• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Majority of American Babies Are Now Minorities

I've made this point before, on other forums: The USA isn't a melting pot - it's a stew.

No, it is a melting pot. It's just that many people misunderstand what the term means.

It does not mean that whomever comes here will be transformed into some definition of "american" that is enduring and unalterable. Instead, like a real melting pot, what comes out of it will change as what goes into it changes.

"America is God's Crucible, the great Melting-Pot where all the races of Europe are melting and reforming... Germans and Frenchmen, Irishmen and Englishmen, Jews and Russians - into the Crucible with you all! God is making the American."'

Note that it does not say "God is making you American"
 
It used to be that first-generation immigrants would cling to their roots, while second-generation tried to forget it, and third generation tried to remember it.

Today, more and more immigrant generations refuse to melt with the rest.

What leads to you believe this?

I've made this point before, on other forums: The USA isn't a melting pot - it's a stew.

Yummy!
 
Which part, the former or the latter?

That current immigrants refuse to assimilate. Every past wave of immigrants was accused of the same thing, and they all assimilated. I live among assimilating immigrants. I see it every day. That's mere anecdote, of course, but I'm wondering what data you have.
 
It is not that current immigrants are "refusing to assimilate." Rather, one could make the case that the K-12 system no longer makes a concerted effort to assimilate students into the dominant Anglo-Saxon traditions (as was the case in the early 20th century).

Schools in the early 20th century indoctrinated the children of Eastern European immigrants into the culture of mainstream Anglo-Saxon America. In other words, the children of Poles, Hungarians, Italians, etc. were actively taught in schools with the belief that they need to inculcate Anglo-Saxon norms in order to function in this society.

I am Indian-American (though far prefer the simple word of American), and immigrated to the US as a child. I can honestly say that while I may have beliefs and traditions unique to my heritage, I respect the principles of America as much as any other citizen. Suggesting that immigrants "are not assimilating" is only further polarizing an already divided country.
 
I agree with that.....

but it seems as though people are celebrating racial uniformity... as if it's a virtue or something...weird stuff.
I guess the color of your skin really does matter to people.
<shrugs>



Some racists will always pre-judge others by the color of their skin.



"The only race on this planet is the human race."
 
The article is flawed because it automatically lumps in all hispanics as "non white minorities". It doesn't take into account the hispanics who are racially white. Those like Ted Cruz, Rubio, and myself for that matter.

That said, the conservative reaction to this is amusing. While they are constantly hollering and screaming about how supposedly racist liberals/Democrats are, they sure seem kind of pissed off at the possible notion of whites becoming a minority in America. I mean if they are as color blind as they claim, why do some of them seem upset? The comment section on breitbart is particularly amusing, and of course extremely racist.
 
Do go on.... :cool:



Minor point:

The fertility rate for whites was 1.9 in 1990, and is now around... 1.8. RUN FOR THE HILLS!!! :D

African-American fertility rates declined from 2.5 to 2.0. Non-white Hispanics, from 3.0 to 2.4. Asians, 2.0 down to 1.7.

Meawhile, whites and non-white Hispanics have an infant mortality rate around 5.3 per 1,000. For blacks, it's 12.2.

It's not a huge drop, certainly not in the past ~20 years. It's that Hispanics still have more children than whites and with the same infant mortality rates, and of course almost all immigrants are now non-white.



tumblr_losovterVJ1qf7r5lo1_500.gif


I think we'll be OK when whites have a little less control over culture.

You sure you're not worried about whites having less political power...?



Or South Africa. :D

Let's reflect on this for a moment. Circa 1900, "whites" actually mean "descended from the English and maybe French settlers," and all those impoverished immigrant Jews, Italians, Germans, Irish, Poles and others were the scum of the American earth. Today, all Europeans are mainstream and classified as "white," dominate white culture, and have substantial political power. Even in the 1950s and 1960s, there was a fair amount of discrimination, prejudice and stereotyping of Irish, Italians, Jews et al.

Has this ethnic shift made the US worse since 1900? What does "white culture" mean anyway?

I've heard a lot of talk from right wingers about this mythical "white culture" that apparently every white person on the entire planet seem to adhere to, but not one single right winger can actually explain what "white culture" supposedly is. I guess it's something only the brilliant minds at FOX can explain.
 
Hispanics in america and south of the border are having less children and in some places are already about the same as whites. I doubt with that trend in mind that they will be able to really get much of any majority status unless immigration stays high. Anyway, having less children than is needed to maintain your population is stupid and shortsighted.
 
Last edited:
The fertility rate for whites was 1.9 in 1990, and is now around... 1.8.

Among college educated white women, the rate is presently 1.6 (for reference, China - with the One Child Policy - is sitting at 1.5, and Japan - which is in full on population free fall - is at 1.4). The overall rate for the whole country is around 1.9.

The Wall Street Journal - America's Baby Bust

Either way, the overall result of this is the same. Whites are dying off, and minorities are taking their place at a somewhat alarming rate.

distribution-of-u-s-population-by-raceethnicity-2010-and-2050-disparities.png


You sure you're not worried about whites having less political power...?

Is there any reason I shouldn't be? I mean... Let's not quibble around reality here. Pragmatically speaking, power matters. If we have less, that simply means someone else has more.

In case you haven't noticed, quite a few of the (currently) minority groups in this country, and their political agenda setters, would like absolutely nothing better than to use any potential reversal of such power to make whites "pay" in some way or another for the various slights and hardships for which they perceive us as being responsible. That's not going to magically change simply because there are more of them and fewer of us. In all likelihood, such a state of affairs will serve to exacerbate tensions. Transition usually does.

This isn't a "melting pot." Increasingly, it is becoming a country of racial "tribes," constantly in conflict with one another. It exists as such primarily because the political powers that be benefit from encouraging such conflict.

Or South Africa

Case in point of the above. South African whites are basically being all but driven out of the country. Some black extremist groups are even calling for outright ethnic cleansing.

The same thing happened to Lebanese Christians when the Muslims took over.

Will anything that extreme happen in the US? I doubt it. However, I have no doubt that the Al Sharptons and other assorted populist hate mongers of the American political system will leap at the opportunity to "get even" in some way or another.

Circa 1900, "whites" actually mean "descended from the English and maybe French settlers," and all those impoverished immigrant Jews, Italians, Germans, Irish, Poles and others were the scum of the American earth. Today, all Europeans are mainstream and classified as "white,"

In grand total, Irish and Italians only make up 15%-20% of the "white" US population. They make up somewhere around 10% of the total population including all races. Other ethnicities (barring the Germans, who have a somewhat unique situation) tend to be a lot smaller. They also all arrived at different times, and there was enough of a language and culture barrier between the different groups that they were never able to form any kind of monolithic cultural block that was capable of threatening the majority culture. They really had no choice but to assimilate as such.

As the chart I posted above shows, that's really not the case where this latest wave of immigration is concerned. Latinos are set to make up 30% to 40% of the total population all by themselves by 2050. They're all arriving at roughly the same time as well, and have cultures and languages that are all largely homogeneous with one another.

I'm sorry, but, given those facts, the odds are that they're all going to wind up identifying a Hell of a lot more with one another than with the existing culture. The introduction of such a new monolithic cultural and political block into the existing political and social order will almost certainly cause significant complications.

I've heard a lot of talk from right wingers about this mythical "white culture" that apparently every white person on the entire planet seem to adhere to, but not one single right winger can actually explain what "white culture" supposedly is.

No, it's actually largely unique to the United States. What it represents is basically the melding of all different European ethnicities and nationalities into a single, highly inter-bred, English speaking culture made of up of pan-European influences.

Make no mistake. The primary baseline of that culture is undeniably English Protestant, as they were the original majority influence. However, it has borrowed elements from all of the peoples of various different cultures it has assimilated - primarily food and holidays.

If we could somehow pull off a similar trick with non-Europeans, that would be awesome, IMO. However, that doesn't seem to be what's happening. We're getting combatant "racial tribes" instead.
 
Last edited:
We founded it, we developed it, and we've run it and made up the majority of the population for the last 200 years. For all intents and purposes, it's "our" country, built in our own image.

Good on you, man. Over the course of the last few weeks I painted some pictures, went to a bar, watched tv, got drunk, caught a couple movies and wasted some time on the internet. You, meanwhile, were creating America.


That's not to say that we cannot, or should not, "share" it with those we are able to do so, or that it should not change in some regards to adapt to new arrivals (just as they should change to adapt to it). However, there's a fine line between "sharing," and simply handing the whole thing over on a silver platter.

If we're not careful, we're going to wind up doing the latter. It has, as I've already pointed out, happened before.
 
Good on you, man. Over the course of the last few weeks I painted some pictures, went to a bar, watched tv, got drunk, caught a couple movies and wasted some time on the internet. You, meanwhile, were creating America.

Are you going to deny that the original settlers, soldiers, and politicians responsible for bringing together, and subsequently building, what we now refer to as "America," were primarily white?

I'm in that group, so that technically qualifies me under the auspices of "we." Frankly, even beyond that, some branches of my family have been here since the early 1700s and late 1600s, so I can claim "we" in the sense of my ancestry as well.
 
Are you going to deny that the original settlers, soldiers, and politicians responsible for bringing together, and subsequently building, what we now refer to as "America," were primarily white?

I'm in that group, so that technically qualifies me under the auspices of "we." Frankly, even beyond that, some branches of my family have been here since the early 1700s and late 1600s, so I can claim "we" in the sense of my ancestry as well.

By all means, take pride in your ancestry. I certainly do. I can, as I'm sure you can with your own ethnicity, point to many accomplishments in my Jewish ancestry. However, it's equally important to not let yourself get carried away by that pride either, and try to remember instead that whatever your predecessors accomplished, you yourself did not do those things, and its definitely not a free ticket for you to reign supreme over a land and people.
 
Hispanics in america and south of the border are having less children and in some places are already about the same as whites. I doubt with that trend in mind that they will be able to really get much of any majority status unless immigration stays high. Anyway, having less children than is needed to maintain your population is stupid and shortsighted.

True. If immigration slows down or stops, this could ultimately wind up being a non-issue.

Such a state of will only create different problems, however- namely in that we will be in exactly the same "population decline" situation currently being faced by Western Europe and Japan.

By all means, take pride in your ancestry. I certainly do. I can, as I'm sure you can with your own ethnicity, point to many accomplishments in my Jewish ancestry. However, it's equally important to not let yourself get carried away by that pride either, and try to remember instead that whatever your predecessors accomplished, you yourself did not do those things, and its definitely not a free ticket for you to reign supreme over a land and people.

Also true. However, as I said, I've got no problem with "sharing."

What I have a problem with is the fact that we, as a people, seem to be more or less simply "giving up" and letting another group take over for us. At best, that's going to cause some problems. At worst, they might very well be rather severe.
 
'Racial and ethnic minorities now surpass non-Hispanic whites as the largest group of American children under 5 years old, the Census Bureau said Thursday.

The reversal in 2014 marked a milestone in a trend toward a more diverse U.S. that's projected to continue. Births outnumbered deaths for all ethnic and racial groups last year except for non-Hispanic whites, the new Census data show. A report earlier this year projected that by 2044, today's majority white population will be the minority.'


The Majority of American Babies Are Now Minorities - Bloomberg Business



Excellent.

I am as WASP as it gets and I think it will be great for America to truly be a melting pot.
Is the article referring to all minorities as a single group?
 
True. If immigration slows down or stops, this could ultimately wind up being a non-issue.

Such a state of will only create different problems, however- namely in that we will be in exactly the same "population decline" situation currently being faced by Western Europe and Japan.



Also true. However, as I said, I've got no problem with "sharing."

What I have a problem with is the fact that we, as a people, seem to be more or less simply "giving up" and letting another group take over for us. At best, that's going to cause some problems. At worst, they might very well be rather severe.

what's with all this "group" talk? I thought conservatives see everyone as individuals?
 
We founded it, we developed it, and we've run it and made up the majority of the population for the last 200 years. For all intents and purposes, it's "our" country, built in our own image.

No. Not unless you think a 2nd generation immigrant from western Europe has more claim to the US than a black person whose family has been there for hundreds of years, or a 5th generation Japanese-American, simply because they happen to be white.
 
Also true. However, as I said, I've got no problem with "sharing."

What I have a problem with is the fact that we, as a people, seem to be more or less simply "giving up" and letting another group take over for us. At best, that's going to cause some problems. At worst, they might very well be rather severe.

Okay, but what precisely is the cost of that? Let's say the future majority of the United States is no longer European Caucasian, but Hispanic, black or Inuit. What price do we as Caucasians pay for that?
 
Last edited:
Okay, but what precisely is the cost of that? Let's say the future majority of the United States is no longer European Caucasian, but Hispanic, black or Inuit. What price do we as Caucasians pay for that?

Why should they pay a price ?

I don't care what the color of a Babies skin in. I think all Babies are adorable. What matters is what that baby is going to grow into. Is he going to be able to graduate and go to college ? Is there going to be a strong economy so he can go out and support himself and his family ??

The Democrats should stop being so concerned with the color of people's skin and focus on building a better America that includes offering up some smeblence of a future for all of our new humans.
 
Why should they pay a price ?

I don't care what the color of a Babies skin in. I think all Babies are adorable. What matters is what that baby is going to grow into. Is he going to be able to graduate and go to college ? Is there going to be a strong economy so he can go out and support himself and his family ??

The Democrats should stop being so concerned with the color of people's skin and focus on building a better America that includes offering up some smeblence of a future for all of our new humans.

Maybe you should consider the context of the discussion between me and Gathomas.
 
We founded it, we developed it, and we've run it and made up the majority of the population for the last 200 years. For all intents and purposes, it's "our" country, built in our own image.

That's not to say that we cannot, or should not, "share" it with those we are able to do so, or that it should not change in some regards to adapt to new arrivals (just as they should change to adapt to it). However, there's a fine line between "sharing," and simply handing the whole thing over on a silver platter.

If we're not careful, we're going to wind up doing the latter. It has, as I've already pointed out, happened before.

I'm curious, have you traced your ancestry back and found that your specific bloodline helped found America and build it up through generations? Or did your family come over on a boat sometime in the 20th century? If the latter is the case, why does being white entitle you to the accomplishments of other whites?

Also, how many blacks are descendents of slaves in America? The slaves collectively did billions of hours of really crappy work to help build America. Does that not qualify? Their descendents at least have a direct relationship to founding America and fueling its progress and prosperity.

What about the cheap migrant labor that has built countless large scale projects in America for pennies? What about all the non whites that played a role? It wasn't just whites doing things.
 
Okay, but what precisely is the cost of that? Let's say the future majority of the United States is no longer European Caucasian, but Hispanic, black or Inuit. What price do we as Caucasians pay for that?

As I pointed out to Visbek, you can't expect to have a transition like that happen without social upheaval. You can't upend more than 200 years of established ethnic and sociocultural order without collateral damage.

There are already more race-baiting agitators out there than you can shake a stick at, after all, who - for various ideological reasons - would like nothing better than to put whitey "in his place" if the opportunity were to present itself. I fully expect them to make use of their new found electoral power to do so if current trends continue, and the white vote declines to the point of irrelevancy.

Now, will that be "the end of the world as we know it?" In all likelihood, no. However, it probably will make for a less than ideal couple of decades or centuries for my children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren.

Beyond the realm of the personal, on the other hand? Well... As much as I hate to say it, where my own ideology is concerned, these developments might not actually be such a bad turn in the grand scheme of things. While Latinos tend to be a bit more Left-leaning on the economic front, they are also more religious than whites on average, more culturally conservative, and carry a substantially better work ethic and sense of community with them.

If "white" culture is truly so rotten as to be completely unsalvageable, I frankly wouldn't mind Latinos being the ones to replace us. Things could be a lot worse.

Make no mistake, however. It's still problematic and a damn shame all the same. We never should have allowed ourselves to fall this far to begin with.
 
Last edited:
Among college educated white women....
College educated white women ≠ all white women.

Meanwhile, the evidence shows quite clearly that whites are not "dying off."


Is there any reason I shouldn't be? I mean... Let's not quibble around reality here. Pragmatically speaking, power matters. If we have less, that simply means someone else has more.
Yes, you should not be worried, because:

1) No one controls demographics.
2) As ethnic groups get larger, it is perfectly natural for them to demand more representation and political influence.
3) There is plenty of room for common ground. E.g. we all want a better economy, we all want to be safe. Many people, of all ethnic groups, want justice for everyone.

By the way, wasn't it the conservatives bashing liberals for indulging in identity politics for so many years? I'm losing track. ;)


In case you haven't noticed, quite a few of the (currently) minority groups in this country, and their political agenda setters, would like absolutely nothing better than to use any potential reversal of such power to make whites "pay"....
There's a handful of African-American extremists who are interested in monetary restitution for slavery; I see little support for this, even in the black community.

I see no indication that Hispanics or Chinese or Irish or Italians plan to extract a pound of flesh from "The Whites" for past injustices.


This isn't a "melting pot." Increasingly, it is becoming a country of racial "tribes," constantly in conflict with one another. It exists as such primarily because the political powers that be benefit from encouraging such conflict.
So what?

There is no obligation for any immigrants to assimilate to the existing culture. All they have to do is respect our political institutions and processes, and it seems like they do a decent job of that so far.

Nor is this any different than in the past. Various groups assimilate to various degrees. E.g. American Jews range from those who are highly assimilated, to those who live in Kiryas Joel -- where they refuse to adopt to most American norms, and arguably try to subvert the local political process to their own ends. Speaking of, are YOU going to tell the Hasidic Orthodox Jews of Kiryas Joel that they should forsake their religious beliefs because they live in America? Good luck with that one....


In grand total, Irish and Italians only make up 15%-20% of the "white" US population.... They really had no choice but to assimilate as such.
Odd that you say that, because many of those European groups were seen, at the time, as an existential threat to America. Many whites did not want them to assimilate; they didn't want them in the country at all.

That said, I hardly see it as a good thing for an ethnic group to be forced to assimilate. A community should not be forced to give up their culture and values, just because it makes a bunch of WASPS all nervous.


Latinos are set to make up 30% to 40% of the total population all by themselves by 2050. They're all arriving at roughly the same time as well, and have cultures and languages that are all largely homogeneous with one another.
I don't see much difference between Irish and Hispanic patterns of immigration. The numbers were consistently around 50,000 per year for nearly 100 years, with a big spike between 1843 and 1855:

immigrantChart.gif


Nor are Hispanics a monolithic block. Mexicans, Hondurans, Nicaraguans, Colombians, they are all distinct groups. Even within those nationalities are different ethnic groups, different political views, and so on.


Make no mistake. The primary baseline of that culture is undeniably English Protestant, as they were the original majority influence. However, it has borrowed elements from all of the peoples of various different cultures it has assimilated - primarily food and holidays. If we could somehow pull off a similar trick with non-Europeans, that would be awesome, IMO.
So your idea of an "awesome" triumph of American culture is... Chipotle?

Screw that. Citizens have every right to adhere to their old cultures; to generate new cultural relationships; to refuse to culturally assimilate, if they so choose. America is not about everyone becoming white, it is about freedom and liberty.
 
As I pointed out to Visbek, you can't expect to have a transition like that happen without social upheaval. You can't upend more than 200 years of established ethnic and sociocultural order without collateral damage.
News flash! Our nation has had plenty of social upheaval that had nothing to do with demographics. E.g. the social upheaval of the 1960s was disruptive, far more so than any waves of immigration (albeit much shorter), and we came out OK.


There are already more race-baiting agitators out there than you can shake a stick at, after all, who - for various ideological reasons - would like nothing better than to put whitey "in his place"....
lol

So because you don't like Al Sharpton, everyone who isn't white should stop having kids? Does that mean that if I don't like Mike Huckabee, we should tell all evangelical Christians to start using birth control?


Now, will that be "the end of the world as we know it?" In all likelihood, no. However, it probably will make for a less than ideal couple of decades or centuries for my children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren.
worlds-smallest-violin.jpg



If "white" culture is truly so rotten as to be completely unsalvageable, I frankly wouldn't mind Latinos being the ones to replace us. Things could be a lot worse.

Make no mistake, however. It's still problematic and a damn shame all the same. We never should have allowed ourselves to fall this far to begin with.
Riiiight. When in doubt, bash a social change you happen to dislike with a bit of declinism.

I mean, really. Does that ever work? Has anyone said "wow, if whites don't have more kids soon, we'll be outnumbered. Honey, get rid of the condoms!"
 
'Racial and ethnic minorities now surpass non-Hispanic whites as the largest group of American children under 5 years old, the Census Bureau said Thursday.

The reversal in 2014 marked a milestone in a trend toward a more diverse U.S. that's projected to continue. Births outnumbered deaths for all ethnic and racial groups last year except for non-Hispanic whites, the new Census data show. A report earlier this year projected that by 2044, today's majority white population will be the minority.'


The Majority of American Babies Are Now Minorities - Bloomberg Business



Excellent.

I am as WASP as it gets and I think it will be great for America to truly be a melting pot.

That's a statement that negates itself, doesn't it?

And America has always been a melting pot, from the very beginning. Some additions refuse to melt these days.
 
Back
Top Bottom