It was one of those odd experiences that happens when one reads the news a lot. You see the title of an article and immediately think you know what it is going to say and that you are going to disagree with it completely. That the author is one of “those people” who endlessly regurgitate the far-left mantra of “all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others”, or insist the sky is yellow, the sun is blue, and men can get pregnant.

The title of the article was “Ending ‘Race’: Here’s how America can end the sordid alliance of the state and discredited 19th-century pseudoscience.”

I took out my baseball bat (that is, fountain pen) and got ready to swing hard for the fences. I love it when people twist themselves into into knots trying to argue that race is nothing but a social construct that has no basis in biology. These are the same people that want tampons in the men’s room.

Then I read the article, and it wasn’t that bad. Nor was it overtly about refuting the biological basis of race. It was about the US Census. And while I disagree with the overarching premise- the “America as melting pot” idea- it had a number of interesting points and one piece of good news I was not aware of: starting with the 2030 census, a new “race” or category is being used: MENA- Middle Eastern and North African. This will include Jews, finally, and rightfully, splitting them off from the White category.

They say to learn something new every day, and I was pleased to learn this, even though, technically, the new category of MENA will only include Lebanese, Iranian, Egyptian, Syrian, Iraqi, and Israeli. So Jews from Europe could still call themselves “White”. Hopefully they will have the good graces not to do so.

Be that as it may, let’s face it, we generally don’t give the Census a lot of thought as it only happens once every ten years. But we should.

The History

The census has been around since 1790 and is overseen by the Bureau of the Census, which is a branch of the Department of Commerce. That should tell you something: it was established so that taxes could be levied on the various States according to their numbers—that is, their population— and a census was necessary to determine those numbers. Likewise, given that our form of government is a “representative democracy” or Republic, population numbers play a crucial role in assigning proportional representation.

But to some extent, it has also reflected American’s perception of race, and thus itself: in 1790, there were three categories: Free Whites (men and women), All Other Free Persons, and Slaves. In 1850, it was even simpler, as there were only two categories: White and Black/Mulatto. Then in 1860 other categories began to creep in: Indian and Chinese, and so on, until in 2020 there was White, Black, Hispanic, Native American/Alaskan Native, a plethora of Asian choices, and Other.

The article states that the Census as we know it now, and its definitions of “race” as defined by the Office of Management and Budget, of all things, is largely a result of the 1960s civil rights nonsense:

Having outlawed Jim Crow, the civil rights movement then split into a colorblind liberal wing led by [the gay, black] Bayard Rustin and others, who argued that the next step should be race-neutral economic reform, and a color-conscious wing, associated with Black radicals, who demanded racial quotas in hiring and university admissions and Black-majority congressional districts. The colorblind liberals lost the argument.

Radical Chicano activists like those of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF) jumped on the racial-preferences bandwagon and argued for the recognition of a pan-Hispanic “race” whose members would be eligible for race-based affirmative action like Blacks. Some “white ethnics” like Irish Americans and Italian Americans argued unsuccessfully that they, too, should be included in affirmative action, because their groups had been discriminated against by Anglo American Protestants for generations.

To forestall conflicting and arbitrary racial and ethnic classifications, Caspar Weinberger, secretary of health, education, and welfare in the Nixon administration, ordered the Federal Interagency Committee on Education (FICE) to come up with a consistent system of classifying Americans by race and ethnicity. The recommendations led to OMB Statistical Policy Directive No. 15, adopted in 1977, which mandated the classification of all Americans as members of one of five official races: American Indian or Alaskan Native; Asian or Pacific Islander; Black; White; and Hispanic.

The changes for the 2030 census include splitting the Asian and Pacific Islander categories, and creating the Middle Eastern-North African designation.

The Money

Of course, it’s no longer about collecting taxes per se, nor entirely about apportioning political power- which we’ll come to in a moment: it’s about doling out tax-money to special interests.

The Project on Government Oversight found that in 2020, federal assistance programs relied on census data to spend $2.1 trillion in federal funds to “state agencies, local governments, nonprofit organizations, educational institutions, companies, and households.” Notice how it is always “federal funds” and not “your money”. Basically, any group which can point to Census data to show that they are non-White, and thus a minority, is immediately conferred “special status” by our government for the purposes of boarding the gravy-train of tax-payer dollars.

Let’s play buzzword bingo. According to the Urban Institute: “This new designation will allow these stakeholders to better ensure their work leads to more equitable and targeted support. MENA Americans’ recognition as a distinct marginalized identity grants them legal recognition for policies that were created to protect racial minorities… policymakers will be able to better assess how to allocate its trillions of dollars to meet the MENA community’s unique situations.”

As the original article points out, “…accuracy of data is not the point of America’s system of official racial classifications and never has been. Since the 1970s, the unspoken rationale for America’s system of half a dozen official pseudo-races is to identify Americans eligible for rewards from the ever-expanding racial patronage racket pushed by the post-New Deal Democratic Party.”

The Power

But of course, as mentioned above, it’s about political power too.

The biggest danger to identity politics, the key strategy in the Democratic playbook, is assimilation. Fearing that new immigrants, after a few generations, would lose their distinct identities and merge with whites in voting on the basis of interests other than their racial identity, leftists have systematically taken over key institutions “like the federal civil service, the universities, and the media, to brainwash immigrants and their descendants into assimilating, not to a transracial American melting pot, but to government-sponsored, panethnic pseudo-nationalities.” In other words, keeping Americans separated by “race”, or more specifically, by “victim” and “victimizer” categories, keeps the money flowing into their special interest coffers and voting for whatever mentally challenged automaton the Democrats put on the ballot. It’s a simple equation: Working class Whites increasingly won’t vote for woketard Democrats, so replace the White vote with a non-White vote.

“For half a century, Democratic strategists have hoped that immigrants from Mexico, Cuba, Puerto Rico, and other countries, instead of following Irish, German, Italian, and other white groups down the road of assimilation and intermarriage, might function as cohesive racial voting blocs like the Black American bloc, which since the civil rights revolution has voted overwhelmingly for Democrats. For the last generation progressive Democrats have therefore shrugged off the party’s loss of white working-class voters, telling themselves that they could compensate for the losses by importing nonwhite voters from other countries who will vote strictly on party lines…”

All good points, but this is where I begin to disagree with the article. Again, the overarching premises are: “America is a melting pot, and that’s a good thing” and “racial distinctions are arbitrary and unnecessary”.

I don’t subscribe to either.

The Truth

The article’s main objection to how the Census defines race is as follows: “The seven official races that are scheduled to be identified in the 2030 census are as arbitrarily defined and ludicrous as the former set of five used by OMB and the Census Bureau from 1977 to 2024. Even without the inclusion of Pacific Islanders, the “Asian” category is as absurd as ever, lumping together South Asians with East Asian nationalities like Chinese, Koreans, and Japanese. Jews, Arabs, and Iranians…will cease to be “white” for U.S. government purposes and will now be “nonwhites” in the MENA category. The “white” category will continue to exclude blond, blue-eyed Paraguayans of exclusively German descent—they are “Hispanic or Latino,” you see—but will continue to include ethnicities as diverse as Portuguese and Danes.”

First, rather obviously, informed decisions require information. Knowing what sorts of people are living inside your country’s borders is essential. From an administrative point of view, the racial distinctions used by the census are indeed somewhat arbitrary, but necessary. A line has to be drawn somewhere, if for no other reason than accounting purposes. Furthermore, there is nothing preventing the aforementioned “blond, blue-eyed Paraguayans of exclusively German descent” from checking the “white” box.

Secondly, and more to the point: America is not, nor should it be, a “transracial melting pot”. It is a White nation. We do not need non-Whites to assimilate. We need them to conform: to our laws, our culture, and our national spirit. Assimilation dilutes us and does a disservice to them. Let them keep their culture. Let them live in their own communities and do their own thing, at their own expense. They’re not White and never will be.

No, the real harm in the assimilation paradigm is that it flows both ways: Whites are increasingly expected to adopt and celebrate the subversive beliefs, behavior, and culture of those who wash-up on our shores, while denigrating our own history and achievements. We must put a stop to this. Celebrate being White. Speak proudly of our culture and its achievements. Stand firm in the belief that America was founded by Whites, for Whites.

This is where the racial information gathered by the Census can be useful, if used appropriately. For example, I live near a city which the 2020 census says has a Black population of about 5%. Given that small percentage, it makes no sense to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars renaming a street after Martin Luther King. He’s not an icon or a racial representative of the White majority living in that city. The White people there would be better served promoting and celebrating their own culture: how about Neil Armstrong Avenue, or Daniel Boone Boulevard? Personally, I’d vote for Adolph Hitler Street, or G.L. Rockwell Road. Not bloody likely now, but with persistence and determination, maybe someday.

Amerika Erwache!

Subscribe