Ethnic cleansing in Orange

In 1993 I spent a few days in Orange, California meeting with local immigration reform activists. Several of us started up a 501(c)(3) organization aimed at a national grass-roots immigration restrictionist campaign, though it was subsequently taken over by someone who made it into a purely local organization. While in Orange, I heard many heart-rending and outrageous stories about the changes taking place there and in the nearby communities due to the influx of Mexicans. And now here’s something I wouldn’t have expected to see in a mainstream paper: a frank, honest account in the Orange County Register about white middle class people in Orange who are being forced to leave their beloved homes, and their no-longer beloved neighborhoods, because the Mexicans have made life so unpleasant there for Americans. Read about Carol and Dennis Fulton and their friends. This is what is happening in America. This is the reality underneath the pious, hateful sloganeering of all the goddamn open-borderites.

- end of initial entry -

J. writes:

I didn’t find this account frank or honest. Not once did it mention that the people leaving were white Americans. Not once did it use the words “alien” or “immigrant” or “Mexican” or “Hispanic” or even “foreign.” Everything was implied, tongue-in-cheek. The natives are named (Hill, Wiggins, Hanson, Fulton) to give an unmistakable clue as to the identity of the group getting ousted; their character and culture implied by adjectives like “clean neighborhood,” “generations of families,” “deep roots,” “summer barbecues and Fourth of July parades.” So much for the losers.

Now for the “frank and honest” description of the winners: “mariachi music,” “honking horns on carts,” “unfamiliar cars and people,” “more transient community,” “overcrowded boarding houses,” “urinating in the yard,” “catcalls,” “day laborers,” “multiple families in one house,” “language and culture barriers,” “cannot understand English.” I wonder who that might be? The whole article smacks of a delicate discussion in polite company of some unpleasant and mystifying illness.

Finally, the mandatory public disavowals by the natives being forced out, and by the officials supposed to protect them. “But race is not the issue, says [the American woman being ethnically cleansed out of her neighborhood]. She would be incensed at any neighbor who disrespected her privacy and property.” And, .”.. gathering evidence is very hard. Maybe people are telling the truth and maybe not” says the city attorney. I suppose it would be tough to smoke out dozens of day laborers living in a single house, none of whom spoke English, and who had converted the garage into a multi-family dwelling.

I guess I don’t see what’s so surprising about this mincing discussion of the problem, unless it’s the fact that it was acknowledged at all.

LA replies:

I disagree. To me what was new about the article was the frank acknowledgment that the Mexicanization of a town makes it unlivable for whites. So it didn’t say the words “white” and “Hispanic.” It is self-evident that white and Hispanic was the subject. For the reader to say that the article’s references to “mariachi music,” “honking horns on carts,” “unfamiliar cars and people,” “more transient community,” “overcrowded boarding houses,” “urinating in the yard,” “catcalls,” “day laborers,” and “multiple families in one house” are mere mincing euphemisms is not correct in my view. The article was describing in concrete terms, and without liberal escape hatches, the actual destruction of American civilization that occurs as a result of the Mestizo influx. In that regard, the article was the same as an article in American Renaissance.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at June 01, 2006 10:04 PM | Send