White fright: the future of the West’s white majorities

White fright: the future of the West’s white majorities, by Eric Kaufmann, in The Australian.

In the West, even without immigration, we’re becoming mixed race. This is not speculation but is virtually guaranteed by the rates of intermarriage occurring in many Western countries. …

In two centuries, few people living in urban areas of the West will have an unmixed racial background. …

Whites are already a minority in most major cities of North America. Together with New Zealand, North America is projected to be “majority minority” by 2050, with Western Europe and Australia following suit later in the century. …

People who oppose this have personality defects, apparently:

Those with a conservative psychological make-up wish to maintain continuity with the past. For them, ethnic change is the irritant, not levels of diversity. Voters with an authoritarian profile, by contrast, seek order and security. Diversity, whether ethnic or ideological, however long its provenance, is problematic because it disrupts a sense of harmony and cohesion. … Many people have fond memories of youth, viewing this time as their halcyon days. …

The political environment is changing fast:

Today’s young ­people are growing up with greater diversity, so begin with more polyglot memories. With some exceptions, they are less likely to support anti-immigration politics.

The loss of white ethno-cultural confidence manifests itself in other ways. Among the most important is a growing unwillingness to indulge the anti-white ideology of the cultural Left. When whites were an overwhelming majority, empirically unsupported generalisations about whites could be brushed off as amusing and mischievous but ultimately harmless. As whites decline, fewer are willing to abide such attacks.

Marxism through diversity:

At the same time, white decline emboldens the cultural Left, with its dream of radical social transformation. …

Today, left-modernism’s most zealous exponents are those seeking to consecrate the university campus as a sacred space devoted to the mission of replacing “whiteness” with diversity. …

To hanker after homogeneity and stab­ility is perceived as narrow-minded and racist by liberals. Yet diversity falls flat for many because we’re not all wired the same way. Right-wing populism, which champions the cultural interests of group-oriented whites, has halted and reversed the multicultural consensus that held sway between the 60s and late 90s. This is leading to a polarisation between those who accept and those who reject the ideology of diversity. ..

(Fake cover, but funny)

Is this vision of the future all they have to offer?

We in the West are becoming less like homogeneous Iceland and more like homogeneous mixed-race Turkmenistan. But to get there we’ll be passing through a phase where we’ll move closer to multicultural Guyana or Mauritius. The challenge is to enable conservative whites to see a future for themselves in whiteshift — the mixture of many non-whites into the white group through voluntary assimilation.

Name me one other ethnic group, other than whites, which is:

  • Discouraged by the PC western elites from any form of positive identity or consciousness. Compare to the positive encouragement of say Black Lives Matter, La Raza, Australian Aboriginal groups, etc.
  • Discouraged by western PC policy from having any country of their own. All white countries are encouraged to have huge levels of immigration from other groups — the Great Replacement. Giving up their countries is not demanded of any other ethnic group. Sure, the Jews have Israel, but the left hates that too.
  • Demonized in the PC MSM. Every other racial group gets the positive treatment.

Who voted for this? Why is no discussion allowed? Why isn’t the obviously false blank state theory allowed to be discussed? Why doesn’t the left acknowledge that the immigrants overwhelmingly vote for them? Read the article linked above for clues.