America finds itself at a tipping point. Change is happening and it’s coming in the form of demographics and ideology. Both of which have recently come into focus, introducing to America in piecemeal their negative effects that have been unleashed upon society.
Let us take the latter for examination. There is no center in American politics. This is a fact taken from our lawmakers’ analyzed voting patterns[1]. The political center has been compromised and thus, cannot hold. The ideological wings that stimulate our politics, those being progressivism and conservatism, have each claimed near equal stakes of what was once the so-called vital center. The only relief from ideological purity is measured in small degrees of deviation. Consequently, it is all party, all the time. Political extremism has made our system a winner take all. As the stakes get higher, so will the level of extremism.
A major milestone in this development was passed when progressive lobbyists handed President Obama a healthcare bill he did not understand or read, and told to pass it. To keep Americans in the dark, Obama and his Democrat allies forced it through Congress, which dutifully passed according to party lines. Consequently, those Americans who did not want it, and did not ask for it, are now forced to live by it. The decision was made for them. Thus they are forced to get along with it. Some may call this representative government at work. A lot more call it a hijacking, a top down coup perpetrated by the few powerful and connected.
No people can feel entirely free when parliamentary warfare and majoritarian bullying settle matters of livelihood. Such a system throws sparks igniting an ideological wildfire. In such a case, neither side sees the other as a complimentary counterweight, but rather as enemies and usurpers. The resounding result is a lack of legitimacy held toward government by the public. Within this system each side’s politicians must do more to gain and hold power, taking ever increasing extreme measures to outdo the other while in power. However, there is only so much real estate in government. The ebb and flow of power and control changes with the political seasons, increasing the urgency to get matters handled and initiatives enacted before the blue skies give way to the dark clouds of misfortune. Total control, thankfully, has eluded the power hungry.
Let us consider the other point mentioned at the beginning: Demographics.
If one has been paying attention, Social Security is not en vogue. That is for the old and dying. It is food stamps and other immediate social welfare benefits that are all the rage. They are for the young and the reproductive, which have decades of child rearing and voting years left in them. As a result, vast government campaigns are being carried out across this land recruiting bodies for welfare and unemployment [2]. Latin and Hispanic populations are not only the fastest growing demographic in terms of population but are also the fastest growing demographics receiving government handouts. The vast majority is not native to America but is first generation or recent arrivals that understand our welfare system better than the average American. That is because the Mexican government, for example, equips their citizens with information on America’s entitlement system. Additionally, progressive organizations in America print millions of information brochures in every language under the sun ready for when they arrive from across our southern border. Then not only are they enrolled into welfare benefits; they are also registered to vote, and in most cases, told which party to vote for.
This is why illegal immigration is vital to the Democrat’s long-term interest; it’s a steady source of poverty and dependency, the requisite fuel for government power. And, of course, is the reason why illegal immigration will continue to plague our country because to do away with it would literally cost Democrats millions of votes.
Running parallel to this operation is the campaign against white America, and its standard-bearer, conservatism, or the more readily identifiable vehicle, for which, is the Republican Party. How many times has it been said recently that the GOP is the “white male” party, as if there is something inherently wrong with being a white male? How comfortable and bold has the media and certain pundits become using the word “white” to describe an idea or a position they which may not agree? How gleefully, in near celebratory fashion, do they become when they discuss the “tanning” of America?
Any gathering of white males, such as a campaign rally or the Republican National Convention, is deemed as a suspicious hate gathering. For example, the continuous negative use of “white” by progressive and minority talking heads is captured nicely by Mia Farrow, in explaining what she observed at a 2011 Romney/Ryan rally, “Camera pans crowd: whole bunch of white people.” Oh the humanity!
This is drastically different from the original idea behind the Obama presidency. As Victor Davis Hanson once put it, “The election of the biracial Barack Obama was supposed to usher in a new era of racial harmony. Instead, that dream is becoming a tribally polarized nightmare -by design…” [3]
That design Hanson speaks of is, of course, to marginalize white America, which is seen as the old guard, the traditional identity standing in the way of a glorious progressive future. Identity politics among minorities is nothing more than a celebration of their non-whiteness or non-traditional conformity, with strong undertones of an anti-white agenda carrying them. It plays on humanities’ most base-line behavior, which is a charged-ethnicity and tribal tendencies. The progressives in this country have exercised this demon but have done so by channeling its racialism against conservative and traditional white America. Minorities are constantly told conservative whites are their enemy, which, thereby, increases their paranoia toward white America, and increases progressives’ chances during election time [4].
Considering these things, it should be of little surprise when President Obama wins over seventy percent of the Hispanic vote and over ninety percent of the black vote. Why would Democrats anger and marginalize the white electorate that makes up over seventy percent of the population [5]? The answer is simple. They don’t need a lot of white votes to win; they need only one-third to win. What’s more, that number will decrease in the coming years as the white vote accounts for significantly less of the overall electorate.
The real question turns to what will America become when presidential elections are decided before the first campaign event has occurred. What if it becomes mathematically impossible for any conservative, let a lone a white conservative candidate, to win a national election?
Will its government and its laws be seen as legitimate to remaining traditionalists and conservatives? Will a declining majority, which is, at heart, traditional white Americans still see themselves in a country they call their own? If not, what will be their reaction?
Perhaps these are questions the progressive operatives should be asking one another before they settle on fundamentally transforming the United States of America. Once America loses its identity, which is, and always has been, the proto-historical European-American sort, will be the moment America ceases to exist.
Notes
[1] The number of moderate voters currently serving in Congress is eleven compared to 344 in 1982. Today’s eleven make up 2.5 percent of Congress.
[2] CNNMoney.com reported “More than one in seven Americans are on food stamps, but the federal government wants even more people to sign up for the safety net program” June 2012.
[3] Victor D. Hanson. “White on the Brain.” National Review. August 2012
[4] President Obama announced to a Latino crowd during the 2012 presidential election, “If Latinos sit out the election instead of saying, ‘We’re gonna punish our enemies and we’re gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us.”
[5] James Joyner argues against Victor Hanson’s point claiming the strategy to marginalize white America is self-defeating. Joyner’s point is wrong, as I pointed out in the essay; the number of white votes needed is decreasing as the minority population increases.