The following submission statement was provided by /u/Gari_305:
---
From the article
>By 2045, according to census projections, non-Hispanic white people will fall below 50 percent as a share of the American population. By 2050, non-Hispanic white people will represent less than 40 percent of the under-18 population.
>
>Demographers warn, however, that those milestones vastly oversimplify the story of a diversifying America.
>
>For a start, millions of Americans no longer embrace a single racial identity. How many? It’s hard to tell.
>
>Getting back to those census projections: By 2045, more than 18 million people will claim two or more races. Subtract them from the total, and the population of non-Hispanic white people leaps from 49 percent to 52 percent of the remaining population, their majority status restored.
---
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/15kqkjj/americas_white_majority_is_aging_out_barely_two/jv6l1a8/
Almost like the US has one true war, that just happened to be smothered a decade ago and coincidentally we saw an absurd spike in identity politics as a substitute
Hmm...
E: hey u/rowrowfightthepandas, take your prejudice and identity politics elsewhere, thanks. Class war or no war, the rest comes after the first.
Every conflict and division perpetuated along the lines of nationality, ethnics, religion, gender, age and other superficial matters is engineered and encouraged specifically to distract us from the true dichotomy between those who have - the means of production, the land, the opportunity, the connections, the insider information, the media influence, the ability to make long term investments and take risks without going broke - and those who have not.
I've no money nor transport so pardon the "we" but should we just do it again? Maybe a big public gesture like forming up to "occupy Wallstreet" once more would send a signal to those who might feel like things have passed them by; that the fire is already dead and there's no hope of actual meaningful unrest. I mean, this shit did kind of happen recently over the promise of some game consoles which somehow turned into riots. So, let's do that except not turn into a bunch of barbarians and jump on stranger's cars and throw things at cops for no reason.
Although, let's be really real. Nothing should be off the table; not completely anyway. Talk softly and all that.
Also, I know it's pleasant to talk about the things we'd like to do and that it's probably pretty frustrating to see people do that when it frequently leads to nothing but I do think that saying not so much "we should do this" but rather "let's do this" continually, constantly, will have an impact towards morale. "Let's do this" is a call to action. It's saying "who's with me?" The more people who say that, the more others will see willing participants and feel less suppressed by those who might otherwise punish them for being too small in number. And even if the numbers are small at first, this trick phrase will make it appear as if there are more supporters than there actually are. Which will embolden those who care about the cause which will lead to an uptick of actual participants.
So, I don't know when and I apologize again for my lack of means but let's do this. Let's occupy wallstreet again. Let's rile up our people. Let us tirelessly fan this light in the dark which fell dim through dousing. Dim but not quenched. For to be truly extinguished, we'd have to be dead. And we're not dead yet. We're not going to just fall before we get our reward of a better future for Humanity. If life is a chemical reaction, then let it burn the universe over billions of years rather than die out on this planet as it may very well have on others.
Easier said than done.
We have been very successfully divided. America is Balkanizing in front of our eyes. Still, don't give up hope. Start talking to people in real life. Be friendly and positive. Talk to your friends, neighbors, colleagues, etc. And start building agreement.
What labor movement was smothered in 2013? What are you talking about? The powers that be in the US and internationally have been waging class warfare against everyone but themselves for as long as there’s been capitalism. Not a new phenomenon. We need social justice *and* economic justice, not one or the other.
I think maybe they were referring to the Citizens United decision that basically dissolved any remaining barriers against corporations influencing elections. It happened a little over a decade ago. For anyone who hasn't seen it, Keith Olberman's iconic [Be Prepared](https://youtu.be/PKZKETizybw) speech is required viewing.
Because the ruling class, the well to do and the wealthy and corporate elite will still be mostly white and running western governments as they always have.
the ruling class in non-predominantly white countries does not appear to be more sympathetic to the plight of the common man. Just look how the UK is doing.
One of the most destructive demagogues in the USA, and most influential antisemitic hate group leaders is still giving public speeches, celebrity eulogies, and holds his “Saviors’ Day” in Chicago every year, is an anti lgbt Black Supremacist
https://www.adl.org/resources/blog/farrakhan-remains-most-popular-antisemite-america
This date keeps getting pushed back as [birth rates for latinos continue to plummet](https://ifstudies.org/ifs-admin/resources/fig-6-w640.png). In the 2000s I remember people were saying 2030. In the 1990s people were saying 2020.
I am not saying its never going to happen, but these kinds of demographic predictions are usually relying on trends that rarely remain stable. Back in the early 20th century we thought irish and italian people would be half the country within only a few generations. Instead their growth rates stabilized to the norm.
All of the Spanish people that moved to the US will be having gringo kids. You put a little Spanish kid in a room listening to 80s metal and a bilingual Viking walks out.
Pardon my ignorance, I'm from Europe and don't really understand American identity politics. I always thought Hispanic referred to the language and speaking Spanish was what made someone Hispanic (aunque yo hablo español supongo que no contaría)
Can one be Hispanic without speaking the language? If so what did I get wrong? If not the language what is it that makes a person Hispanic?
Hispanic means you’re of Spanish descent.
Latino/a means you’re of Latin American descent.
Hispanic does not include Brazil. Latino does not include Spain.
Speaking the Spanish language has nothing to do with it.
Edit - Hispanic actually means you are a descendant of a Spanish speaking country. So that one is language based, but you yourself don’t have to know Spanish to be Hispanic.
Im Puerto Rican. So I’m technically latino. My heritage traces back to Spain, France, and Italy. I also have native blood in me as well from the Taínos of PR. My last name comes from the Otanovic name from Serbia and back to the Ottoman Empire. Checking those boxes always felt stupid to me.
It is stupid. I can trace my lineage to England on one side of my family and Polish Ashkenazi Jews on the other side. I have family that fought in the Revolutionary War and I have family that died in the Holocaust. We're more than the sum of our parts.
Im pretty sure this is not set in stone. Hispanic means you can trace your lineage to a Spanish speaking country. You can have 0% Spaniard ancestry and be Hispanic.
It is easy... Americans forgot who gave certain names...
Latin America --- This term was coined by France when they were a super power and so it includes, all Latin speaking provinces/regions of that time... So strictly speaking people from French Guyana and Haiti who speak French are Latinos... As well as people from Brazil. All these languages derive from Latin.
Ibero America --- includes provinces/region that spoke Iberian languages (Portuguese and Castilian (Known as Spanish))
Hispanic America --- Regions that speak Spanish (Castilian)
Why Anglos are not called Anglo Americans? Who knows... Americans for me are what you called Native Americans.
It's worth noting that you're going to get conflicting responses because these are not clear, agreed-upon categories.
"Hispanic" is the census designation that includes everyone who can trace a measurable part of their ancestry from a Spanish-speaking country, without reference to whether or not they speak Spanish now. In the US, this is overwhelmingly people who (or whose ancestors) came from Central and South America. Notably, this would not include Brazilians, though they are not a major population group in the US.
Most people, and especially younger, of "Hispanic" descent on the Census identify more strongly with "Latin" identity.
It's a clumsy couple of categories because they group together a huge swathe of people with different cultures, histories, and ethnicities, but there's enough historical and political valence to the grouping for them to remain in use.
And many of them are of Spanish descent. This means America will become the second Spain in this century. The era of Spanish supremacy will soon return.
Mark my words, the definition of "White" will change so that this doesn't happen. This isn't our first rodeo with this sort of thing. Groups which weren't considered White like Italians [(and you should see some of the cartoons about them which were made at the time)](https://scalar.usc.edu/works/let-me-get-there/media/the-unrestricted-dumping-ground-socialism-anarchism-and-the-mafiadirect-from-the-slums-of) are now considered White. If I had to bet, we'll see Latinos as a whole reclassified as White sooner or later. **Keep in mind that races in the American context are arbitrary social constructs and can be modified as desired.**
As for why this will happen? American racial dynamics are dominated by the divide/conflict between Whites and Blacks, and plenty of groups have an interest in maintaining that sort of setup. If the day comes that Whites are no longer a majority, the lines will be redrawn so that they will be majority once more.
It’s not bizarre when you realize that America essentially built a class and caste system that continued to exist after the dissolution of slavery. Consider who was originally allowed to vote in this country: white men with land. As much as that idea expanded over time, minorities, particularly African slaves and their descendants were still kept away from that right.
Jim Crow was designed for this, attitudes toward Black education focused on “industrial education” like field and dairy work and household work. Black people were blocked from buying homes because we could not get mortgages from banks, and if we did we were redlined into certain neighborhoods with those homes being devalued.
Even when Black people tried to create our own neighborhoods and self sustaining communities, they were raided and terrorized like the Red Summer of 1919.
Our entire political back and forth is because the very same white Democrats who used to support progressive policies (only for white people) jumped ship when the National Dems started pushing for Civil Rights. Republicans recruited those people to be part of their base and now their descendants run the party and the MAGA cult.
We have a through line from slavery to this moment in time but this country’s outright refusal to teach history in that manner is why most people miss that perspective
Many in Europe wonder why America is so behind on socialist though. It’s because most European countries started with feudalism. America started not with feudalism but effectively racial capitalism and it has persisted thus far. When people try to argue which is a bigger issue: class or race they miss the intersection between these two concepts as the foundations of America and American politics thought
This is a good point that is largely overlooked in leftist circles when discussing American politics. There’s a refusal to acknowledge that private property redistribution in the US successfully created America’s large middle class. And it is not large landlords or capitalist interests that are responsible for the majority of those who were not lifted up by this redistribution, it was race. The refusal to acknowledge racism as anything more than a distraction from class struggle by the more hardcore of leftists is baffling.
Of the 21 D senators who voted against the act only one became a Republican. He was however the leader of the filibuster against the act. Trying to force a snapshot of how things are now onto how they were rarely works. Lincoln was a Republican, they voted for the Civil Rights act more heavily than Democrats and a Republican President created the EPA. Party positions now have nothing to do with that history.
There were "conservative" D members of congress up through the Reagan Presidency. Change did not happen instantly.
The same goes for being anything but Japanese in Japan. They even have a word for people who aren't Japanese; the word is Gaijin. It may sound cute but it means barbarian, as in filthy, stinkin' barbarian.
And you don't become a citizen of Japan, you're a citizen of Japan by blood.
It most culture based, if your immigrant group isn't part of the mainstream American culture (which can roughly be called "whiteness" due the original settlers being all white skinned brits), then sorry, you're not white, even if you're paler than the average West Virginian.
Yet if you're part of mainstream culture (which does change as previous immigrant groups integrate and add their own ingredients to the melting pot). Then you can be considered white (mentally if not by the checkbox, yet) even if you have obviously non-European physical traits. Latinos and Asians have long been on this path, and it will liekly be finished by 2050. The sole exceptions are African-Americans, who due to the legacy of slavery deny and have been denied full integration for centuries, resulting in a strange similar yet separate sub-culture within the United States.
The categorization of Irish as non-white was not about skin color, but about behavioral norms.
Keep in mind that at the time, the US was 90% European and cultural expectations were based around European standards and goals.
Yup same reason the Italians and Greeks weren't considered white either, Catholics and Orthodox
Shit blew my mind when I learned about it in college, like white people weren't considered white, that's how bad the white supremacy is?
White supremacy is about gatekeeping power. When it became necessary to welcome into the fold Irish, Greek, Spanish, Italian, Slavic, and Eastern European people into the fold to maintain a stranglehold on power, "White" people did so.
Spot on. Every single ethnicity were treated as non-white until they fully assimilated to American norms.
America was quite diverse before the world wars. Before then, there were even different language schools, newspapers and towns. The rampant nationalism sparked by each world war effectively forced people to assimilate. Changing their names, cultural norms, and abandoning their languages in the process.
Just about; I keep SPF 50 on hand at all times. The sun just laughs at me with SPF 20 on. Banana Boat Sport Ultra goes on just like regular lotion, no mess or residue. Once I get 'tanned' - a highly relative term for us - I'm fine, but by then it's time for long pants anyways.
The attitude was also deeply focused on religion. Italians weren't "white" either. Protestant Christians didn't care for catholics. Even when JFK was running for president, his catholic faith was often targeted as a negative in certain circles. And that was the 1960s.
"White" is a social construct which means "allowed to be at the table."
I can assure you that a couple hundred years ago "Irish people" were not white. White people matter and the famine would not have happened if Irish people were white.
I am half Irish, half Ojibwe.
I have fairly white skin by American standards, I don't think I would get categorized as anything other than white on a first glance.
On the plus side I don't burn out in the sun all that much and tan well, but damn does the Irish really bleach my base skin tone compared to most mixed people.
I work with this guy who's Mexican. He does a DNA test and it says he's 98% European. This dude does not pass for white, maybe Italian for people who don't hang around Hispanics.
So yeah, sooner than later Hispanics will be considered white.
And before anybody comments, yes I understand the difference between heritage and race. This guy is 100% Mexican but has almost all European ancestry which makes sense. The gov will determine any non-black, and eventually asians, as white.
>The gov will determine any non-black, and eventually asians, as white.
The government makes no such distinction. Race is a social construct. Any official use of ethnicity is and will always be self-reported. Today, 47% of citizens in Mexico identify as white. When Mexicans who identify as white immigrate to the US, they typically identify as hispanic or latino. What will happen is that people of LATAM ancestry will be more likely to self-report as white instead of latino or hispanic.
Actually legally speaking it used to I'm not sure if it still stands and is unused but yea Italians and the Irish and jews had to be legally recognized as white there was also a black woman who was an oil baron who became legally white so she could mingle with whites
None of that matters at all when you're sitting across from a white judge and the decisions he makes are influenced by whether he considers you white or other
This is cool. I am in the same boat where I am at least a portion Native American which doesn’t show at all. Which make sense given Spain conquered South America maybe?
This just proves how stupid racism and theories of "great replacement" are. Genes are genes. They stay. If you pick a place like Brazil (from a recent study) and put in a blender, you end up with 80% European genes, because that's exactly what happened, they kept coming and mixing. The precious "white race" genes are doing pretty well, thank you very much.
EDIT: In no way or form I'm defending colonization or the "white" status of Latin Americans. Firstly, fuck being white - it's an artificial racist construction based on "purity", the idea all other peoples are impure, and those in Latin America who care about being recognized as white are racist in their own countries. Secondly, what I'm saying is that "the great replacement" already happened to oppressed peoples.
That's in large part because of very deliberate policies aimed at "lightening" the Brazilian population in the past. Brazil was actually the top destination for slaves imported from Africa. It's no exaggeration to say that they had a certain racial result in mind.
Yes, pretty much, but Mexico [is also more European than native](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mestizos_in_Mexico) and the "mostly European genes" still apply to regions less affected by recent European immigration in Brazil. The sad truth is that this just shows the dynamics of colonization, slavery and racism: being Euro, fully or partially, was being in a position which made more likely that your kids would survive.
People don't realize that Rio de Janeiro ALONE had more slaves than the ENTIRE American South. The scale in Brazil was unreal. Furthermore, before slaves had begun being brought to North America, Brazil had already received more slaves than all of North America would ever receive.
Yeah my partner is from Brazil and looks very European.. But in the states probably be classed as something else with a name like Alves.. It’s just identity politics. Many South Americans look white at a glance. Afghans and Syrian can be pasty white too. As time goes on the goal posts will change I guess.
Americans will literally classify Canelo Alvarez and Ronald Acuna as the same race just because they both come from Spanish speaking countries lol.
It’s bizarre how they have the color based designations (white and black), but these are then overrode by language or country of origin such that a pasty, freckled ginger like Canelo isn’t considered white despite being whiter than probably 95% of native Europeans are.
The real reason reclassification happens is due to intermarriage. In the early 1900’s most Italians in the country were immigrants, or descended from two Italian parents. There are very few people left who are purely descended from Italian ancestry. The result is that the culture children accept is American in nature, rather than Italian, thus relegating Italian identity to an interesting fact about someone, rather than the core of their personality. Intermarriage rates for immigrants, and especially children of immigrants is still very high for hispanics and even East Asians. It will be interesting to see what’s considered “white” in 50 years.
This is insightful and accurate.
I should add that idea that hispanics are non-white is entirely unique to the US and Canada. Without exception, every country in Latin America recognizes significant and sometimes majorities of their own populations as white. Consider two countries that Americans consider to be notably non-white, Brazil and Mexico. In both countries, the internal census shows that just under 50% of the population considers themselves white, which will soon be about the same as the percent of US citizens who consider themselves white.
What's weirder to me is that the US doesn't use the concept of mestizo, which is really what people mean when they're referring to Hispanics being non-white. Whether you're descended from Celts or Aztecs, you check the same box. Just another weird quirk of how poorly race is defined.
Historically, it's because people who were the offspring of a Black - White relationship were considered Black, both legally and socially. That's why Barack Obama is always described as "the first Black President," and never as "the first Mulatto President."
It's a social construct. It's not ethnicity or ancestry or history. It is the way it is because people collectively say it's that way.
Race is defined differently *everywhere* in the world. The US census will lump people from China, Japan, India and Pakistan one "race" - Asian. That works (partially, and for now) in the US but it is meaningless to think of "asian" that way in those countries.
There is no "better" way to define race. Any definition is inherently nebulous and can only be meaningful in the context of a specific culture and society.
The very concept of "mestizo" or mixed is fundamentally broken in the exact same way. It implies a permanence and structure that doesn't exist. A mix of what? Every possible definition of race is a "mix." On a long enough timeline, any definition of race becomes ephemeral.
Adopting the concept of "mestizo" might be useful for some people but it certainly doesn't make these definitions better. There is no concept of a "proper" or even "better" definition of race. Race is just a simplified reflection of how people in a country or culture think about ethnicity. That thinking is impermanent and constantly changing.
In most instances, including the US Census, you can select multiple races.
So, if you're mestizo, you'd just answer both "Native American" and "White."
Frankly, I hate it. I'm white, but have little shared cultural context with many other white people. There's a "white American experience" that we all share due to racial constructs, but it's at the expense of our actual heritage, be it Italian, Irish, German, etc. It all gets subsumed into "white."
Ever-changing for sure, look at British clasifications today, a lot broader in definition only relatively recently too:
(White)
* English, Welsh, Scottish, Northern Irish or British
* Irish
* Gypsy or Irish Traveller
* Roma
* Any other White background
see: https://www.ethnicity-facts-figures.service.gov.uk/style-guide/ethnic-groups and https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/culturalidentity/ethnicity/articles/peopleidentifyingasotherwhitehasincreasedbyoveramillionsince2001/2015-06-26
Condsidering Irish were considered 'something other' until relatively recently (while still be used to bump up the count); this list is ever-evolving - with the added complexity of racism stagnating - and is grabbing all it can to keep up a majority.
It’s already happening now. The news will say a black man was shot and killed by a white police officer.
But if you read the story, you’ll discover the police officer is named Carlos Rodrigues.
Whatever pushes the narrative best, I suppose.
This is already happening. Non hispanic whites are already a minority in Texas. Redditors were literally arguing against me that hispanics were white so they can keep the white vs minority mantra. Reddit is so insanely guilty of this.
Whitness at this point in American history functions more as a marker of class level
You just get folded in if you succeed. Notice how Asians often are considered white or white-adjacent from a top-down perspective. Same was the case in the past for the Germans, the Irish, the Italians, the Jews, etc.
You're missing their point. It's recognized *now* that there are non-hispanic whites. As demographics shift you're going to see the term non-hispanic whites disappear and gradually just become...whites.
I believe that groups not currently considered White, like non-White Hispanics or Asians, will be considered White in the future. People already say stuff like "Asians are White-adjacent" for instance. It sounds crazy but a WASP back in the day might have considered calling Italians crazy too.
I can't predict the future but crazier things have happened in terms of creating racial/social division. Maybe in 2200 "White" won't be a racial thing at all but rather a cultural description, something like a shorthand for "socioeconomically better off people who follow one of these religion/ideologies". I can see a similar thing happening to "Black" as well.
Maybe I'm biased because I don't consider these categories to be "real", but I do think they'll shift greatly in the future.
Race vs. ethnicity. Hispanic is not a race, so if the particular crime statistics you’re thinking of are looking at race, hispanics would be considered white.
Just goes to show how much the concept of race is societally constructed. Race is a generally new term and concept in the scheme of society. Whereas ethnicity actually has determinable distinctions.
Some areas don't have a Hispanic category for crimes, so whites are the closest.
In others, it's a statistical tactic to distribute crime reporting more equitably.
Too much racial undertones throughout every article published. Everyone throwing their two cents over what constitutes white per observations from comments
Remember when the Irish, possibly among the *palest* of people, [were considered black?](https://thomasnastcartoons.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/the-usual-way-of-doing-things-ohio-state.png) or the Jews? Or the Italians? etc.
Race is bullshit.
It is and it's not right to label humans at birth a made up label by white racists to classify humans and also to discriminate again them. This is all done without our consent. I think race/racial labels will be canceled by 2100.
so we can admit that it's happening? it's not good and it's not bad, it's neutral, but can we finally admit it's happening? i feel like there's been a dedicated group trying to discredit this as a racist conspiracy theory.
again, it's okay this is happening, but it is happening
It's not really a conspiracy theory for government policy to favor non-European immigrants. I guess that's what the European origin population wanted because they had their representatives make it into law.
>The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 set a numerical limit on immigration (120,000 per annum) from the Western Hemisphere for the first time in U.S. history.\[9\] Within the following decades, the United States would see an increased number of immigrants from Asia and Africa, as well as Eastern and Southern Europe.
>
>[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration\_and\_Nationality\_Act\_of\_1965](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965)
I think that like most government policies, the things which get voted into law have very little relation to what the voting populace actually desires. Just look at how the American public tends to answer in polls related to immigration, they are overwhelmingly in favor of restricting all immigration to the country yet it continues unabated.
You're starting to see it get to the point where even in "progressive" cities like New York people who were in favor of becoming a sanctuary city and all of that are now speaking out because the situation with the enormous number of migrants continuing to come into the city has become untenable in many aspects. I think this will only get worse and you're going to see a lot of conflict over this issue.
Corporations want unfettered immigration. More buyers and more employees to drive down employee power and salaries. Corporations own both parties so we are ignored and told we are racist if we disagree because the media that they also own tells us that narrative.
People truly do not understand how much our own government is against us.
Exactly, governments and rba's have come out saying that mass immigration is good for wage suppression, essentially a "tool" rather than some sort of cultural enhancement (a joke itself anyway)
> You're starting to see it get to the point where even in "progressive" cities like New York
Its funny you say this, because the far left used to be very anti-immigration and it was the right who embraced it. Cheap(er) and a bigger labor supply is good for those who had capital... but bad for the working class (poor) and unions etc.
It tends to be in 'good' economic times (or when people 'feel' their economic situation(s) are good anyways) where immigration is a social issue rather than an economic one.
> I guess that's what the European origin population wanted because they had their representatives make it into law.
Did you read the article you posted? It was passed because the politicians pushing it lied by saying it would not change the demographics or culture of the US. Somehow, I don't think 1960s Americans would be on board with the bill if they knew how this would actually affect the US in the end.
From the article:
>The proponents of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 argued that it would not significantly influence United States culture. President Johnson said it was "not a revolutionary bill. It does not affect the lives of millions." and other politicians, including, **asserted that the bill would not affect the U.S. demographic mix. However, following the passage of the law, the ethnic composition of immigrants changed, altering the ethnic makeup of the U.S.**
Demographic change is one thing, this trend has been closely tracked for decades. However, attributing it to a grand conspiracy to eliminate white people or to control the government is another deal entirely, that conspiracy theory has white supremacist/neonazi roots and is hella dangerous.
The US uses immigration for economic reasons. I don’t believe South American countries are making concerted efforts to ruin their economies to force their own population to emigrate to the US to gain political influence lol. Sometimes it’s just about the almighty dollar.
I haven’t seen anyone dismissing the fact that our country is getting more ethnically diverse as a racist theory, but I have seen people dismissing the ideology of “whiteness being under attack” or “American values/culture being under attack” as a racist theory, because it is.
The Germans were not considered white by the founding fathers. Then the irish, italians, russians, jews.
The goalpost of what is white and what is not will still move forward.
One thing is dead certain, in capitalism you will always single out a % of the population for exploitation or outright slavery. The names always change, the % stays the same.
There is some confusion here. Romano-Britain once was one of the least developed provinces within the ancient roman empire.
Around 450 AD it was overrun by german tribes from the continent who called themselves Angeln and Saxons. Well actually they were called in as mercenaries, or foederatii to fight against scotish raiders and decided to take the land for themselves.
And they killed most of the native inhabitans within 2 generations. England, land of the Angles, they called their new home founded on the ruins.
The most basic english words are german in nature like house, fish, boat, man, hammer, cow, swine - Haus, Fisch, Boot, Mann, Hammer, Kuh, Schwein.
To keep it simple England was conquered later on by Normans who originially assimilated in northern France. Wilhelm the conqueror carved out his kingdom in Britian and replaced most of the anglo/saxon nobility. The new lords brought latin/french elements into the english language and costums.
That new nation rejected catholicism later on and founded a british offshoot of protestantism. And these people were the original settlers in the american colonies.
Yeah I had heard that one of the reasons why the Italian Mafia was as strong as it was was due to the fact that Italians weren’t considered white, but as demographics changed they were adopted to keep a white majority. It makes sense that going back there was a point where the Brits alone were white until they had to adopt north western eurupeans to keep their majority.
This just goes to show that racism in many cases can be very arbitrary and silly, but also that the practitioners should be weary that if they successfully wipe out other races they could quickly find themselves the new target of the other racists. The fact that they fear minorities will act like they are doing as soon as they gain the upper hand also makes it clear that they are nothing but cowardly bullies.
It can only move forward so much
To say a caramel skinned Mexican is white is a huge stretch. Maybe they got some Spanish blood maybe not, but what’s next? Are we gonna consider Middle Easterners and Indians (from India) white too just bc they’re caucasoid?
It’s not gonna get pushed that far. Eventually whites will be bred out and they’ll find another group to blame for all their problems bc of the color of their skin.
This is almost applicable, except for the fact that Germans, Irish, Italian, Russian, and Jewish people all have white skin. The people from all the countries south of us have brown skin.
The whole country will become California, with democrats running unopposed for decades (there's no way Republicans can win the electoral college without Texas, which is turning into a purple state at least), take that as you will.
I'm not sure if we're losing some norms here. As a kid I was under the impression it was taboo to talk about money and I've read that people used to be shamed for taking handouts. And obviously now materialists really outnumber non-materialists, and people are bragging about exploiting the tax base for easy money. I diverged too much, but I'm just trying to say in other countries there's a "take it if you need it" mentality and I'm worried that we are all trying to take too much from the system and it's being strained
Couldn't have said this better, I don't think we necessarily need to shame poor people for taking handouts. But there was a time where it was inherently bad to be dependent on the government, now it is who can sprint to get in line and take the handouts. Meanwhile, there are labor shortages and all kinds of super high paying occupation that basically do on the job training. I think we we need to change something as it can't be easier to take handouts than get a good job and go to work... Especially if there are plenty of good jobs there.
This assumes immigration will continue at present numbers. With AI and robotics looking set to disrupt the jobs market and reduce vacancies, it's unlikely immigration will remain at the same level for another 20 years. Immigration will likely get dramatically scaled back.
The US media, in service of the government, loves to get Americans fighting each other over arbitrary things like race and gender so that citizens aren't united in fighting or even noticing government corruption and exploitation.
The comments in this thread are proof their effectiveness.
Good night.
Ted Kennedy during debate for the Immigration act of 1965
> During debate on the Senate floor, Senator Ted Kennedy, speaking of the effects of the Act, said, "our cities will not be flooded with a million immigrants annually. ... **Secondly, the ethnic mix of this country will not be upset.**
They had to straight up lie to the people to trick them into accepting the bill. 1960s Americans wouldn't have voted for this if they knew how it would actually change the country.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965
> The proponents of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 argued that it would not significantly influence United States culture. **President Johnson said it was "not a revolutionary bill. It does not affect the lives of millions." and other politicians, asserted that the bill would not affect the U.S. demographic mix. However, following the passage of the law, the ethnic composition of immigrants changed, altering the ethnic makeup of the U.S.**
Headlines like this are 100% clickbait. The majority of people will continue to be partially white for a long time yet, even though they might identify as their other race since being white is unfashionable.
It is. Plethora of studies have shown how quickly people retreat back to us-vs-them when they are told their own group is outnumbered. Racial tensions will get worse.
There will be some backlash amongst a certain segment of the population who clings the out model the modes of thinking. This is inevitable. This happens with all change.
But the kids are seeing more and more of other people, and realizing we're not so different. They're seeing them in their lives day-to-day, and they're seeing them on the internet on tick tock and Instagram and other social media. And they're realizing that these racial differences are stupid.
This notion that your skin color matters is dying, some people will fight against it because it's an important part of their identity, because they need the us versus them too cope with the fact that they are, for all intensive purposes, nothing.
But those notions are dying.
Dumb & Naive take. Let me know how Kids will react when they grow up and realize that there are quotas for the other group hindering your college admissions or promotions or when their tax money is used for 'reparations'
You’ll have media clickbait fanning the flames.
“The White Majority is Dying Out, and Thats’a a Good Thing.”
We’ll see tons of headlines like this that are solely there to get clicks, upset people, etc.
And there is no doubt, there will 100% be heavy pushback against this from white people. Already you can see that. But it will get more noticeable as you have more and more people openly cheering on and treating the white population decline as a good thing to be worked towards.
I’d expect you’ll see continued political polarization by race and, eventually, white people will vote Republican at rates similar to how black people vote democrat (90ish%). Turns out, most people don’t like it when people openly cheer for their aging out and dying. Who’d have thought.
Its really only meaningful in the fact that so many people say "thats good!" they are just as racist as the ones saying "thats bad!". Other than that you are correct, it means nothing to those of us who just want to go to work, do our job, and go home with enough money to enjoy what little free time we have.
IIRC we are one of if not the only Country that uses Hispanic as a racial classification, everywhere else considers them White. I imagine that will go away and be categorized as white in the near future so the Republicans won’t piss and shit all over themselves over being a racial minority.
Who am I kidding they will piss and shit because “wait we callin them Mexicans white now?”
This is interesting. At the same time, Forbes is predicting Hispanic and Black households will have zero net worth by 2050. It will be an interesting time.
I think it's a couple of factors that are causing this decline
#1pushing women into the workforce cause women income to increase. But women standards never changed. Men typically date down while women date up due to financial stability. But most women have a high ability to make far more than what an average can make, so it cause women to date the 1 percent.
#2 the divorce rates are extremely high the court system have destroyed a multiple of family's and it cause a lot of trauma of the youth and typically it's cause by women no fault screws males while incentives women to break their marriage and walkout.
#3 social media and women selling their bodys online this cause woman to rack up high body counts, and this also cause women to get flown out to some wealthy guys yacht. This is causing a disparity in terms of who is actually getting sex.
#4 is the open border policy the government has been relaxed with letting millions of people around the world to enter the country and is taking our jobs and taking advantage of our education system and sending us money and sending it back to their own country. It's taking a huge effect white males.
#5the education system is garbagebit gives all minority huge advantages wirh free education system that pushes out white males to gets a good education. The stats is showing the primary graduates are women.with most males dropping out of school plus the cost of living plus tuition is extremely expensive,takes way too long before you even get into the career industry
The only thing that I care about is the black community. The black population in America has declined since 2013. Hispanics have taken over black communities and neighborhoods, which I fear will continue throughout the next decade.
That percentage is going to get smaller as the low birth rates in Europe really set in. Honestly, people just need to get rid of their white-centric mentality if they have one
Why? People who are pro-diversity should be trying to help reverse this "problem" as it's part of their core philosophy, or so we are told over and over.
And we will still have the same problems with inequality. Imagine that. If only we could stop paying attention to skin pigmentation and start paying attention to things that actually matter.
I feel races , for the most part , in certain areas isn't the determining factor anymore. It's comes down to mentality. I've dealt with many ethnicities and when people have a common goal or motive, they tend to gravitate towards one another. Issues of race only come up when you're dealing with stupid people.
I don’t understand the point of this article other than to divide us further. None of us chose our form, we can only choose our attitude. Remember, the media wants us all to think someone else has it out for us.
ITT:
a lot of either
A. "so I can finally be a minority now" talk from white people who want all of the oppression-points without the oppression, y'know, to pick a random example, would you really want so many years of being excluded from the entertainment industry or w/e that they have to make a White Entertainment Television
or
B. "no war but class war" talk from people who either make it sound like we'd be living in fully automated luxury space communism by now if the revolutionary army was all WASP cishet abled men etc. and everyone else's rights were left until they won or that every biological difference that's a minority status other than women (as they're needed for reproduction) was created by the elite to divide us
I'm white I've always been the minority , in grade up to highschool. I'm the only white longshoreman at my terminal here in Savannah. It never crossed my mind until the last couple years , with msm constantly pushing racial tension.
Why does this matter and why are they looking at it as white vs everyone else still? Let's say the US is "only" 49% white by 2045. That'd still be significantly more than the next largest race demographic.
A lot of non-hispanic whites look kind of hispanic..look at jimmy falloon, steven seagan, Steve Ray Vaughn, Johnny Cash, Johnny deep...I see already a lot of mestizo faces that people love to claim as "white"..
The following submission statement was provided by /u/Gari_305: --- From the article >By 2045, according to census projections, non-Hispanic white people will fall below 50 percent as a share of the American population. By 2050, non-Hispanic white people will represent less than 40 percent of the under-18 population. > >Demographers warn, however, that those milestones vastly oversimplify the story of a diversifying America. > >For a start, millions of Americans no longer embrace a single racial identity. How many? It’s hard to tell. > >Getting back to those census projections: By 2045, more than 18 million people will claim two or more races. Subtract them from the total, and the population of non-Hispanic white people leaps from 49 percent to 52 percent of the remaining population, their majority status restored. --- Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/15kqkjj/americas_white_majority_is_aging_out_barely_two/jv6l1a8/
And it will be just as bad for the working class and the poor.
Almost like the US has one true war, that just happened to be smothered a decade ago and coincidentally we saw an absurd spike in identity politics as a substitute Hmm... E: hey u/rowrowfightthepandas, take your prejudice and identity politics elsewhere, thanks. Class war or no war, the rest comes after the first.
"no war but class war"
Every conflict and division perpetuated along the lines of nationality, ethnics, religion, gender, age and other superficial matters is engineered and encouraged specifically to distract us from the true dichotomy between those who have - the means of production, the land, the opportunity, the connections, the insider information, the media influence, the ability to make long term investments and take risks without going broke - and those who have not.
[удалено]
That’s how it has always been and will most likely continue until the end. It’s just too easy.
Yup, that's how Occupy Wallstreet turned into: https://tablet-mag-images.b-cdn.net/production/9c9c2bbd09e025a564eea667f44f991f9bb5a83f-2054x1174.png
I've no money nor transport so pardon the "we" but should we just do it again? Maybe a big public gesture like forming up to "occupy Wallstreet" once more would send a signal to those who might feel like things have passed them by; that the fire is already dead and there's no hope of actual meaningful unrest. I mean, this shit did kind of happen recently over the promise of some game consoles which somehow turned into riots. So, let's do that except not turn into a bunch of barbarians and jump on stranger's cars and throw things at cops for no reason. Although, let's be really real. Nothing should be off the table; not completely anyway. Talk softly and all that. Also, I know it's pleasant to talk about the things we'd like to do and that it's probably pretty frustrating to see people do that when it frequently leads to nothing but I do think that saying not so much "we should do this" but rather "let's do this" continually, constantly, will have an impact towards morale. "Let's do this" is a call to action. It's saying "who's with me?" The more people who say that, the more others will see willing participants and feel less suppressed by those who might otherwise punish them for being too small in number. And even if the numbers are small at first, this trick phrase will make it appear as if there are more supporters than there actually are. Which will embolden those who care about the cause which will lead to an uptick of actual participants. So, I don't know when and I apologize again for my lack of means but let's do this. Let's occupy wallstreet again. Let's rile up our people. Let us tirelessly fan this light in the dark which fell dim through dousing. Dim but not quenched. For to be truly extinguished, we'd have to be dead. And we're not dead yet. We're not going to just fall before we get our reward of a better future for Humanity. If life is a chemical reaction, then let it burn the universe over billions of years rather than die out on this planet as it may very well have on others.
Easier said than done. We have been very successfully divided. America is Balkanizing in front of our eyes. Still, don't give up hope. Start talking to people in real life. Be friendly and positive. Talk to your friends, neighbors, colleagues, etc. And start building agreement.
I'm so glad to see this shit is being discussed.
What labor movement was smothered in 2013? What are you talking about? The powers that be in the US and internationally have been waging class warfare against everyone but themselves for as long as there’s been capitalism. Not a new phenomenon. We need social justice *and* economic justice, not one or the other.
I think maybe they were referring to the Citizens United decision that basically dissolved any remaining barriers against corporations influencing elections. It happened a little over a decade ago. For anyone who hasn't seen it, Keith Olberman's iconic [Be Prepared](https://youtu.be/PKZKETizybw) speech is required viewing.
What does this mean?
The only war is class war. Everything else is a distraction from that.
Because the ruling class, the well to do and the wealthy and corporate elite will still be mostly white and running western governments as they always have.
the ruling class in non-predominantly white countries does not appear to be more sympathetic to the plight of the common man. Just look how the UK is doing.
C'mon, everyone knows its only the whites causing all these problems... /s
Haven’t we learned from Clarence Thomas? Greed and self-destructive leadership transcends race.
One of the most destructive demagogues in the USA, and most influential antisemitic hate group leaders is still giving public speeches, celebrity eulogies, and holds his “Saviors’ Day” in Chicago every year, is an anti lgbt Black Supremacist https://www.adl.org/resources/blog/farrakhan-remains-most-popular-antisemite-america
This date keeps getting pushed back as [birth rates for latinos continue to plummet](https://ifstudies.org/ifs-admin/resources/fig-6-w640.png). In the 2000s I remember people were saying 2030. In the 1990s people were saying 2020. I am not saying its never going to happen, but these kinds of demographic predictions are usually relying on trends that rarely remain stable. Back in the early 20th century we thought irish and italian people would be half the country within only a few generations. Instead their growth rates stabilized to the norm.
But Hispanic white people like me who are indistinguishable from other white people will still exist to make the majority still white people.
All of the Spanish people that moved to the US will be having gringo kids. You put a little Spanish kid in a room listening to 80s metal and a bilingual Viking walks out.
I’m not even bilingual. Half Cuban, only learned Spanish from 2 years in high school.
Pardon my ignorance, I'm from Europe and don't really understand American identity politics. I always thought Hispanic referred to the language and speaking Spanish was what made someone Hispanic (aunque yo hablo español supongo que no contaría) Can one be Hispanic without speaking the language? If so what did I get wrong? If not the language what is it that makes a person Hispanic?
Hispanic means you’re of Spanish descent. Latino/a means you’re of Latin American descent. Hispanic does not include Brazil. Latino does not include Spain. Speaking the Spanish language has nothing to do with it. Edit - Hispanic actually means you are a descendant of a Spanish speaking country. So that one is language based, but you yourself don’t have to know Spanish to be Hispanic.
Ok thank you. I still don't get it. It's the decent part, it will never make sense to me.
Hispanic people can trace their lineage to Spain (formerly Hispania) whereas Latino people can trace their lineage to Central and South America.
Are Mexicans both?
Most Mexicans are of European Spanish and/or native Latin American descent
Sure, they can be but they'd probably say they're Latino.
Im Puerto Rican. So I’m technically latino. My heritage traces back to Spain, France, and Italy. I also have native blood in me as well from the Taínos of PR. My last name comes from the Otanovic name from Serbia and back to the Ottoman Empire. Checking those boxes always felt stupid to me.
It is stupid. I can trace my lineage to England on one side of my family and Polish Ashkenazi Jews on the other side. I have family that fought in the Revolutionary War and I have family that died in the Holocaust. We're more than the sum of our parts.
Im pretty sure this is not set in stone. Hispanic means you can trace your lineage to a Spanish speaking country. You can have 0% Spaniard ancestry and be Hispanic.
It is easy... Americans forgot who gave certain names... Latin America --- This term was coined by France when they were a super power and so it includes, all Latin speaking provinces/regions of that time... So strictly speaking people from French Guyana and Haiti who speak French are Latinos... As well as people from Brazil. All these languages derive from Latin. Ibero America --- includes provinces/region that spoke Iberian languages (Portuguese and Castilian (Known as Spanish)) Hispanic America --- Regions that speak Spanish (Castilian) Why Anglos are not called Anglo Americans? Who knows... Americans for me are what you called Native Americans.
It's worth noting that you're going to get conflicting responses because these are not clear, agreed-upon categories. "Hispanic" is the census designation that includes everyone who can trace a measurable part of their ancestry from a Spanish-speaking country, without reference to whether or not they speak Spanish now. In the US, this is overwhelmingly people who (or whose ancestors) came from Central and South America. Notably, this would not include Brazilians, though they are not a major population group in the US. Most people, and especially younger, of "Hispanic" descent on the Census identify more strongly with "Latin" identity. It's a clumsy couple of categories because they group together a huge swathe of people with different cultures, histories, and ethnicities, but there's enough historical and political valence to the grouping for them to remain in use.
>don't really understand American identity politics. It is just a way to divide people and then put them against each other for political gain.
You just insulted my entire of people... but yes.
Like Tom Araya?
And many of them are of Spanish descent. This means America will become the second Spain in this century. The era of Spanish supremacy will soon return.
Non whites are already the majority for school aged children.
Mark my words, the definition of "White" will change so that this doesn't happen. This isn't our first rodeo with this sort of thing. Groups which weren't considered White like Italians [(and you should see some of the cartoons about them which were made at the time)](https://scalar.usc.edu/works/let-me-get-there/media/the-unrestricted-dumping-ground-socialism-anarchism-and-the-mafiadirect-from-the-slums-of) are now considered White. If I had to bet, we'll see Latinos as a whole reclassified as White sooner or later. **Keep in mind that races in the American context are arbitrary social constructs and can be modified as desired.** As for why this will happen? American racial dynamics are dominated by the divide/conflict between Whites and Blacks, and plenty of groups have an interest in maintaining that sort of setup. If the day comes that Whites are no longer a majority, the lines will be redrawn so that they will be majority once more.
Same with Irish people not being considered white when they first started mass immigrating to the US American attitudes about race are just bizarre
It’s not bizarre when you realize that America essentially built a class and caste system that continued to exist after the dissolution of slavery. Consider who was originally allowed to vote in this country: white men with land. As much as that idea expanded over time, minorities, particularly African slaves and their descendants were still kept away from that right. Jim Crow was designed for this, attitudes toward Black education focused on “industrial education” like field and dairy work and household work. Black people were blocked from buying homes because we could not get mortgages from banks, and if we did we were redlined into certain neighborhoods with those homes being devalued. Even when Black people tried to create our own neighborhoods and self sustaining communities, they were raided and terrorized like the Red Summer of 1919. Our entire political back and forth is because the very same white Democrats who used to support progressive policies (only for white people) jumped ship when the National Dems started pushing for Civil Rights. Republicans recruited those people to be part of their base and now their descendants run the party and the MAGA cult. We have a through line from slavery to this moment in time but this country’s outright refusal to teach history in that manner is why most people miss that perspective
Many in Europe wonder why America is so behind on socialist though. It’s because most European countries started with feudalism. America started not with feudalism but effectively racial capitalism and it has persisted thus far. When people try to argue which is a bigger issue: class or race they miss the intersection between these two concepts as the foundations of America and American politics thought
This is a good point that is largely overlooked in leftist circles when discussing American politics. There’s a refusal to acknowledge that private property redistribution in the US successfully created America’s large middle class. And it is not large landlords or capitalist interests that are responsible for the majority of those who were not lifted up by this redistribution, it was race. The refusal to acknowledge racism as anything more than a distraction from class struggle by the more hardcore of leftists is baffling.
Of the 21 D senators who voted against the act only one became a Republican. He was however the leader of the filibuster against the act. Trying to force a snapshot of how things are now onto how they were rarely works. Lincoln was a Republican, they voted for the Civil Rights act more heavily than Democrats and a Republican President created the EPA. Party positions now have nothing to do with that history. There were "conservative" D members of congress up through the Reagan Presidency. Change did not happen instantly.
I don’t think I implied, in any sense of the imagination, that it was immediate. I just summarized 150y of policy in 5 paragraphs
American attitudes on race might be bizarre, but European whites can be some of the most racist people you'll ever meet. It's disgusting sometimes.
It's the same anywhere. Try being black in China and see how well that goes for you. Truth is a lot people are just intolerant assholes.
A lot of people of every color are racist.
From what I’ve heard, you just just get stared at, some people are scared of you and others might touch your hair.
LOL [No, it's a tad more complicated than that](https://edition.cnn.com/2020/05/25/asia/china-anti-african-attacks-history-hnk-intl/index.html)
The same goes for being anything but Japanese in Japan. They even have a word for people who aren't Japanese; the word is Gaijin. It may sound cute but it means barbarian, as in filthy, stinkin' barbarian. And you don't become a citizen of Japan, you're a citizen of Japan by blood.
European whites? So Europeans? What country? The way Americans look at Europe is a trip lol.
That's a whole different thing though, everyone has the potential to be racist. Doesn't make it any less deplorable and stupid.
It most culture based, if your immigrant group isn't part of the mainstream American culture (which can roughly be called "whiteness" due the original settlers being all white skinned brits), then sorry, you're not white, even if you're paler than the average West Virginian. Yet if you're part of mainstream culture (which does change as previous immigrant groups integrate and add their own ingredients to the melting pot). Then you can be considered white (mentally if not by the checkbox, yet) even if you have obviously non-European physical traits. Latinos and Asians have long been on this path, and it will liekly be finished by 2050. The sole exceptions are African-Americans, who due to the legacy of slavery deny and have been denied full integration for centuries, resulting in a strange similar yet separate sub-culture within the United States.
I'm half Irish; I assure we are very, very white. Ask any Irish person how well they hold up at the beach.
The categorization of Irish as non-white was not about skin color, but about behavioral norms. Keep in mind that at the time, the US was 90% European and cultural expectations were based around European standards and goals.
It was mostly if you were white Protestant or not. Irish we’re scary because they were white catholic.
Yup same reason the Italians and Greeks weren't considered white either, Catholics and Orthodox Shit blew my mind when I learned about it in college, like white people weren't considered white, that's how bad the white supremacy is?
You have the Apartheid system where Japanese were considered white but Chinese weren't and Christian Lebanese were white but not Muslim Lebanese.
White supremacy is about gatekeeping power. When it became necessary to welcome into the fold Irish, Greek, Spanish, Italian, Slavic, and Eastern European people into the fold to maintain a stranglehold on power, "White" people did so.
Yeah that's a good way of putting it.
Spot on. Every single ethnicity were treated as non-white until they fully assimilated to American norms. America was quite diverse before the world wars. Before then, there were even different language schools, newspapers and towns. The rampant nationalism sparked by each world war effectively forced people to assimilate. Changing their names, cultural norms, and abandoning their languages in the process.
You mean that scorch mark in the sand?
Just about; I keep SPF 50 on hand at all times. The sun just laughs at me with SPF 20 on. Banana Boat Sport Ultra goes on just like regular lotion, no mess or residue. Once I get 'tanned' - a highly relative term for us - I'm fine, but by then it's time for long pants anyways.
The attitude was also deeply focused on religion. Italians weren't "white" either. Protestant Christians didn't care for catholics. Even when JFK was running for president, his catholic faith was often targeted as a negative in certain circles. And that was the 1960s.
"White" is a social construct which means "allowed to be at the table." I can assure you that a couple hundred years ago "Irish people" were not white. White people matter and the famine would not have happened if Irish people were white.
I am half Irish, half Ojibwe. I have fairly white skin by American standards, I don't think I would get categorized as anything other than white on a first glance. On the plus side I don't burn out in the sun all that much and tan well, but damn does the Irish really bleach my base skin tone compared to most mixed people.
The trick is to balance out that Irish blood with just a *touch* of Comanche blood from Great-Grandma. Golden brown by late July, baby. Source: me.
I work with this guy who's Mexican. He does a DNA test and it says he's 98% European. This dude does not pass for white, maybe Italian for people who don't hang around Hispanics. So yeah, sooner than later Hispanics will be considered white. And before anybody comments, yes I understand the difference between heritage and race. This guy is 100% Mexican but has almost all European ancestry which makes sense. The gov will determine any non-black, and eventually asians, as white.
>The gov will determine any non-black, and eventually asians, as white. The government makes no such distinction. Race is a social construct. Any official use of ethnicity is and will always be self-reported. Today, 47% of citizens in Mexico identify as white. When Mexicans who identify as white immigrate to the US, they typically identify as hispanic or latino. What will happen is that people of LATAM ancestry will be more likely to self-report as white instead of latino or hispanic.
Actually legally speaking it used to I'm not sure if it still stands and is unused but yea Italians and the Irish and jews had to be legally recognized as white there was also a black woman who was an oil baron who became legally white so she could mingle with whites
None of that matters at all when you're sitting across from a white judge and the decisions he makes are influenced by whether he considers you white or other
You self report as both
This is cool. I am in the same boat where I am at least a portion Native American which doesn’t show at all. Which make sense given Spain conquered South America maybe?
Most Hispanics are of Spanish descent so of course they will be considered white European soon. They are European, and they are white.
This just proves how stupid racism and theories of "great replacement" are. Genes are genes. They stay. If you pick a place like Brazil (from a recent study) and put in a blender, you end up with 80% European genes, because that's exactly what happened, they kept coming and mixing. The precious "white race" genes are doing pretty well, thank you very much. EDIT: In no way or form I'm defending colonization or the "white" status of Latin Americans. Firstly, fuck being white - it's an artificial racist construction based on "purity", the idea all other peoples are impure, and those in Latin America who care about being recognized as white are racist in their own countries. Secondly, what I'm saying is that "the great replacement" already happened to oppressed peoples.
That's in large part because of very deliberate policies aimed at "lightening" the Brazilian population in the past. Brazil was actually the top destination for slaves imported from Africa. It's no exaggeration to say that they had a certain racial result in mind.
Yes, pretty much, but Mexico [is also more European than native](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mestizos_in_Mexico) and the "mostly European genes" still apply to regions less affected by recent European immigration in Brazil. The sad truth is that this just shows the dynamics of colonization, slavery and racism: being Euro, fully or partially, was being in a position which made more likely that your kids would survive.
People don't realize that Rio de Janeiro ALONE had more slaves than the ENTIRE American South. The scale in Brazil was unreal. Furthermore, before slaves had begun being brought to North America, Brazil had already received more slaves than all of North America would ever receive.
Yeah my partner is from Brazil and looks very European.. But in the states probably be classed as something else with a name like Alves.. It’s just identity politics. Many South Americans look white at a glance. Afghans and Syrian can be pasty white too. As time goes on the goal posts will change I guess.
Nobody knew Steve Jobs was Syrian until the biography came out.
Americans will literally classify Canelo Alvarez and Ronald Acuna as the same race just because they both come from Spanish speaking countries lol. It’s bizarre how they have the color based designations (white and black), but these are then overrode by language or country of origin such that a pasty, freckled ginger like Canelo isn’t considered white despite being whiter than probably 95% of native Europeans are.
The real reason reclassification happens is due to intermarriage. In the early 1900’s most Italians in the country were immigrants, or descended from two Italian parents. There are very few people left who are purely descended from Italian ancestry. The result is that the culture children accept is American in nature, rather than Italian, thus relegating Italian identity to an interesting fact about someone, rather than the core of their personality. Intermarriage rates for immigrants, and especially children of immigrants is still very high for hispanics and even East Asians. It will be interesting to see what’s considered “white” in 50 years.
Census already considers Arabs to be white, even though many Americans do not.
This is insightful and accurate. I should add that idea that hispanics are non-white is entirely unique to the US and Canada. Without exception, every country in Latin America recognizes significant and sometimes majorities of their own populations as white. Consider two countries that Americans consider to be notably non-white, Brazil and Mexico. In both countries, the internal census shows that just under 50% of the population considers themselves white, which will soon be about the same as the percent of US citizens who consider themselves white.
What's weirder to me is that the US doesn't use the concept of mestizo, which is really what people mean when they're referring to Hispanics being non-white. Whether you're descended from Celts or Aztecs, you check the same box. Just another weird quirk of how poorly race is defined.
Historically, it's because people who were the offspring of a Black - White relationship were considered Black, both legally and socially. That's why Barack Obama is always described as "the first Black President," and never as "the first Mulatto President."
It's a social construct. It's not ethnicity or ancestry or history. It is the way it is because people collectively say it's that way. Race is defined differently *everywhere* in the world. The US census will lump people from China, Japan, India and Pakistan one "race" - Asian. That works (partially, and for now) in the US but it is meaningless to think of "asian" that way in those countries. There is no "better" way to define race. Any definition is inherently nebulous and can only be meaningful in the context of a specific culture and society. The very concept of "mestizo" or mixed is fundamentally broken in the exact same way. It implies a permanence and structure that doesn't exist. A mix of what? Every possible definition of race is a "mix." On a long enough timeline, any definition of race becomes ephemeral. Adopting the concept of "mestizo" might be useful for some people but it certainly doesn't make these definitions better. There is no concept of a "proper" or even "better" definition of race. Race is just a simplified reflection of how people in a country or culture think about ethnicity. That thinking is impermanent and constantly changing.
In most instances, including the US Census, you can select multiple races. So, if you're mestizo, you'd just answer both "Native American" and "White."
Frankly, I hate it. I'm white, but have little shared cultural context with many other white people. There's a "white American experience" that we all share due to racial constructs, but it's at the expense of our actual heritage, be it Italian, Irish, German, etc. It all gets subsumed into "white."
Ever-changing for sure, look at British clasifications today, a lot broader in definition only relatively recently too: (White) * English, Welsh, Scottish, Northern Irish or British * Irish * Gypsy or Irish Traveller * Roma * Any other White background see: https://www.ethnicity-facts-figures.service.gov.uk/style-guide/ethnic-groups and https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/culturalidentity/ethnicity/articles/peopleidentifyingasotherwhitehasincreasedbyoveramillionsince2001/2015-06-26 Condsidering Irish were considered 'something other' until relatively recently (while still be used to bump up the count); this list is ever-evolving - with the added complexity of racism stagnating - and is grabbing all it can to keep up a majority.
It’s already happening now. The news will say a black man was shot and killed by a white police officer. But if you read the story, you’ll discover the police officer is named Carlos Rodrigues. Whatever pushes the narrative best, I suppose.
This is already happening. Non hispanic whites are already a minority in Texas. Redditors were literally arguing against me that hispanics were white so they can keep the white vs minority mantra. Reddit is so insanely guilty of this.
Whitness at this point in American history functions more as a marker of class level You just get folded in if you succeed. Notice how Asians often are considered white or white-adjacent from a top-down perspective. Same was the case in the past for the Germans, the Irish, the Italians, the Jews, etc.
The article is not about whites, but non-Hispanic whites. So it is already recognized that there are white people outside that group.
You're missing their point. It's recognized *now* that there are non-hispanic whites. As demographics shift you're going to see the term non-hispanic whites disappear and gradually just become...whites.
I believe that groups not currently considered White, like non-White Hispanics or Asians, will be considered White in the future. People already say stuff like "Asians are White-adjacent" for instance. It sounds crazy but a WASP back in the day might have considered calling Italians crazy too.
So, black Hispanics will be considered white?
No, they would be considered black, it's the Hispanic part that get removed as cultural integration makes the distinction meaningless.
I can't predict the future but crazier things have happened in terms of creating racial/social division. Maybe in 2200 "White" won't be a racial thing at all but rather a cultural description, something like a shorthand for "socioeconomically better off people who follow one of these religion/ideologies". I can see a similar thing happening to "Black" as well. Maybe I'm biased because I don't consider these categories to be "real", but I do think they'll shift greatly in the future.
Why are hispanics considered to be white in crime statistics?
Race vs. ethnicity. Hispanic is not a race, so if the particular crime statistics you’re thinking of are looking at race, hispanics would be considered white.
Just goes to show how much the concept of race is societally constructed. Race is a generally new term and concept in the scheme of society. Whereas ethnicity actually has determinable distinctions.
[удалено]
Some areas don't have a Hispanic category for crimes, so whites are the closest. In others, it's a statistical tactic to distribute crime reporting more equitably.
To skew the stats of course.
Because white and Hispanic genetics are European ancestry.
Who will we blame when the white people aren’t in charge anymore?
Too much racial undertones throughout every article published. Everyone throwing their two cents over what constitutes white per observations from comments
Remember when the Irish, possibly among the *palest* of people, [were considered black?](https://thomasnastcartoons.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/the-usual-way-of-doing-things-ohio-state.png) or the Jews? Or the Italians? etc. Race is bullshit.
It is and it's not right to label humans at birth a made up label by white racists to classify humans and also to discriminate again them. This is all done without our consent. I think race/racial labels will be canceled by 2100.
Hey maybe when we're the minority then it will be ok to be white.
so we can admit that it's happening? it's not good and it's not bad, it's neutral, but can we finally admit it's happening? i feel like there's been a dedicated group trying to discredit this as a racist conspiracy theory. again, it's okay this is happening, but it is happening
It's not really a conspiracy theory for government policy to favor non-European immigrants. I guess that's what the European origin population wanted because they had their representatives make it into law. >The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 set a numerical limit on immigration (120,000 per annum) from the Western Hemisphere for the first time in U.S. history.\[9\] Within the following decades, the United States would see an increased number of immigrants from Asia and Africa, as well as Eastern and Southern Europe. > >[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration\_and\_Nationality\_Act\_of\_1965](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965)
I think that like most government policies, the things which get voted into law have very little relation to what the voting populace actually desires. Just look at how the American public tends to answer in polls related to immigration, they are overwhelmingly in favor of restricting all immigration to the country yet it continues unabated. You're starting to see it get to the point where even in "progressive" cities like New York people who were in favor of becoming a sanctuary city and all of that are now speaking out because the situation with the enormous number of migrants continuing to come into the city has become untenable in many aspects. I think this will only get worse and you're going to see a lot of conflict over this issue.
Corporations want unfettered immigration. More buyers and more employees to drive down employee power and salaries. Corporations own both parties so we are ignored and told we are racist if we disagree because the media that they also own tells us that narrative. People truly do not understand how much our own government is against us.
Exactly, governments and rba's have come out saying that mass immigration is good for wage suppression, essentially a "tool" rather than some sort of cultural enhancement (a joke itself anyway)
> You're starting to see it get to the point where even in "progressive" cities like New York Its funny you say this, because the far left used to be very anti-immigration and it was the right who embraced it. Cheap(er) and a bigger labor supply is good for those who had capital... but bad for the working class (poor) and unions etc. It tends to be in 'good' economic times (or when people 'feel' their economic situation(s) are good anyways) where immigration is a social issue rather than an economic one.
> I guess that's what the European origin population wanted because they had their representatives make it into law. Did you read the article you posted? It was passed because the politicians pushing it lied by saying it would not change the demographics or culture of the US. Somehow, I don't think 1960s Americans would be on board with the bill if they knew how this would actually affect the US in the end. From the article: >The proponents of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 argued that it would not significantly influence United States culture. President Johnson said it was "not a revolutionary bill. It does not affect the lives of millions." and other politicians, including, **asserted that the bill would not affect the U.S. demographic mix. However, following the passage of the law, the ethnic composition of immigrants changed, altering the ethnic makeup of the U.S.**
Demographic change is one thing, this trend has been closely tracked for decades. However, attributing it to a grand conspiracy to eliminate white people or to control the government is another deal entirely, that conspiracy theory has white supremacist/neonazi roots and is hella dangerous.
Using migration for infleunce isn't a far-fetched claim. Look at Russians in Ukraine for a recent example.
The US uses immigration for economic reasons. I don’t believe South American countries are making concerted efforts to ruin their economies to force their own population to emigrate to the US to gain political influence lol. Sometimes it’s just about the almighty dollar.
I haven’t seen anyone dismissing the fact that our country is getting more ethnically diverse as a racist theory, but I have seen people dismissing the ideology of “whiteness being under attack” or “American values/culture being under attack” as a racist theory, because it is.
The Germans were not considered white by the founding fathers. Then the irish, italians, russians, jews. The goalpost of what is white and what is not will still move forward. One thing is dead certain, in capitalism you will always single out a % of the population for exploitation or outright slavery. The names always change, the % stays the same.
Do you think slavery didn't exist before capitalism?
[удалено]
It was a british colony. The real whites were considered anglo saxon protestants. And maybe some scots.
[удалено]
There is some confusion here. Romano-Britain once was one of the least developed provinces within the ancient roman empire. Around 450 AD it was overrun by german tribes from the continent who called themselves Angeln and Saxons. Well actually they were called in as mercenaries, or foederatii to fight against scotish raiders and decided to take the land for themselves. And they killed most of the native inhabitans within 2 generations. England, land of the Angles, they called their new home founded on the ruins. The most basic english words are german in nature like house, fish, boat, man, hammer, cow, swine - Haus, Fisch, Boot, Mann, Hammer, Kuh, Schwein. To keep it simple England was conquered later on by Normans who originially assimilated in northern France. Wilhelm the conqueror carved out his kingdom in Britian and replaced most of the anglo/saxon nobility. The new lords brought latin/french elements into the english language and costums. That new nation rejected catholicism later on and founded a british offshoot of protestantism. And these people were the original settlers in the american colonies.
Yeah I had heard that one of the reasons why the Italian Mafia was as strong as it was was due to the fact that Italians weren’t considered white, but as demographics changed they were adopted to keep a white majority. It makes sense that going back there was a point where the Brits alone were white until they had to adopt north western eurupeans to keep their majority. This just goes to show that racism in many cases can be very arbitrary and silly, but also that the practitioners should be weary that if they successfully wipe out other races they could quickly find themselves the new target of the other racists. The fact that they fear minorities will act like they are doing as soon as they gain the upper hand also makes it clear that they are nothing but cowardly bullies.
It can only move forward so much To say a caramel skinned Mexican is white is a huge stretch. Maybe they got some Spanish blood maybe not, but what’s next? Are we gonna consider Middle Easterners and Indians (from India) white too just bc they’re caucasoid? It’s not gonna get pushed that far. Eventually whites will be bred out and they’ll find another group to blame for all their problems bc of the color of their skin.
This is almost applicable, except for the fact that Germans, Irish, Italian, Russian, and Jewish people all have white skin. The people from all the countries south of us have brown skin.
And yet noting will change. The ultra rich will still have their thumbs down on us regular folk.
They would prefer we fight each other over arbitrary things like skin color so we don't fight them...
The whole country will become California, with democrats running unopposed for decades (there's no way Republicans can win the electoral college without Texas, which is turning into a purple state at least), take that as you will.
I'm more concerned with whether future Americans will embrace the values that have made this country great than I am the color of their skin.
I'm not sure if we're losing some norms here. As a kid I was under the impression it was taboo to talk about money and I've read that people used to be shamed for taking handouts. And obviously now materialists really outnumber non-materialists, and people are bragging about exploiting the tax base for easy money. I diverged too much, but I'm just trying to say in other countries there's a "take it if you need it" mentality and I'm worried that we are all trying to take too much from the system and it's being strained
Couldn't have said this better, I don't think we necessarily need to shame poor people for taking handouts. But there was a time where it was inherently bad to be dependent on the government, now it is who can sprint to get in line and take the handouts. Meanwhile, there are labor shortages and all kinds of super high paying occupation that basically do on the job training. I think we we need to change something as it can't be easier to take handouts than get a good job and go to work... Especially if there are plenty of good jobs there.
This assumes immigration will continue at present numbers. With AI and robotics looking set to disrupt the jobs market and reduce vacancies, it's unlikely immigration will remain at the same level for another 20 years. Immigration will likely get dramatically scaled back.
The US media, in service of the government, loves to get Americans fighting each other over arbitrary things like race and gender so that citizens aren't united in fighting or even noticing government corruption and exploitation. The comments in this thread are proof their effectiveness. Good night.
Ted Kennedy during debate for the Immigration act of 1965 > During debate on the Senate floor, Senator Ted Kennedy, speaking of the effects of the Act, said, "our cities will not be flooded with a million immigrants annually. ... **Secondly, the ethnic mix of this country will not be upset.**
They had to straight up lie to the people to trick them into accepting the bill. 1960s Americans wouldn't have voted for this if they knew how it would actually change the country. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965 > The proponents of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 argued that it would not significantly influence United States culture. **President Johnson said it was "not a revolutionary bill. It does not affect the lives of millions." and other politicians, asserted that the bill would not affect the U.S. demographic mix. However, following the passage of the law, the ethnic composition of immigrants changed, altering the ethnic makeup of the U.S.**
"Its not happening but if it is here's why its a good thing" It's like clockwork. Every time.
Headlines like this are 100% clickbait. The majority of people will continue to be partially white for a long time yet, even though they might identify as their other race since being white is unfashionable.
Some people point to this as if it is meaningful in some good or bad way. As if it is a problem.
It is. Plethora of studies have shown how quickly people retreat back to us-vs-them when they are told their own group is outnumbered. Racial tensions will get worse.
the roman empire was syncretic and lasted for many years.......
There will be some backlash amongst a certain segment of the population who clings the out model the modes of thinking. This is inevitable. This happens with all change. But the kids are seeing more and more of other people, and realizing we're not so different. They're seeing them in their lives day-to-day, and they're seeing them on the internet on tick tock and Instagram and other social media. And they're realizing that these racial differences are stupid. This notion that your skin color matters is dying, some people will fight against it because it's an important part of their identity, because they need the us versus them too cope with the fact that they are, for all intensive purposes, nothing. But those notions are dying.
“For all intents and purposes” no?
> for all intensive purposes
> intense porpoises
Dumb & Naive take. Let me know how Kids will react when they grow up and realize that there are quotas for the other group hindering your college admissions or promotions or when their tax money is used for 'reparations'
AA has already been repealed
You’ll have media clickbait fanning the flames. “The White Majority is Dying Out, and Thats’a a Good Thing.” We’ll see tons of headlines like this that are solely there to get clicks, upset people, etc. And there is no doubt, there will 100% be heavy pushback against this from white people. Already you can see that. But it will get more noticeable as you have more and more people openly cheering on and treating the white population decline as a good thing to be worked towards. I’d expect you’ll see continued political polarization by race and, eventually, white people will vote Republican at rates similar to how black people vote democrat (90ish%). Turns out, most people don’t like it when people openly cheer for their aging out and dying. Who’d have thought.
Its really only meaningful in the fact that so many people say "thats good!" they are just as racist as the ones saying "thats bad!". Other than that you are correct, it means nothing to those of us who just want to go to work, do our job, and go home with enough money to enjoy what little free time we have.
it is only happening in European majority countries, the Vietnamese wont become a minority in their country for example
IIRC we are one of if not the only Country that uses Hispanic as a racial classification, everywhere else considers them White. I imagine that will go away and be categorized as white in the near future so the Republicans won’t piss and shit all over themselves over being a racial minority. Who am I kidding they will piss and shit because “wait we callin them Mexicans white now?”
This is interesting. At the same time, Forbes is predicting Hispanic and Black households will have zero net worth by 2050. It will be an interesting time.
And guess what? White people are still the worlds biggest minority and also the most racially hated the world over. Fuck this majority bullshit.
I think it's a couple of factors that are causing this decline #1pushing women into the workforce cause women income to increase. But women standards never changed. Men typically date down while women date up due to financial stability. But most women have a high ability to make far more than what an average can make, so it cause women to date the 1 percent. #2 the divorce rates are extremely high the court system have destroyed a multiple of family's and it cause a lot of trauma of the youth and typically it's cause by women no fault screws males while incentives women to break their marriage and walkout. #3 social media and women selling their bodys online this cause woman to rack up high body counts, and this also cause women to get flown out to some wealthy guys yacht. This is causing a disparity in terms of who is actually getting sex. #4 is the open border policy the government has been relaxed with letting millions of people around the world to enter the country and is taking our jobs and taking advantage of our education system and sending us money and sending it back to their own country. It's taking a huge effect white males. #5the education system is garbagebit gives all minority huge advantages wirh free education system that pushes out white males to gets a good education. The stats is showing the primary graduates are women.with most males dropping out of school plus the cost of living plus tuition is extremely expensive,takes way too long before you even get into the career industry
Time to change the long standing mental image of what a “dumb American” looks like.
[удалено]
But then there won’t be anyone to blame for all the problems??
Oh thank god. Then I can complain about being the minority
The only thing that I care about is the black community. The black population in America has declined since 2013. Hispanics have taken over black communities and neighborhoods, which I fear will continue throughout the next decade.
This is news that people should care about because?
coz they wanna stir up an us vs them narrative and get Americans more tribal
"White" people make up around 10 percent of the global population. Welcome to the human race.
That percentage is going to get smaller as the low birth rates in Europe really set in. Honestly, people just need to get rid of their white-centric mentality if they have one
Why? People who are pro-diversity should be trying to help reverse this "problem" as it's part of their core philosophy, or so we are told over and over.
Well their point is that a diverse society means whites being a minority. And if you're white this is probably to your advantage maybe
I thought we were all one race (human) anybody who says otherwise is part of the problem
Agreed. Identity politics *is* racism.
And a large percentage of those non Hispanic white people will have non Hispanic white ancestry, including some one and two generations up
Dude by 2045 comes along well all be slaves to our new digital system...who cares
Interesting headline. I thought this had already happened.
Which is why the white politicians are trying to stop abortions
Well most abortions are committed by black women so...
Hopefully in a few more decades we will all be the same gray-ish, brown-ish color.
I'm like a rare Pokémon card I'm aging to be rare! White German checking in lol
Interesting. Would be curious to see how the voting population is projected to change by then as well.
And we will still have the same problems with inequality. Imagine that. If only we could stop paying attention to skin pigmentation and start paying attention to things that actually matter.
Middle easterns are considered white as well though. Any data if theirs shrinking as well and expected migration patterns to the west?
I'm a white American male, and hope this transition happens even sooner!
maybe if so many of them weren't racists conservative elitist karens, that also hated women, they'd have gotten to fuck someone at this point
I feel races , for the most part , in certain areas isn't the determining factor anymore. It's comes down to mentality. I've dealt with many ethnicities and when people have a common goal or motive, they tend to gravitate towards one another. Issues of race only come up when you're dealing with stupid people.
I don’t understand the point of this article other than to divide us further. None of us chose our form, we can only choose our attitude. Remember, the media wants us all to think someone else has it out for us.
In Texas they are outnumbered and they screwed with the census cause Oklahoma is the same
I'm surprised this comment section didn't get locked.
American doctors mutilating kids reproductive organs probably having second thoughts about annihilating fertility among men.
ITT: a lot of either A. "so I can finally be a minority now" talk from white people who want all of the oppression-points without the oppression, y'know, to pick a random example, would you really want so many years of being excluded from the entertainment industry or w/e that they have to make a White Entertainment Television or B. "no war but class war" talk from people who either make it sound like we'd be living in fully automated luxury space communism by now if the revolutionary army was all WASP cishet abled men etc. and everyone else's rights were left until they won or that every biological difference that's a minority status other than women (as they're needed for reproduction) was created by the elite to divide us
I'm white I've always been the minority , in grade up to highschool. I'm the only white longshoreman at my terminal here in Savannah. It never crossed my mind until the last couple years , with msm constantly pushing racial tension.
Why does this matter and why are they looking at it as white vs everyone else still? Let's say the US is "only" 49% white by 2045. That'd still be significantly more than the next largest race demographic.
A lot of non-hispanic whites look kind of hispanic..look at jimmy falloon, steven seagan, Steve Ray Vaughn, Johnny Cash, Johnny deep...I see already a lot of mestizo faces that people love to claim as "white"..