his skin and socialism "one". Not MLK's dream. A nightmare for ALL America not just "white Amerikkka". Letting race overthrow the Constitution - is a problem. And that's what's happened. He's not even a US citizen. And to anyone who challenges me on that: prove it!! Prove it by the documents Obama has submitted. You can't. He's not a US citizen and you can't prove he is. Our Constitution has been overthrown and our entire system of government - already.

Van Zan said...

Racist as in the sense that you think other races are inferior? No, I don't get that sense of you.

But you don't take the issue of it as being something real that has caused and sometimes still causes pain to some people, so much as a springboard for indignation that anyone in this world should feel themselves less blessed than you.

As you've just said, as far as you're concerned it's all just a lefty tactic to get something for free.

Sometimes I wonder... what is it that people on the hardline conservative side of politics have... that they go about with such unwavering suspicion that there are these nefarious forces that are constantly trying to steal from them?

You're talking about working hard..? There is no way that Bush would have become president were it not for his family's wealth.

Obama did work hard to get where he is, yet your assumption is - before he is even in office - that he won't set that as an example but will create a country of layabouts where "white people" will be the only ones required to work.

Grace Explosion said...

VZ,

The inner cities are populated by minority majorities. That's where the bulk of the redistribution of wealth goes: to the inner cities.

If we tracked the redistribution of wealth by race - we'd see some facts that are demographically represented.

We may have an issue of urban versus suburban and rural in that socialism benefits the urban rather than the suburban and rural. We may also see that the rates of those receiving government benefits in the urban areas is the majority of the weight that the suburban and rural taxpayers carry.

We are experiencing demographic, ideological, and racial splits in America.

I don't believe that the color of a person's skin manners. How people are acculturated produces their ideologies.

Now, when money gets very tight in the days to come (ie. Great Depression that Donald thinks will just be a severe recession)... the "liberality" of those who have always worked for a living vs. those who have always received (for generations) welfare income... are going to be in conflict. I think need and hunger are going to drive the inner city people to demand further socialism with force of passion - because they won't have access to income because they won't have jobs (they haven't worked for their money often for generations). Whileas the shortage of jobs and income is going to drive the suburban and rural people to want to keep the money they earn - and they are going to want a political representation contrary to socialism - or they're going to go hungry and face lack and need.

Things are going to heat up. It's going to appear "racial" - when really it's ideological and political... and demographic... because the inner cities are a different culture than the suburban and rural culture - and corresponding ideologies and political leanings.

Look rural and suburban. For the most part... it's all red. But urban is blue.

We have a cultural divide between urban and suburban/rural... and the fact is that the race demographics place minority majorities in the urban areas.

This nation is in for a nightmare as economic pressure hits.

Racial?? Not really. Cultural. And determined by urban vs. suburban/rural... but it really LOOKS racial. But it's not REALLY the color of skin that makes the biggest difference: it's acculturation.

Palin was stating a truism when she noted that the suburban and rural areas are a completely different culture than the urban - and it's the suburban and rural areas that vote Republican. It's going to be bizarre the difference between urban people and suburban/rural people and how things "shake out" when the pressure hits of severe economic downturn.

It's a powder keg, imo.

repsac3 said...

A few thoughts on the racial angle...

Pretty scary title there, Don.
Assuming this is a nightmare at all, I'd think you folks would believe it a nightmare for all America, rather than just white America...

I don't see all that much of this hammering of the evils of white supremacy & whatnot. Yes, there are some, but just as you label Patrick Buchanan a crank for his views, many of us do the same when confronted by "the white oppressor is keepin' us down" types.

...to whom the term "four-in-hand" is about as familiar a term as "a hand-written post-interview follow-up letter."

I guess you're not seeing that "epidemic of collared shirts and cuff links currently afflicting rappers" to which Hsu alludes. Maybe it has something to do with where you live or something, because I sure am. Not only that, there are a whole lotta folks black & white wearing "Sean John" jackets and the like which, while not formal or business attire, ain't cheap or unflattering.

What's the deal with making fun of the guy's name? Should anyone take you any less seriously when discussing other races or cultures because your name is pretty vanilla-American? (Yes, I recall your mixed heritage, and I do applaud your almost never making a deal about it, or insinuating that you're in any way more qualified to discuss racial issues than us pure whites &/or blacks...) Think about it... Would you feel any differently about this article if *his* name was Donald Douglas, or if *yours* was Hua Hsu? It looked like a pretty cheap shot to me...

As I said, I don't see all this hatred of white culture that you & Jason do. I even question whether there is this white culture, anyway... I'm not so sure that there is much that is "uniquely white," any more than there is a "uniquely black" or "uniquely asian" culture.

Equality, democracy, and our striving to improve our lives & those of our children are not products of whiteness. Yes, some predominantly white cultures older than ours practiced one or more of these traits, but others just as old & just as white did not. There were many white tyrants & violent white cultures along with the more equal & just ones. The same goes for black cultures, asian cultures, native American cultures... I just don't don't share the view that our whiteness made us who we are, or that because white men fought & died to create & defend the land we love (I'm pretty sure some non-white men did too, by the way), it was their whiteness that made them do so.

Jason: And may I dare say, it [progress, and the "American Dream"] was created, governed, reformed, fought for, bled over, and advanced largely by White People.

I wonder whether Jason believes that more non-white people would've been doing even more of that creating, governing, reforming, fighting, bleeding, and advancing than they actually did, if they weren't busy being the slaves of those White People to whom Jason gives all the credit. (Damn them for being our slaves, and not helping to found & shape our system of government, instead.)

Rather, I see our traditions & ways of thinking about these things taken from our varied national & religious backgrounds.

(I don't have time to finish my thoughts now--Just invited to spend the day with family--but I'll be back later to take it further... Promise? Threat? You decide...)

Jason said...

"Jason: And may I dare say, it [progress, and the "American Dream"] was created, governed, reformed, fought for, bled over, and advanced largely by White People.

I wonder whether Jason believes that more non-white people would've been doing even more of that creating, governing, reforming, fighting, bleeding, and advancing than they actually did, if they weren't busy being the slaves of those White People to whom Jason gives all the credit. (Damn them for being our slaves, and not helping to found & shape our system of government, instead.)

Rather, I see our traditions & ways of thinking about these things taken from our varied national & religious backgrounds.

(I don't have time to finish my thoughts now--Just invited to spend the day with family--but I'll be back later to take it further... Promise? Threat? You decide...)"

Repsac,

Precisely. It was an evil injustice engineered by the dominate White culture at the time. However, you must remember that same culture in that very same time gave 600,000 lives to correct and hopefully do away with those injustices. I'm talking about the Civil War of course. That WASP generation set out to correct a monumental wrong. And maybe Lincoln was right, perhaps the unimaginable losses and bloodshed was good for punishment.

As it happened, more reforms took shape over the years. Yes, too slowly. Yes, with great resistance but the change and reform took place nonetheless. Our country has been better for them all, too. Again, another wrong made right by the WASPs.

And what better way to illustrate that point than the 20th. A day so many cynical paranoid people thought would never come. Again, his election was only made possible by the WASPs willingness to vote for him.

I'm like you, I don't have time for all my thoughts but I hope you see my point.

Donald Douglas said...

"I'm like you, I don't have time for all my thoughts but I hope you see my point."

I can guarantee you Repsac3 will not see your point, Jason.

LFC said...

Re Grace's extremely simplistic ramblings about the divide between urban and suburban/rural:

First, there are different kinds of suburbs (just as there are different kinds of cities): a lot of variation in terms of ethnic diversity, income levels etc in suburbs. A more reliable predictor of voting patterns probably is what state the suburb is located in, not the mere fact of its being a suburb.

And what about the relatively new "exurbs"? Grace doesn't mention them. Maybe she thinks suburbs = exurbs. In fact exurbs tend to be different demographically and politically from suburbs in many cases.

On Jason's claim that WASPs [White Anglo-Saxon Protestants] made Obama's election possible: yes, some white Protestants voted for Obama; more, however, did not. I believe I saw the figure that 65% of white Protestants voted for McCain (I could be misremembering). I would think the breakdown of the white Catholic vote was more Democratic, partly b/c of more union households in that group, plus other factors.

Rich Casebolt said...

What's preventing most of us from sending our kids to Sidwell Friends & similar institutions isn't any act or ideology of Clinton or Obama; it's the fact that when compared to the folks we elect as President, our resources are relatively meager.

repsac, Congress and the President could vastly expand everyone's access to better education, were it not for their insistence that my tax dollars be used to subsidize only one venue of education ... the public schools ... instead of a form that better serves my children and grandchildren.

Like they want to do in many other areas (like health care), these "experts" have determined that they know how to educate kids better than their parents do.

Their insistence on creating a monopoly for the teachers' unions to thrive in, impairs our childrens' future.

This is the same reason I prefer private charity over public aid ... when We the People directly control the distribution of resources, our ability to find the best solutions for each child is enhanced, because our resources won't be simply shunted into a "one size fits all" system.

It also means that, when the system isn't working, we can act to change it much more quickly and decisively ... because there will be fewer and lower political hurdles to overcome to do so. (That's why the teachers' unions don't like family-directed funding like vouchers).

Your basic problem, is that you think that just because the Federal government CAN do something, that it SHOULD do it because it is "bigger" and therefore "better" than the alternatives.

Some things, like the military and interstate infrastructure, are the proper purview of the Feds ... but note that these areas are well served by "one size fits all" solutions.

However, effective problem resolution in the areas of social services -- education, health care, welfare -- are better served by INDIVIDUALIZED solutions.

Here is the problem ... because we do want the Federal government to treat all people equally, their ability to individualize solutions is inherently limited ... in most cases, limited only to the carrot of funding and the stick of enforced law.

This limitation -- an important protection of civil liberties, if we value our own freedom of conscience -- renders the Federal government structurally incapable of effective problem-solving on an individual basis.

Add to that the limits of perception and reason of even thousands of "experts" when dealing with problems involving well over 300 million variables ... and you see why I am skeptical about the Feds ability to effect change that will enhance the ability of We the People to pursue happiness.

However, those like you are so self-assured in your own onmiscience, that you are blind to those limits, and persist in proposing statist solutions ...

... which are nearly always '70s reruns of public policy, that weren't entertaining the first time, either.

repsac3 said...

Jason:

Contrary to Donald's interjected thought, I do see the point you're trying to make (or at least, I think I do... I'll leave it to you to judge.)

Precisely. It was an evil injustice engineered by the dominant White culture at the time. However, you must remember that same culture in that very same time gave 600,000 lives to correct and hopefully do away with those injustices. I'm talking about the Civil War of course. That WASP generation set out to correct a monumental wrong. And maybe Lincoln was right, perhaps the unimaginable losses and bloodshed was good for punishment.

But if one really looks at the Civil War, the WASPS were fighting on both sides of that conflict, and neither the ones fighting on the side of good or the ones fighting in defense of wrong did so because of their white skin. It wasn't whiteness that made some men take slaves, and it wasn't whiteness that made other men oppose the practice.

As it happened, more reforms took shape over the years. Yes, too slowly. Yes, with great resistance but the change and reform took place nonetheless. Our country has been better for them all, too. Again, another wrong made right by the WASPs.

I think we're talking past each other, a little. Absolutely, many WASPs did great things in & for this country. Other WASPs, did some crappy things that hurt this country. But neither the ones who did good or the ones who did harm did so because they were White Anglo-Saxon Protestants.

Even the folks who created and maintained Jim Crow or got involved with the Klan did not do those things because they were white--even if some of them might say otherwise, if asked. They did so because they were racists, and believed the color of their skin--which happened to be white--made them superior to folks with skin of other colors. Folks with any of those other skin colors can be racist too, of course... ...but it isn't the color of their skin that makes them that way, either. Whatever the color of the racist, it was something they were taught, and not something about their WASPness... or their BlackAfricanBaptistness... or their BrownHispanicCatholicness...

Beyond that, there is the fact that WASPs were far from alone in doing right (& wrong) by this country. Because they were the first people here (after the natives, of course) they had a head start in the race for political & social power & prestige here--and of course, nothing succeeds like success--but folks who weren't WASPS have increasingly held some power, and have contributed to our changing and reforming, and righting prior wrongs throughout history. I'm willing to acknowledge that WASPS did much of it, by virtue of their positions of power, but as I intended to suggest in my prior comment, I've little doubt that were it not for the thoughts & ideas that held non-WASPs back (slavery, and bigotry against other races, nationalities, & religions--much of which was just as much a contribution of WASPs as the good stuff) they would've done far more than they already did to promote liberty, equality, and progress...

(Of course, I also recognize that the ideas of liberty, and equality most certainly were a product of enlightenment thinking. I doubt they would've taken root here as quickly or easily, were it not for the WASPs that brought and nurtured them. While I don't see how they are a product of being white, they are at least in part a result of Anglo-Saxon Protestantism, for certain.)

And what better way to illustrate that point than the 20th. A day so many cynical paranoid people thought would never come. Again, his election was only made possible by the WASPs willingness to vote for him.

You're right, but again, that answer is almost certainly incomplete. Are there not many other demographics could we substitute for the word "WASP" in that sentence, and have it remain just as true?

If in saying that you're trying to say WASPs are not racist, that's somewhat true, and somewhat untrue--just as it would be for almost any other American demographic. If you're intent is to say WASPs deserve the credit, well, no more or less so than any of the other groups of folks who voted for him in large numbers.

Just as with pretty much any other racial group, whites as a whole once provided, now have, and will in future offer great successes and great failures to the countries in which they live. Nobody is all good or all bad. And no skin color predicts one's inherent destiny or contribution.

I hope that makes sense, sir...

Allan said...

All of these comments are crap. We will all be in worse shape in the near future because of the direction the "smart people of USA" decided to go with the election of Obama as president. And yes, white America does have a nightmare......these postings reflect the nightmare. I am afraid that all of you will get the change you long for, however, it will not be the change you expected. Now I do have to agree with Michele Obama...I am ashamed to be an American.

deprecator said...

Listen up peeps. Obama is the thin end of the wedge. Get it .... ? There is nothing wrong with being racist, I'm a white racist. It's a completely natural reaction, bred into all humans through the millenia. We don't like other races because they are a threat. Like the fear of snakes. What would you say to someone who tried to convince you that Taipans make good house pets? Read Darwin. This "all races are equal and can live in peace" psychosis has been shoved down our throats and everyone believes it. We aren't equal. We're different, at a GENETIC level - which has nothing to do with education, nuture, blah blah blah. As soon as you accept this, everything becomes crystal clear! The choice is: CIVIL WAR or APARTHEID. Maybe 20 years, maybe 30, maybe 40. But it's inevitable. You have to MAKE THE CHOICE. Good luck.