My thesis tonight is that in response to the growth of Diversity, the two major parties promoted pro-Diversity programs and ideologies that have had massive consequences, sometimes unfortunate.
Let’s start on September 11, 2001. I sat down that evening and wrote a news article that began:
Bush had called for laxer airport security …
Ironically, in an attempt to appeal to the growing number of Arab-American and Muslim voters, exactly eleven months ago George W. Bush called for weakening airport security procedures aimed at deterring hijackers.
On Oct. 11, 2000, during the second presidential debate, the Republican candidate … said …, “Arab-Americans are racially profiled in what’s called secret evidence. People are stopped, and we got to do something about that.” … It’s an issue throughout our society. And as we become a diverse society, we’re going to have to deal with it more and more.” …
Five years after 9/11, the airline ticket clerk who first checked in Mohammed Atta, a guy named Michael Tuohey, went on Oprah and said:
I said to myself, ‘If this guy doesn’t look like an Arab terrorist, then nothing does.’ Then I gave myself a mental slap, because in this day and age, it’s not nice to say things like this,” he said. … “I got an instant chill when I looked at [Atta]. I got this grip in my stomach and then, of course, I gave myself a Politically Correct slap.
And he waved Atta through.
But of course nobody outside of this room noticed any of this at the time, much less remembers it now. It just doesn’t fit within anybody’s worldview. To Democrats, George W. Bush was a racist and to Republicans he was a hero, so nobody can learn anything from events, even events as memorable as 9/11. …
If you decide not too keep baddies out of your country, you must go forth into the world and eliminate said baddies:
Rather than tighten the borders after 9/11 to, you know, keep foreigners from killing thousands of Americans, the Bush Administration concluded that because we must invite the world, therefore we must invade the world.
Granted, Iraq didn’t have anything to do with 9/11, but, the Bush Administration argued, we were doing it for their own good: America would democratize Iraq, just like it democratized West Germany and Japan after WWII. …
I then pointed out a fact that virtually nobody in America knew about Iraq — that roughly half of Iraqi married couples consisted of first or second cousins, with more of them first cousins than second cousins. And Iraqi cousin marriage made American nation-building in Iraq highly implausible.
Muslims, especially Arabs, are so much more loyal to their families than to their nations in part because, due to countless generations of cousin marriages, they are so much more genealogically related to their families than Westerners are related to theirs. …
Not surprisingly, the Bush plan to reform Iraq did not work. Iraqis went on being Iraqis, not Germans or Japanese.
A few years ago, a reporter for the New Yorker called me up to get the inside story of why the intellectual Right had split up in the early 2000s. Was it over race? Immigration?
Nah, I said, it was over Iraq. The respectable Republicans wanted to invade Iraq, and us deplorable bad guys didn’t want to start a pointless war. The New Yorker reporter was deflated by this news. This was not the story he wanted to hear, so that quote never appeared in his article about how us bad guys are Bad. …
Diversity and the coalition of the fringes:
Over the first decade of this century it became clearer that the grand strategy of the Democratic Party is to capitalize on the growing Diversity. So Democrats try to intensify Diversity by importing more of it and by encouraging Americans to adopt ever more diverse identities, such as the ever-growing number of stripes on the gay flag.
Democrats like to talk about how they stand up for the marginalized, although it’s a little questionable just how marginalized you can be right now when you have one major party, the media, academia, and increasingly business celebrating you loudly at all turns.
It’s probably more accurate to say that the Democrats are comprised of a coalition of the margins of American culture, the fringes of the American story, people who identify less with the fundamental history of America, people who are kind of sick and tired of hearing about how great George Washington, Ben Franklin, and Tom Jefferson were, whether these margins be blacks, gays, liberal Jews, intellectuals, Muslims, lesbians, immigrants, Middle Eastern and North Africans, and so forth and so on.
For example, one of the founders of Berkeley Springs, where we are gathered today, was George Washington, who made this town his summer White House even before there was a winter White House. To most of us who are proud to identify with America’s founders, that’s pretty cool. But to others, it’s an annoying reminder that somebody else’s ancestors got here first.
When I crunched the exit poll numbers after the 2004 election, and then again after 2012, what stood out was how the more likely you are to be like Washington or Franklin in terms of identity — white, married, male, home-owning, native-born, etc. — the more likely you are to vote Republican. ...
Today, the less you are like the Founding Fathers demographically, the more likely you are to be a Democrat. The Democrats thus have an obvious incentive to gin up more Diversity through immigration, which can be dismissed as the Great Replacement “conspiracy theory” or celebrated as the Emerging Democratic Majority. But also, more imaginatively, through fostering bizarre new gender identities in naïve children.
The Democrats thus have the demographic wind at their backs, but they also face an obvious problem: their Coalition of the Fringes doesn’t have many positive things in common with each other. What do they have to come together over? How do they avoid becoming a circular firing squad?
The answer, so far, has been that the one thing that can unite the margins is resenting and hating core Americans.
Over the course of this century, it’s become clearer that stoking fear and loathing of generic Americans is essential to the success of the modern Democratic Party. Thus the tearing down of statues and the promoting of hate hoaxes like Jussie Smollett and the tall tale told by Rolling Stone magazine about a fraternity initiation ritual gang-rape on broken glass.
Yes, they won’t admit it, but it’s racial. Like many a monstrosity, anti-white racism must either keep growing or cease.