The shape of things to come (John Derbyshire on the future of the GOP)

John Derbyshire ^ | November 9, 2012 | John Derbyshire

[Zhang Fei]

What about the future, then? Does the Republican Party have a future?

As I have been saying, there is no unity among white Americans. The old splits of education, class, sex, religion, city-country, and of course North-South still divide whites, and that is the basis of most of our politics. The Republican Party is white, sure enough, but whites aren't Republican.

This will presumably be less and less the case as whites head for minority status. At some point the fact of impending minority status will sink in, and whites will begin to sink their differences and circle the wagons. At some point the Lee Kuan Yew principle will take over. I've quoted it before, and I'll quote it again, because it's very quotable in this context. Quote from Lee Kuan Yew, who was Prime Minister of Singapore for thirty years, and the power behind the curtain for a further twenty in that very successful city-state, quote:

In multiracial societies, you don't vote in accordance with your economic interests and social interests, you vote in accordance with race and religion.

End quote.

What then will be the fate of the Republican Party? The Republicans themselves seem unable to discuss this at any level above the moronic. The usual thing you hear is that the GOP has to "reach out" to minorities, especially Hispanics, by handing out a few million sets of citizenship papers to illegals and by putting Marco Rubio on the 2016 ticket.

This is, as I said, moronic. Not "Mormonic" — been there, done that — moronic.

In the first place, Rubio's a white guy of Cuban ancestry, an outlier among Hispanics, from a group that Mexicans, Puerto Ricans, Dominicans and Guatemalans don't much care for. In the second place, non-white, non-Asian minorities in the U.S.A. underperform in education and employment, and have for generations. You don't need to have a metaphysical theory about why this is so, it's just so, has been for decades in defiance of every kind of remedial action, and there's no evidence anyone can do anything about it. For example, we now have a good database on Hispanics covering the fourth and fifth generations: the statistics are terrible. High-school dropout rates, test scores, unmarried pregnancies, crime, every kind of social dysfunction — Hispanics in the generality are an underperforming group that depends on money transfers from whites and Asians via government. Why would this group ever, in any numbers, vote for a small-government white party? And you can of course write that out all over again in boldface large type and italics for blacks. In the third place, given the previous point, where on earth is the sense in expanding this never-going-to-vote-Republican demographic by awarding citizenship to a further three or four million of them? What's the logic here? "We got into this pickle because of uncontrolled immigration. How do we get out of it? Uhhh… I know! — let's try more uncontrolled immigration!" As Basil Fawlty would say: "Brilliant!" Or as a different Englishman, Daily Telegraph columnist Ed West, headlined his column this week, quote: Pundits tell the Republican party: "The only way you can win is by importing more Democrat voters", end quote. Did someone say "Stupid Party"? This is beyond stupid! In the fourth place, Republicans have poisoned their credibility in this zone by being complicit in the phenomenon they are now pretending to be vexed by, as I described before. The hunger for cheap labor on the part of Republican donor groups has been a big driver of our country's demographic transformation. Why should we listen to anything Republicans have to say about this? For fifty years they've been part of the problem; why should we now believe they're willing to be part of the solution? And in the fifth place, this talk about reaching out to minorities and diversifying the ticket just insults white people, the very group Republicans should be trying to rally. OK, say in 2050 our numbers fall below half the population. That's still a mighty lot of people. Are you telling me that for the next 38 years this huge bloc, the founding stock of modern America, should not be allowed to see themselves represented on a Presidential ticket? Where's the equity in that?

"But," (I hear you say), "if the GOP is to be the white folks' party, and if white folks are destined to be a minority even within the possible lifetime of a reactionary old fogey like Derbyshire, then the GOP will be a minority party, for ever excluded from power, won't it?"

That depends how things shake out over the next forty years. Yes: In a nation made up entirely of ethnic minorities, any ethnically-based party will of course be a minority party. To get power under the present constitutional order, supposing that continues to exist, two or more minorities will have to unite under one party.

But (A) I refer you to Lee Kuan Yew's observation quoted earlier, that in a multiethnic state, politics inevitably comes down to an ethnic shoving match; and (B) this logic will apply to the Democratic Party, too, only in the opposite direction.

Let me elaborate on (B) there. The only thing binding the Democratic Party together right now is hatred of traditional white America. As traditional white America fades in power and importance, the Democrats, deprived of that binding force, may come unglued. By mid-century our politics may consist of three, four, or more minority parties in floating alliances with each other. It's plausible, for example — though I'll allow I may be influenced by personal bias here — it's plausible that whites and East Asians could go into coalition with each other. Or that successful white Hispanics like Rubio might be at odds with underperforming black and Amerindian Hispanics. Or that blacks and Hispanics may turn enemies, as they already are in jails and schoolyards all over the nation.

So I take the chatter about the death of the Republican Party with a grain of salt. However, I take the other chatter — the chatter about the Republican Party ceasing to be a white party — I take that with a whole truckload of salt. No, make that a one-hundred-wagon locomotive full of salt. Mm, come to think of it, let's make it a container ship …

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

a failed plan to defend and resist without clearly explaining their position. They are content with looking like the bad guys and face public scorn when they don’t realize how important it is to manipulate a clearly left leaning MSM. They represent the failure of the last four years to our own and obstructionists to the opposition. We’ve got to show a new face to the nation. That is the genesis of rebuilding this movement. Ryan or Cantor in the House, Rubio or Demint in the Senate.

There is no substitute for recognizing the truth, and teaching it. The truth is that:

• journalism is leftist. It just is, and it is understandable only when you consider that journalists are mere critics who don’t get things done, and socialism is the creed of the superiority of criticism over accomplishment.

• The only possible reason that journalists would temper their tendency to coddle Democrats would be competition among journalists to get the truth out - but there is no effective competition within journalism.

• Ideological competition within journalism is entirely suppressed for the simple reason that all major journalism is joined at the hip by the AP newswire.

• Academia has the same incentives as journalism does, and it is as ideologically homogeneous as journalism is. That makes it excruciatingly difficult to raise up succeeding generations of conservatives. But IMHO KhanAcademy.org may show the way. It is possible to create an entire curriculum independent of the public school system at dramatically less cost than the conventional classroom educational approach. But the point has to be to avoid teaching that journalism is objective, when that is not a necessary assumption and there is no proof of it, and plenty of historical evidence against it.

• ”Liberals” and “progressives” are mere code words which are euphemisms for “agreeing with journalists’ perspective, but not being working journalists.” Journalists will accord its acolytes any positive label except objective, which it reserves to itself.

[iopscusa]

Obama was elected by Yankees (Race traitors in new-speak).

[Silver Sabre]

Most racially mixed people consider themselves non-white and vote accordingly. Many of the most lunatic black nationalists are half white.

[The_Media_never_lie]

The solution: business friendly “red zones” and benefit friendly “blue zones. Just like Hong hong China and PRC China. Let the blues stew in their filth.

[Zhang Fei]

Most racially mixed people consider themselves non-white and vote accordingly. Many of the most lunatic black nationalists are half white.

A lot of the rebel Indian chiefs who fought the US Cavalry were half (or more) white. Call it hybrid vigor. Call it superior smarts inherited from their white forebears. They were Indian enough to be leaders of the Indian community, but also had the superior raw intelligence (IQ) necessary to beat out most of the full-blooded Indians competing for leadership positions. There's this fortune cookie saying "It is better to be the head of chicken than the rear end of an ox". That's why Obama sided with his black half. And he was lucky in that choice - it ultimately took him all the way to the White House.

[Zhang Fei]

However in the future as our numbers dwindle, white liberals will have to fall back to racial solidarity just to survive. In a country were whites are a minority, do you really think Harry Reid will be treated any better than Jim DeMint, hell no. All those white liberal hacks holding cushy no work jobs are going to be replaced with minorities. At that point they will become Republicans for the sake of survival. When you scratch beneath the surface, we are no different than the Sunnis in Anbar Province.

Brilliant and succinct precis.

[RKBA Democrat]

“Barack Obama wasn’t re-elected by blacks, Hispanics, or Asians, though they helped at the margins; he was re-elected by Yankees.”

Ain’t that the truth. Look at a map of the electoral results on Tuesday and compare it to a map of the US/CSA circa 1862. Nothing much has changed.

[RKBA Democrat]

“Does the Republican Party have a future?”

God I hope not. But I suppose it’ll hang on for awhile longer. Just like the Whigs did.

[Zhang Fei]

The thrust of the essay is that we are headed toward a 90% share of the white vote, but unfortunately, only on the way down. One poster summarized it thus:

However in the future as our numbers dwindle, white liberals will have to fall back to racial solidarity just to survive. In a country were whites are a minority, do you really think Harry Reid will be treated any better than Jim DeMint, hell no. All those white liberal hacks holding cushy no work jobs are going to be replaced with minorities. At that point they will become Republicans for the sake of survival. When you scratch beneath the surface, we are no different than the Sunnis in Anbar Province.

[RKBA Democrat]

“Deliverance wasn’t just a movie - it was the encapsulation of every horrific fantasy citified Yankees have had about the South.”

Good point. Perhaps we should play up to their nightmares? I don’t speak with much of an accent and have to admit that I prefer a salad to BBQ most of the time. Maybe I should get that beat to death pickup truck with the rifle rack and stickers and go visiting the more toney areas up north?

[RKBA Democrat]

“We can still win, but it’s getting harder and harder with less room for errors/misfortune on the part of our candidates.”

How do you define “winning?” Loose political power over disintegrating, bankrupt northern cities where we’re hated with a vengeance?

[military cop]

You’re making my point for me.

the key is to MANIPULATE THE MEDIA. Show them something they can’t ignore: NEW leadership. A NEW start. The public perception is refreshed.

RLTW

[Spktyr]

And then the GOP will still lose because then the Dems will be the party of the other 75%.

[Zhang Fei]

In fact, what makes it amusing is that the source of this observation is the leader of the tiny city state of Singapore, who transformed this barren island into the highest income non-oil state in Asia, surpassing both Japan and the US:

As I have been saying, there is no unity among white Americans. The old splits of education, class, sex, religion, city-country, and of course North-South still divide whites, and that is the basis of most of our politics. The Republican Party is white, sure enough, but whites aren't Republican. This will presumably be less and less the case as whites head for minority status. At some point the fact of impending minority status will sink in, and whites will begin to sink their differences and circle the wagons. At some point the Lee Kuan Yew principle will take over. I've quoted it before, and I'll quote it again, because it's very quotable in this context. Quote from Lee Kuan Yew, who was Prime Minister of Singapore for thirty years, and the power behind the curtain for a further twenty in that very successful city-state, quote:

In multiracial societies, you don't vote in accordance with your economic interests and social interests, you vote in accordance with race and religion.

End quote.

From Zero Hedge, it appears that Singapore surpasses us not only in terms of average income, but also average wealth. And they appear to have surpassed us in average wealth a decade ago:

[grey_whiskers]

Hi, troll.

West was redistricted, as was Palin.

Akin was sandbagged by a question which was a "dog-whistle" for the slut vote: the centerpiece of Obama's strategy -- see also Stehpanopoulos and his questioning of Romney on contraceptives, the "vote with your lady parts" and "vote like it's your first time" ads, and so on.

Mourdock had to fight the GOP-e he was replacing, who gave him about as much help as Chris Christie gave to Romney despite Christie's being such an important speaker at the GOP National Convention, and the shunning of Palin and West there.

Not to mention the carpet bombing of Gingrich with negative ads, and jiggering with the Primary in Virginia and messing up the GOP state convention in Minnesota.

Conservatism can win, but not against a two-front war where one front is within the "big tent" (read : Quislings).

[grey_whiskers]

and didn’t force rape victims to carry their rapist infected embryo.

I’ll add that people also vote or abstain in accordance with their intelligence.

Hmmm another sleeper liberal outs himself?

[Zhang Fei]

And then the GOP will still lose because then the Dems will be the party of the other 75%.

As minorities become the face of the Democratic party, whites will defect en masse. Once a pain threshold is reached, the 90% shift in the white vote to the GOP may occur overnight, in political terms. Think of all the white no-show or low-show jobs (Pelosi, Reid, Trumka) in government, unionized industries and charitable foundations and endowments being monopolized by blacks or Hispanics all down the line. Think of disparate impact lawsuits being filed against the current reality of all-white Hollywood productions, charitable foundations and endowments and other traditionally liberal white sectors of the economy, and racial quotas imposed that shut out large numbers of highly-competent and -productive white liberals. Why would a white liberal vote for the Democratic party ever again?

[Jim Robinson]

This is a pro-God, pro-life site. If you can’t respect that you can always leave. Push abortion on this site you’ll be pushed out.

[Alaska Wolf]

the establishment doesn’t understand politics

What percentage of the vote total did the Constitution Party and Libertarian Party garner?

[Spktyr]

Because they want to show how tolerant and diverse-thinking they are.

You don’t get it - the problem is that by the time the GOP has 90% of the white vote, 75% of the people in the US won’t be white.

And I say that as an ex-liberal non-white who voted for Romney.