Clinton celebrates loss of America’s white majority
In a speech a couple of days ago to a Muslim activist group, Bill Clinton said that the impending loss of America’s white majority is a positive development. He also spoke approvingly of the rise of Islam, Hinduism, and other religions which are reducing the Christian majority and weakening the powerful Jews in our nation. He drew large applause when he praised Obama’s Cairo speech.
This speech didn’t get much publicity, but it’s a pretty brazen slap to the face of historic America. With Obama in the White House they don’t even bother to hide their hostility all that much. The Republicans should be all over this speech, but they’re stupid and for the most part in full agreement with Clinton & Obama on these issues. We need an ANP (American National Party).
I haven’t yet read the speech, but at first glance this doesn’t seem particularly objectionable. After all, the fact is that, due to our non-discriminatory immigration policies, we ARE becoming a nonwhite country. Yet this fact, the single most consequential fact of our times and perhaps of all American history since it means the end of everything America has been, is virtually never mentioned. So it’s a good thing that a prominent figure like Clinton brings this out, as he also did once when he was president. That makes it a topic and opens the possibility of debating it. If Clinton can support the prospect of America turning into a nonwhite country, then others can oppose it.
Posted by Lawrence Auster at June 17, 2009 04:59 PM | Send
Further, why should we blame him for supporting it? What else is he supposed to do? The whole Western world today believes in race-blindness and non-discrimination and diversity, and as a result we are becoming more diverse. How else should a good liberal—or, for that matter, a good “conservative”—feel about it, other than to say that this is a wonderful thing? Should he say it’s a bad thing? That would automatically put him with the “extreme right” of race-conscious immigration restrictionists. Obviously, for anyone in the liberal mainstream, the only option—other than the usual cowardly and evasive stance of welcoming “diversity” while never stating what this diversity actually means in concrete terms—is to welcome and approve the transformation of America into a nonwhite country. Given our established beliefs, there simply is no other way for a respectable person to talk bout it. If we want that to change, we have to provide people with a point of view that is fundamentally different from the prevailing liberalism. And that is something that today’s “conservatives” will never do.
We could see the speech as positive, as an opening to a real debate on immigration. Or we could see it as the liberal establishment coming out and saying,
“Up to this point, we remained silent about where non-discrimination and open borders were really heading. We only discussed these policies in terms of abstract rights and humane feelings. We didn’t say what they really meant for white America. But now the process has gone so far, and our own power is so great, that we can come out and tell you: our policy is to eliminate white America and the white West, and reduce the white race to what white South Africans are now.”
Well, if that’s the message, I say that that also is welcome. Far better to have this stated openly so that it can be discussed and opposed.
However, there is one more angle here. When he made similar remarks as president welcoming America’s demographic transformation, it was to a group of reporters at the White House. Here he has said it to a Muslim audience. Making such a statement to Muslims conveys the same sinister implications as Obama’s Cairo speech: “We are, or we are becoming, your dhimmis.”
But if that’s what he meant, then again I say: Fine, let’s have this out in the open.