Rob Long · Sep 1, 2011 at 2:03pm

As the 2010 Census data gets crunched, some interesting things emerge.  We now know what we always suspected -- America is becoming a lot less white, and a lot more brown. 

Notice, though, the spin on this new data from the moderate-left.  From the Brookings Institute:

The latest wave of 2010 Census data, released this week, confirms what earlier surveys have strongly hinted: virtually half of recent births in the U.S. are minorities. We are becoming a more globalized nation than most Americans have experienced in their lifetimes. The great demographic change has potential long term benefits for our population growth in terms of our economic competitiveness in the international marketplace. But these changes, coming so quickly and evolving from the “bottom up” of our age structure, may exacerbate existing cultural generation gaps, as older, largely white generations may be slow to recognize the promise of this change.

Wait.  What?  Why exactly will older, "largely white" generations have a problem with this?  They don't say.  It's just understood, in some quarters, that "largely white" means "racist."

It's unclear to me, at least, why a vibrant and more globalized generation of Americans means trouble.  As long as we maintain a solid sense of the American identity and American values, we should be all right.  It won't be without challenges, of course, but notice how the gang at Brookings frames the problem:

Older Americans fear cuts to Medicare and Social Security, but they need to understand the long term benefits for the country and for them that will come from providing younger Americans the wherewithal for good education, housing support, and health care. Our young, diverse population will be the backbone of our labor force and will provide future business and government leadership, in a new American demographic era.

So, for the establishment Left, it's all a question of fighting over the spoils of government.  Old white people want handouts -- forgetting, for a moment, that those old white people paid into a system -- but they're just going to have to suck it up, because young people need the handouts more, in the form of those ominously vague terms, "good education, housing support, and health care."

Why young people need "health care" more than old people is a mystery.  Why the Brookings Institution doesn't realize that a big part of our economic collapse was precisely because the government did offer young people "housing support," is another baffler.

And why does Brookings predict that a browner American requires more awful, destructive, inefficient federal spending?  

  • Comment Filters
Contributor Comments
Member Comments
Comment Popularity

Comments :

Mel Foil
Joined
Jun '10
etoiledunord

Thankfully, a lot of recent immigrants still have a healthy distrust of government. They should hold on to it.

Edited on Sep 1, 2011 at 2:15pm
CJRun
Joined
Dec '10
CJRun

The cultural generation gap does concern me.

I have attended rowdy concerts with young family members, for years, but became very uncomfortable during a fabulous Papa Roach show when my young nieces were lofted over strangers heads and my culturally different brother-in-law told me to let it go, man.  I cannot imagine the horror their grandparents would have suffered, had they seen that.

Earlier today I saw something (probably on Big Hollywood) that was just stunning, but was being promoted as a breakout of pro-Americanism.  It was interesting to watch, but I felt I was watching something just one tick away from devolving into a full-on race riot.  (not linking as it is completely beyond CoC, but I believe the comedian's name was Katt Williams)

The cultural-generation gap I witness is going to be very difficult for my parnets generation, and even mine, to adjust to.  I am so worried we are going to wind up like those lost older citizens of Great Britain, watching their country devolve into mayhem.  Even the young that are tenth generation American are being influenced by an unassimilated culture that senses no familiar boundaries.

Erik Larsen
Joined
Jan '11
Erik Larsen

I dislike race based politics immensely.  I always crings when I hear CNN talk about what something "means" for Black America or Latino voters, as if they have no capacity for independent thought.  I have more in common with a co-worker from Singapore (brown, with a colonial background) than with a hypothetical Slav from an easternmost European country (white).  Ugh, ugh, ugh ugh - I hate being classified! 

Western Chauvinist
Joined
Dec '10
Western Chauvinist

Rob Long

The great demographic change has potential long term benefits for our population growth in terms of our economic competitiveness in the international marketplace.

Why?  Because the growth is among brown people?  Yes, it's too bad America wasn't browner sooner or we would have been a lot more competitive in the international marketplace years ago!  The Left is so racist and so clueless.

raycon
Joined
Oct '10
raycon

In the book of I Samuel the Jews said that they wanted a king "just like the other nations have".  They got Saul.

We have now imported the people of the other nations, without regard to assimilation, and we now have their king.  Congratulations.  Just like the Jews in the Old Testament, we will have our many years of suffering under our new kings.

midnightgolfer
Joined
Aug '11
midnightgolfer

It's just the same assumptions that lead true racists to immediately jump for (false) accusations that their political enemies are "starving" the "children" with "cuts" to "nutrition" programs.

Joseph Eagar
Joined
Oct '10
Joseph Eagar

The dirty little secret of sociologists is that diversity makes existing members of a community distrust each other as much as it makes them distrust the new people (Jon Haidt, the centrist sociologist, writes about this).  This is why Teddy Roosevelt came up with New Nationalism, which he used to assimilate Italians, Poles, and Irish immigrates into American society.

Of course, our elite hates even benign, multi-ethnic American nationalism, while all the while complaining that people just don't form healthy communities anymore.  They want an impossibility: a non-nationalist multi-cultural society where people form safe, trusted communities with high social cohesion.  That just isn't possible.  At some point, we either embrace American-style nationalism and assimilation, or we re-segregate.  There is no sustainable middle ground.

KC Mulville
Joined
Jan '11
KC Mulville

Wait a minute. Someone please explain to me how "people of color" make us more globalized?

If a black kid is born in America, that says absolutely nothing about the rest of the world, or our relationship to it. If an Asian kid or Hispanic kid is born in this country, is that supposed to make us more "globally aware?"

You know all these non-Caucasians? They happen to be Americans also, and are no more "international" than me, a mick from Philly.

Edited on Sep 1, 2011 at 3:37pm
Aaron Miller
Joined
May '10
Aaron Miller

I, for one, am looking forward to being the lone white person in a crowd and being accused of oppressing helpless minorities. That's power, baby!

I love how Frey equates a growing hispanic population and declining white population with "becoming a more globalized nation".[edit: You read my mind, KC]

Edited on Sep 1, 2011 at 3:38pm
Joseph Eagar
Joined
Oct '10
Joseph Eagar

Oh, I forgot to make my point.  The Brookings institute is basically admitting that unless something changes we will see ethnic strife in America, and pretty serious strife too.  I suspect they know all of this, but are too cowardly to come up with a serious plan for maintaining social cohesion. 

KC Mulville
Joined
Jan '11
KC Mulville
Aaron Miller: .[edit: You read my mind, KC] 

Truth is public domain!

Chris Campion
Joined
Jul '11
Chris Campion

As usual, Brookings paints the world as they would like to tell us how things should be, not as they truly are.  We must provide massive federal outlays for "housing support" and "health care", because, y'know, we just should.  How was that any different than the massive federal outlays spent on "housing support" and "health care" for the millions of Americans, white or brown, that qualified for whatever handout, er, "value-streamed support system" that had been previously declared as absolutely necessary in order to create more, what, equality, I guess?

It would be nice if Brookings realized that anyone who's willing to work for a living, obey the law, and have ice cream on Sundays is living the American dream - which is what millions of immigrants and 2nd or 3rd-generation descendants of immigrants want.  They simply want a better life.  What Brookings want is a better life as dictated by a federal patriarchy, long intent on buying votes by sub-dividing America into demographics that favor politicians that actively endorse this class segregation, as long as it keeps their pasty cans in comfy, taxpayer-provided chairs in DC.

I think that's about it.

Douglas
Joined
Mar '11
Douglas

Seems there's quite a bit of glee among liberals about the diminishing number of whites.

Terrell David
Joined
Jun '11
Terrell David

Leave it to Brookings and every other liberal entity to point out groups and work to pit them against each other.  Then, throw government money at the lesser group (victims).

Casey
Joined
Mar '11
Casey

As you can see by my profile image, I am uniquely qualified to speak out on issues of racial harmony.

First, Diversity simply is what is.  To be Pro-Diversity is simply to pat oneself on the back for accepting reality.

Second, Diversity is not a driver of success.  Diversity is a byproduct of success.  The more successful we are, the more outsiders we attract, the more diverse we become.


Would you like to comment on this Conversation?

Become a Member for $3.67 a month.

Join the Conversation
Already a member? Sign In
Loading
Welcome Visitor

Already a Member?
Please Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Join Ricochet today!

Already a Member? Sign In