I was with you all the way to "do you abandon these traits". Who's saying anything about abondoning traits? See here's the basic fallacy of the anti-Hispanic movement. You ASS-U-ME that integration of a Hispanic means getting rid of the things that make America great. I think that's absolute BS, and I think that after having spent the last 25 years living in the middle of the territory they supposedly are trying to reconquer. Absolute 100% rubbish. There is no reconquista, and the Hispanics are not a blight on our society.
You will not find that I have referred to "Hispanics" as a group, as a blight, or as to the fact that some Mexicans would like to reverse the whipping that they received from the Texans in 1836, and from the Polk led Americans in 1846--as well as their resentment over the Pershing incursion in 1915. I do so now, only to make a new point.
Do you really think that one could integrate large numbers of Mexicans into a school with large numbers of "Anglos," without the "Anglos" having to give up anything?
For a start, how about pride in history? Do you really think that a school that has a 30% Mexican minority--or anything close to it, given the current dispensation to be "politically correct" among "educators," is not going to down play those very events which I just ticked off? Do you think that school would be singing, "Remember Pearl Harbor, As We Did The Alamo," in response to another surprise attack, as did the generation of school kids who responded to Pearl Harbor, and our entrance into World War II? Do you really think that that school will put the same emphasis on Shakespeare, Dickens--or even our own literary geniuses, such as Poe, Melville, Mark Twain, etc., as a traditional American school? Will the history of American exploration and settlement still feature a tremendous emphasis on individual initiative, which was so important in the American tradition?
Many of the Mestizos pouring into the Southwest--and indeed spreading all over America, now--are hard working people. I do not dispute that. But what they are not is a people steeped in the traditions of the quiet loner, who went into a largely unpopulated area and rose to extraordinary heights, in displaying individual initiative in building a society from the ground up. The type of Mexican coming in is rather from a spectator background: A long settled people, victimized by successive waves of conquest. This is not to put him or her down. Some of them have proud blood from the Aztecs, Mayans and Spanish Conquistadors. But the leadership of those peoples are virtually extinct. These are the surviving remnant of the peasant stock lorded over by the departed dead; and to say that they have the same culture as the founders of America is an absurdity.
And as to your hypothesizing the resettlement of people to alleviate crowding. That is just silly parlor theorizing. Our concentration of population patterns are, if anything, still less than many other countries. People do not fan out over the land as you postulate--except in times of duress as under the mad rule of Chairman Mao, in a Communist land. They are drawn to particular areas, where they may find employment. And our areas that are amenable to settlement and employment for other than agriculture are already terribly over-crowded.
When you consider that our settlement was selective for people who liked space--the sense of being crowded in Europe was one of the motivations for our early settlers--you must understand that the very crowding today, is probably a major reason for the fall in the birth rate of the native stock to such very low levels. It is certainly a factor in the increase in mental disorders. It is ethnic suicide for us to encourage even more over-crowding, in pursuit of either cultural confusion or a temporary spurt in Corporate bottom lines.
Enough is surely enough.
William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site