Posted on 05/11/2006 12:26:17 AM PDT by XR7
WASHINGTON — Nearly half of the nation's children under 5 are racial or ethnic minorities, and the percentage is increasing mainly because the Hispanic population is growing so rapidly, according to a census report released today.
Hispanics are the nation's largest and fastest-growing minority group...And the increase in young children is largely a Hispanic story, driving 70 percent of the growth in children younger than 5. Forty-five percent of U.S. children younger than 5 are minorities.
The new numbers offer a preview of demographic shifts to come...In some parts of the country, the transformation is more visible than in others. Large swaths of the upper Midwest are still mainly non-Hispanic white. But minorities are a majority of children younger than 5...
William Frey, a demographer with the Brookings Institution, predicted that the United States will have "a multicultural population that will probably be more tolerant, accommodating to other races and more able to succeed in a global economy." There could be increased competition for money and power, he added. "The older, predominantly white baby-boom generations will need to accommodate..."
William O'Hare, a senior fellow at the Annie E. Casey Foundation, said he is not sure the country is prepared to provide the extra help that immigrants' children often need to become well-educated workers and the future supporters of retirement programs for a predominantly white older population. Some Americans, he said, will not welcome the news that minorities are nearly the majority among young children.
"Part of the people will see this and say, 'Gee, these kids are really our future parents and workers, and we need to take care of them,' " O'Hare said. "The other would say it is time to send them all home."
(Excerpt) Read more at seattletimes.nwsource.com ...
In the late 1800's, there was a great fear about the coming day when "America would no longer be an Anglo-Saxon majority nation".
Of course, back in those days, "Anglo-Saxon" meant "of British-stock" and not merely some white guy with a surname such as DiMaggio or Kowalski or, heaven forbid, Horowitz.
The dreaded day when "America was no longer an Anglo-Saxon majority nation" came on or about 1903.
The Sun rose the next day, America survived and, 100 years later, an American with 25% Italian blood, 25% Polish blood, 25% Norwegian blood and 25% Russian Jewish blood is called an "Anglo".
Figures. I bet you're Irish too! Whatever happened to REAL Americans?
Vote Know-Nothing in 2006 -- this time, vote like your whole world dependend on it.
Who, me?
Agreed. Can you believe that today, in many major cities, it is rare to see a real American? Oh you see plenty of Germans, East Europeans, and Italians, singing their native languages and peddling their wares outside their tenaments, but what do they know of the Constitution and of our American values? As far as I'm concerned, we should close Ellis Island and send all those poor, huddled masses back to their native third-world helholes.
Unitarians are not Protestants. Nor are the leaders, many of the clergy, and some of the members of the liberal mainline denominations, which abandoned Reformation doctrines for theological liberalism decades ago.
The other half are of European Extraction.
The key difference between the immigrants of the 1840-1920 era and those of today is their legal status. The former group came to America legally, abided by the naturalization laws, and did not become dependent upon government sponsored welfare programs (as there were few such programs then, and none on the Federal level). Another difference is that the largest portion of the immigration has settled in the Southwestern states, adjacent to Mexico, which has long resented the loss of that region as a result of Texas independence and the Mexican War. Many of the immigrants, as evidenced by the recent demonstrations, and many residing in Mexico, as seen in opinion polls, believe that the U.S.-Mexican border should not exist. Thus, the Hispanic immigration into Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California more resembles the influx of Albanians into Kosovo than the standard immigration pattern.
It is also worthy to note that some of the strongest voices against illegal immigration are not exactly candidates for Ku Klux Klan or Nazi membership: Michelle Malkin (Filipino), Michael Savage (Russian Jewish), and Tom Tancredo (Italian).
And your technique of lumping me in with leftists is...
This thread isn't about illegal immigrants, it's about minorities in the US. And there are posters on this thread and elsewhere on FR who are explicitly anti-immigrant and anti-minority, regardless of their immigration status.
The US is headed towards being another Brazil. Why we would look at Brazil and its big problems, then want to copy them all I dont' know.
Recognizing a common characteristic with leftist tactics in your fallacious comparison of opponents of modern day illegal immigration with the Know-Nothings of the 19th Century.
And there are posters on this thread and elsewhere on FR who are explicitly anti-immigrant and anti-minority.
By definition (Webster's II New Riverside Dictionary), racism is the belief that some races are inherently superior to others. Using the term "racist" to wrongly categorize your opponents is the equivalent of a leftist yelling "Nazi", or for that matter, a 1960s Bircher calling his opponents "Commies". Liberals consider anyone who opposes affirmative action or welfare programs as a racist, even if the proponent of such views is as far from being a Protestant of British descent as are, say, Walter Williams or Thomas Sowell. Furthermore, someone who prefers the continuation of America as a predominantly English-speaking nation of Western culture, Judeo-Christian religion, and European descent is not a racist. In reviewing the previous posts in this thread, I see no poster who would qualify, by the definition stated previously, as a racist.
And yet I haven't called you or anyone else on this thread "racist." Perhaps you should learn to read more closely. [ON EDIT: Actually, reading further into the meat of your post, I may have to change my position.]
Liberals consider anyone who opposes affirmative action or welfare programs as a racist, even if the proponent of such views is as far from being a Protestant of British descent as are, say, Walter Williams or Thomas Sowell.
Are you sure you're on the right thread? What does that have to do with anything?
Furthermore, someone who prefers the continuation of America as a predominantly English-speaking nation of Western culture, Judeo-Christian religion, and European descent is not a racist.
You had me up to that last one. What's special about European descent? What's particularly American about white skin? Who is more American, a first generation Albanian immigrant or a black person who's ancestors have been in the US since 1619?
Unless of course your opponents actually happen to be racists, Nazis or Commies.
As far as your comparison of an African American whose ancestors arrived in colonial times with a recent immigrant from Albania, the American Indian has a greater claim than anyone, Americans of British colonial descent included, to being an American by virtue of his ancestors on this continent for millennia. Many nations have minorities: for example, France has Bretons and Alsatians; Germany has Wends and Sorbs; Italy has Albanians, Croatians, and Germans. These minorities may be as loyal to their home countries as are the respective French, German, and Italian majorities. However, they do not fit the accepted definition of being French, German, or Italian.
The fact is that the historical concepts of America and Americans are rooted in common cultural, religious, and ethnic bonds. A second or greater generation Irish American is just another Yank in Kerry and Kildare, and a second or greater generation Italian American is an Americano in Naples or Sicily. Granted, as the result of 19th and early 20th Century immigration, the concept of what was American expanded from more narrowly British and Protestant to more broadly European and Judeo-Christian. In a century or so, the European, and possibly the Judeo-Christian and the Western as well, elements of the American identity will no longer exist.
As far as it goes, I regard an immigrant who supports the foundational principles of this republic, like a Ludwig von Mises or an Edward Teller, as far more truly American than leftists like Jane Fonda or Jesse Jackson, both of whom have American ancestries dating to colonial times.
Hmmmm... a voice from the past....definitely a this is your life moment, thanks for posting the link.
darn, can't use this article to convince wife to have another child since we would be adding the the hispanic minority. Our kids are part Mexicna(Spanish), Korean, English, Irish and Scottish. We think of it as a chance to celebrate more holidays(except Cinco De Mayo, I still don't get that one and I am an American of Mexican descent).
No it isn't. That said, your claim that "European ancestry" is a fundamental test of American-ness is indeed racist. There's no way that Slobodan Milosevic was more "American" than Condi Rice.
As far as your comparison of an African American whose ancestors arrived in colonial times with a recent immigrant from Albania, the American Indian has a greater claim than anyone, Americans of British colonial descent included, to being an American by virtue of his ancestors on this continent for millennia.
Agreed. But you have failed to answer my question. Is white skin really a useful measure of American-ness? You said it was, and I'm challenging you on that.
However, they do not fit the accepted definition of being French, German, or Italian.
Yes but "American" isn't an ethnicity.
Granted, as the result of 19th and early 20th Century immigration, the concept of what was American expanded from more narrowly British and Protestant to more broadly European and Judeo-Christian.
Black people aren't American?
I don't know how to take your reply; the internet does not effectively convey sarcasm.
Sorry. You are right. I was being a bit funny. Not my best asset. LOL.
Please read what I said more carefully before you make unjustified accusations. I cited ethnic minorities in three European nations, who may be as loyal to the nation as the majority population, as an analogy to American blacks. A Breton is a Frenchman, but not a archetypal Frenchman. Furthermore, since I identified Ludwig von Mises and Edward Teller, both foreign born, as better Americans than Jane Fonda or Jesse Jackson, of colonial ancestry, should indicate that the crux of "American-ness" (to use your term) is philosophical/ideological and not cultural/racial.
There's no way that Slobodan Milosevic was more "American" than Condi Rice.
An absurd statement, since the former president of Serbia/Yugoslavia has never, to my knowledge, lived in America.
"American" isn't an ethnicity.
Merriam Webster Online defines "ethnic" as "of or relating to large groups of people classed according to common racial, national, tribal, religious, linguistic, or cultural origin or background." Until recently, over 80% of the American population shared European ancestry. Judeo-Christian religion, and the English language. As in my earlier analogy of the Irish-American or Italian-American who returns to the land where his grandparents were born and finds himself regarded as a foreigner, assimilation transforms the descendant of immigrants. That same Irish-American or Italian-American, when traveling in Sweden, Japan, or Ethiopia, is seen simply as an American. At the same time, the input of the immigrants modifies the culture, a point Mencken noted decades ago in The American Language. By the dictionary definition and the attitudes of people of other countries toward American citizens, there is indeed an American ethnicity.
Black people aren't American?
Black people like Walter Williams, Clarence Thomas, and Thomas Sowell are far more American than are leftists, liberals, and psuedo-conservatives of any race who seek to undermine the foundational principles upon which this republic and traditional American civilization rest.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.