Posted by Steve on Fri, 19 May 2006 12:13 | #

Formative?!!

Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 19 May 2006 16:43 | #

More and more of us are on the journey out of liberalism, Steve.  I see from today’s Guardian that even Chris Smith has embarked upon it.

Posted by Bo Sears on Fri, 19 May 2006 17:41 | #

Congratulations on getting the vocabulary right. Mexicanization is correct. AmRen’s Taylor was recently caught up in a debate in which the term Hispanization was used, making Taylor’s side the automatic loser.

Ranging from Florida to Texas to New Mexico, to Arizona, and to California, the US positively revels in its existing historical Hispanization…names of churches, cities, buildings, streets, and special sites. Taylor needed a minder who could tell him that Spanish influences in the southern tier of states has left a broad and ancient trail of Hispanization.

In many ways, it is like the names and influences in the northern states stemming from Indianization. From Pensylvania to Oregon, names of counties, townships, cities, and special sites carry the imprint of American Indians.

Guessedworker got it right, it’s the Mexicanization of the US that is troubling. Just for starters, how embarrassing for Mexicans that they cannot protest as freely on the streets of Mexico City as they can on the streets of Washington, D.C.

One caveat: it is a little over-the-top to refer to “the fate of America under Mexicanization.”

Mexicans are not a unified whole. The most interesting split is between the northerners and the southerners. An enormous cultural split appears there. Another split is the generational split, i.e., as between immigrants, first generation, second generation, and so on. Unfortunately on the high school and college drop-out continuum, the generations are not showing significant differences, but in all other ways, language, acculturation, embracing the American dream (house, yard, white picket fence), and politics, the generations are split wide open.

We in Resisting Defamation fight them every which way when they refer to us in derogatory Spanish terms (guerro, blanco, anglo, etc.), but their language is a European language and their church is a European-based church except when it is one of the newer more fundamentalist European American founded churches.

This is not to say we believe the squid-like ink formulation about “Mexican family values” which is a myth, and so on.

Basically, Mexicanization threatens to wipe out African American influences in our US cultures, not our European American cultures. It’s a mixed bag, not the doom of European-based cultures, histories, and heritages.

***********************

PS: Don’t bother writing about the appropriateness of having the label anglo with a Spanish accent imposed on you. Remember that Anglo-Saxon is a name of dignity, “anglo” in Spanish is a putdown….seriously.

Posted by Matra on Fri, 19 May 2006 20:44 | #

the older and, for the moment, less ethnically diverse societies of Europe, have stronger and more deep rooted cultures.  For example, in Britain, we still have some of the sense of being one people that we had during the war.  There is still the perception of a predominant culture - even though many people feel that it is under attack.

I think that is true. Having lived in both Europe and North America during both my childhood and adult years I’ve observed how much people in a typical European country have in common with each other compared to North Americans. (Newfoundland and parts of the American South may be exceptions).

It’s not exclusively due to ethnicity. Until recently N Americans have always had more choices than Europeans in everything from from TV channels to product brands to food. This abundance of choice (due to capitalism and the affluence it brings) combined with lack of ethnic homogeneity leads to fragmentation. Typically North Americans are much more individualistic than Europeans and, in my experience, have shockingly few common experiences with their fellow citizens - even with family members.

Even seemingly trivial things like TV ratings bear this out. In most European countries the most popular programmes are watched by as many as 1 in 3 people. Only the once a year Super Bowl can bring as many N Americans together for a night.  Most I knew growing up watched their own TVs, listened to their own music, or played their own video games in their own rooms separated from their siblings and parents.  Some might think the fragmentation in N America seen in the programmes they watch or the astonishing variety of food at each restaurant needed to please everybody don’t matter much, but they may be indicative of more important differences between people. (BTW what’s so damn good about individual choice anyway?)

Then there’s the mobility that separates people from family, friends, and community.

Such an atomized society will have more trouble getting its act together to face a collective enemy than one that still sees a itself and behaves as an historically rooted people.

Posted by john rackell on Fri, 19 May 2006 20:59 | #

Ultimately it’s easier to spot other people’s delusions than your own. The West – Western Europe and US – have so many delusions that spring from the same source that we will probably share similar fates – though with interesting twists. Which is suffering from the most pernicious delusions – US or Europe, and which will fare the worst? People of a certain mindset really do believe we live in the best of all possible worlds – and any attempt to offer up alternative is either ridiculed or browbeaten down.

Personally I think the storm that’s going to hit the US is going to be a lot worse than that what hits Europe. But on the other hand… for example, is the US or European situation worse regarding energy. The US has built out to suburbia and exurbia based on cheap gasoline; the Euros pay high gasoline prices and are still relatively urbanized. But OTH European urban areas are now the locus of Europe’s Islamization with whites fleeing to the suburbs – so may be a wash. OTH the US still has large untapped oil reserves in Alaska and coastal offshore to possibly mitigate energy problems, while the North Sea reserves are dwindling. (Western) Europe is becoming increasingly dependent on Russian nat. gas and Arabian oil – both powers that may strike hard bargains, a quid pro quo – the Arabs oil push for further Islamization, the Russians may just want a rewrite of history that proves they didn’t lose the Cold War. And the US gets a lot more solar energy which may be a saving grace if we can harness it, or then again maybe a death sentence for those trapped Arizona heat without air conditioning.

Both countries are under massive delusions. Who is fessing up to them is the real test of which continent is less delusional. But there are independent commentators on both sides who acknowledge the facts, but on both continents the MSM are the one promulgating the lies – and the MSM are dominant everywhere. For example, US current and future obligations are about $50-80 trillion in net present value – and that’s just the Federal Government – the US is quite possibly bankrupt. Is Europe in better shape? Both say use immigration to plug the gaps and shortfalls. Both will be disastrously wrong. We’re telling immigrants to support our old people and support and raise their own children. Ignoring the race replacement aspects of the whole scheme, it’s unworkable.

The managerial elite on both continents can’t manage. But they are both happy to prevent problems on their watch by shunting it off to the future.

What’s to choose between them? The US has the most flexible economy – flexible enough to ship a lot of its manufacturing jobs abroad – flexible enough to let GM, Ford, Delphi possibly go bankrupt. Well, Rover’s kaput too, but Britain is probably in the weird position of having the negativities of both the US and Europe: massive credit and consumer debt induced prosperity; weak manufacturing; massive unassimilable immigration. At least Germany has a hand in the game with BMW and Mercedes.

But Europeans have one advantage. Europe is their real home – racially, genetically and culturally -  and in those aspects where, according to John Boyd, the moral sphere is the most important in determining outcomes. In the US Southwest it’s pretty much just a title document that says it belongs to the US - one which Americans handily drafted themselves. The only open question now is how strong a revanchist movement develops. Noch immer in Westen. It’s the calm that’s eerie, or I’m really paranoid.

Having just left California, where the Mexicanization is really a fait accompli, the most notable thing is the caste system that has developed, with Mexicans waiting on Whites at every turn: fast food joints, car washes, gardeners. I think Whites are in for a big comeuppance which may be salutory for the ones who acknowledge reality will be the ones who survive.

One point that is interesting I think is the US prides itself and believes its economic hegemony is sustained by its respect for the rule of law and especially respect for property rights. Property rights in Latin America are, ahem, a little more flexible. Land claims in Mexico are established by squatting, when that has gone on for long enough the new ‘owners’ may get title or the settlement is tolerated in legal limbo. What’s happening now with the Mexican invasion is this writ on a continental scale. We are witnessing a massive squat on the US. Now you could argue that no property in the US has been confiscated, but wait until the Mexicans really start feeling their oats and start voting themselves more of the pie – current transfer payments are one form of property transfer being effectuated by the invasion. It is unlikely that the US will maintain its economic hegemony when property rights have become a myth.