Rethinking immigration in the context of Post-Americanism
This is quite timely. I was just discussing similar issues with a friend - that the boat has sailed (or, perhaps, landed) on the demographic integrity of the West, and that we must now start thinking of ourselves tribally, effectively as stateless people. This then opens many questions, such as, how do we maintain cultural continuity without our own territory?
In general this is a tragedy, but on the other hand, it opens possibilities. For example, we might reconfigure ourselves into a network state, with enclaves everywhere in the world, much as every city has a Chinatown.
This article is a cope for a complete failure to comprehend the politics of immigration of the past 30 years, which culminated in the election of Trump in 2016. That we’re going to live in enclaves sounds like a stupid Atlantic article from the 1990s. All demographic effects from mass immigration since the floodgates were opened after the Cold War can and will be reversed when the global dollar begins to die a well-deserved death. Eurasia repatriated 50 million people after WWII, including millions whose empires settled them far from their home nations and who lived in foreign enclaves for centuries. Mass resettlement this time will not require 25 million to die, just the dollar. Count on it.
You're wrong in some of what you write. "Multiculturalism for whites" is sort of impossible, because when they coexist as equals with other groups, they're attacked and blamed for everything. A clear example is South Africa, a multicultural attempt where it turned out to be impossible for whites to coexist with non-whites because they became the target of non-whites. Also, America is not as much of a random multiethnic empire as you describe. Imagine a group of random people on the street in any American city. Some of them you'd be tempted to ask the question "Where are you from," whereas others you would assume to not be from anywhere, but rather real Americans. The "real Americans" are whites. The existence of the question "Where are you from" which continues to be asked even in our modern diverse times, proves that there is such a thing as an America and the "rightful" American nation or ethnicity. So America is actually a well-defined demographic and cultural concept, with well-defined assimilation criteria, rather than a random conglomeration of ethnicities. Even people born in this country who aren't white aren't really considered American, and this may actually never change (despite growing diversity). There's another Substack blogger named Scott Greer whom you may know of who argues these points that I've just summarized -- that America is a real, specific, and unified demographic entity based on what's called the Historic (white) Majority. Some of the points you make are valid and I agree with them, but multiculturalism may not ever change the core American identity. As long as the question "Where are you from?" is asked of people who don't look American, even with their growing numbers, America will continue to have a "core" or "rightful" population, while others will be pseudo-foreigners. That is not multiculturalism. Still, who knows? We don't who will turn out to be right -- you or people like Scott Greet.
The YouTube fake “conservative” channels that sling hate at Californians no matter their race or politics is fueling a fire. Babylon Bee makes sure to keep that going and shames any White person for fleeing California to other states. Will there be a hunt to suss out the Californians and round them up?
Have you experienced the hatred by White people in Arizona towards White people from California no matter their politics? It’s quite shocking.
A politically correct way of calling for disunion.
Excellent article! Basically a return to the medieval concept of identity which is village based, which makes sense in accord with our identity as a human species because our zones of perception is limited to local towns and cities etc, which is our sphere of control. Regarding mass migration, while I don't like it for environmental reasons, it is not a ethnic problem at all. It is a process of Americans becoming who they really are: "a Anglo-Latin people." The Hispanic migrants are largely descended of Spanish conquistadors who founded The Americas, and many of the so called White people in USA who have been complaining are post-1800's migrant descendants. That means that from an Indo-European identity perspective the Metis(Mixed race) people of Latin America have more right to the land than the descendants of non-pioneer 'whites.' I am not 'white,' I am an Indo-European. All Mexicans are my brothers, and sisters. I only have one thing to say regarding Hanania(and Stark): "bravo!"
You’ve literally just seen that 6% of new corporate hires are white; this is national-scale genocidal racial policy. Your hope for enclaves over taking state power while whites still can is retarded.
Excellent and necessary piece.
Rightists need to go full-bore on both strategies simultaneously, imo. We must have a hardcore immigration restrictionist movement, that exists separate but alongside another movement to “rewrite” the 1965 Civil Rights Act and restore freedom of association.
We can’t know which will succeed, or both or neither-- they would lead to very different futures. But, alongside raising white racial consciousness culturally, these two issues will determine the fate of our people.
A return to Chinatowns, but for everybody? That seems more multicultural than the standardized monoculture we have today, for sure.
What gives anyone else the right to use human beings as an an anthropological experiment?