Jump to content

Welcome to FutureTimeline.forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

An interactive map of the US's historical racial and ethnic diversity by county for every US census year between 1960 and 2060


  • Please log in to reply
147 replies to this topic

#1
Futurist

Futurist

    Aspiring cross-dresser

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,108 posts
  • LocationSouthern California, United States of America, Planet Earth

Here is an interactive map of the US's historical racial and ethnic diversity by county for every US census year between 1960 and 2060:

 

https://www.usatoday...ves/div100-map/

 

The data for the latter years are, of course, projections.

 

Anyway, what do you think about this? Also, please enjoy! :)



#2
Cyber_Rebel

Cyber_Rebel

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 417 posts
  • LocationNew York

A white eventually soon to be seen as "minority" rule by Republicans will (hopefully) come to an end one way or another. The only way that is wouldn't is to stop immigration entirely, which unsurprisingly the current administration has at times been obsessed with. Think the likes of Stephen Miller. 

Much as I don't like to focus on identity politics, it's a reality that's just going to have to be accepted as diversity continues to define the country. It's not a bad thing itself, and America is going to have to remake itself accordingly. Unfortunately, this reality will no doubt mean that there will be those who push back, attempting once again to "Make America Great Again" as they'll feel threatened by the changing demographics and perceived loss of status. 

I'm not sure what the solution is, but perhaps we need a better economic system as well to accommodate changing demographics and give everyone an equal stake. Folks need to realize that despite what different background you may come from, everyone is just trying to have a better more meaningful life and this means a better say in controlling their material conditions. This in and of itself makes me wary that any flawed human government could be the answer no matter the ideology.

I hope we have a really good AGI by this point which can look at demographics in a neutral nonbiased way, and make logical choices which best benefits any particular group and the betterment of society. Aside from my nonsensical rambling, I think the U.S. as a "culture" will become even more multicultural and perhaps less focused on traditional "Americana." The type of diversity that you see in U.S. cities will spread out from the coast into the interior as the index seems to indicate, and this will be further fueled by rising cost of living in U.S. cities and climate change pushing people to live more rurally. This will have a profound impact on "small town" America, among other things like small or local businesses being more diversified.  



#3
caltrek

caltrek

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,665 posts

+1s for Futurist and Cyber_Rebel


The principles of justice define an appropriate path between dogmatism and intolerance on the one side, and a reductionism which regards religion and morality as mere preferences on the other.   - John Rawls


#4
Futurist

Futurist

    Aspiring cross-dresser

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,108 posts
  • LocationSouthern California, United States of America, Planet Earth

A white eventually soon to be seen as "minority" rule by Republicans will (hopefully) come to an end one way or another. The only way that is wouldn't is to stop immigration entirely, which unsurprisingly the current administration has at times been obsessed with. Think the likes of Stephen Miller. 

Much as I don't like to focus on identity politics, it's a reality that's just going to have to be accepted as diversity continues to define the country. It's not a bad thing itself, and America is going to have to remake itself accordingly. Unfortunately, this reality will no doubt mean that there will be those who push back, attempting once again to "Make America Great Again" as they'll feel threatened by the changing demographics and perceived loss of status. 

I'm not sure what the solution is, but perhaps we need a better economic system as well to accommodate changing demographics and give everyone an equal stake. Folks need to realize that despite what different background you may come from, everyone is just trying to have a better more meaningful life and this means a better say in controlling their material conditions. This in and of itself makes me wary that any flawed human government could be the answer no matter the ideology.

I hope we have a really good AGI by this point which can look at demographics in a neutral nonbiased way, and make logical choices which best benefits any particular group and the betterment of society. Aside from my nonsensical rambling, I think the U.S. as a "culture" will become even more multicultural and perhaps less focused on traditional "Americana." The type of diversity that you see in U.S. cities will spread out from the coast into the interior as the index seems to indicate, and this will be further fueled by rising cost of living in U.S. cities and climate change pushing people to live more rurally. This will have a profound impact on "small town" America, among other things like small or local businesses being more diversified.  

Good points. Also, I would highly encourage transhumanism as a way to uplift all groups in a diverse US and perhaps eventually close group gaps on various traits--such as achievement/student performance, criminality, et cetera. If there were no group differences on these traits, then maybe more people would be(come) comfortable with a more diversified US.

 

+1s for Futurist and Cyber_Rebel

Thank you, Joe! :)



#5
caltrek

caltrek

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,665 posts

Joe?

 

At any rate, what I came here to post:

 

Indeed, it would be difficult to exaggerate the importance of the contributions which these varied immigrants have made to the mosaic of California agriculture.

 

Much of the cultural history has been lost but enough material exists to demonstrate how important the contributions of these immigrant groups have been. Commenting on the extraordinary increase in rice production in California - from 70,000 bushels in 1912 to 9,000,000 bushels in 1919 - one historian has said that an increase of this magnitude in one decade is "too great to be either fully understood or appreciated." But Oriental immigrants in California could provide the answer. As early as 1865, 20,000 pounds of rice were imported by Chinese merchants to supply the needs of Chinese immigrants and, out of this need, with the skill and knowledge of both Chinese and Japanese farmers, came California's rice industry. Not only did Oriental immigrants pioneer in the production of this crop, working as laborers in building the dikes and irrigation systems used in flooding the rice fields, but for many years three-fourths of the California production has been exported to Hawaii for sale to other Orientals.

 

In the early 1890's, one Juan Murrieta of Los Angels, imported a variety of avocado trees from Atlixco, Mexico, and from this group of seedling trees came the varieties that were first planted for commercial production. It was in Atlixco that scientists in 1911 discovered the Fuerte variety, today 85 per cent of the trees of Southern California's 16,000 acres of avocado orchards were of this variety.

  

...Today an important tomato industry exists in the vicinity of Merced, California, employing a thousand people, which in 1948 produced $3,138,278 in income. The founder of this industry is one Camilla Pregno, an Italian immigrant, who in 1900 taught the Merced farmers how to grow tomatoes on stakes after the manner he had learned in Italy.

 

...In the vicinity of the towns of Paramount, Artesia, Clearwater, Bellflower, and Norwalk, in southern California, is a dairy industry which produces 500,000 gallons of milk a month and yields $61,000,000 annually.  This industry has been built up largely by Dutch immigrants who started settling in the area at the time of the first World War. 

 

-Carey McWilliams in California: The Great Exception, page 115-116. First published in 1949.

 

Bottom line is that all the immigration bashing and refusal to engage in discussions regarding the promotion of a more just and equitable society is almost quite literally biting the hand that feeds you.  Please, you folks living in the United States, try to remember that the next time you pick up a piece of food with your fork and place it in your mouth, or sip a glass of milk.  Try to remember where that sustenance came from. It is not that hard a mental exercise to undertake.


The principles of justice define an appropriate path between dogmatism and intolerance on the one side, and a reductionism which regards religion and morality as mere preferences on the other.   - John Rawls


#6
Futurist

Futurist

    Aspiring cross-dresser

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,108 posts
  • LocationSouthern California, United States of America, Planet Earth

Joe?

 

At any rate, what I came here to post:

 

Indeed, it would be difficult to exaggerate the importance of the contributions which these varied immigrants have made to the mosaic of California agriculture.

 

Much of the cultural history has been lost but enough material exists to demonstrate how important the contributions of these immigrant groups have been. Commenting on the extraordinary increase in rice production in California - from 70,000 bushels in 1912 to 9,000,000 bushels in 1919 - one historian has said that an increase of this magnitude in one decade is "too great to be either fully understood or appreciated." But Oriental immigrants in California could provide the answer. As early as 1865, 20,000 pounds of rice were imported by Chinese merchants to supply the needs of Chinese immigrants and, out of this need, with the skill and knowledge of both Chinese and Japanese farmers, came California's rice industry. Not only did Oriental immigrants pioneer in the production of this crop, working as laborers in building the dikes and irrigation systems used in flooding the rice fields, but for many years three-fourths of the California production has been exported to Hawaii for sale to other Orientals.

 

In the early 1890's, one Juan Murrieta of Los Angels, imported a variety of avocado trees from Atlixco, Mexico, and from this group of seedling trees came the varieties that were first planted for commercial production. It was in Atlixco that scientists in 1911 discovered the Fuerte variety, today 85 per cent of the trees of Southern California's 16,000 acres of avocado orchards were of this variety.

  

...Today an important tomato industry exists in the vicinity of Merced, California, employing a thousand people, which in 1948 produced $3,138,278 in income. The founder of this industry is one Camilla Pregno, an Italian immigrant, who in 1900 taught the Merced farmers how to grow tomatoes on stakes after the manner he had learned in Italy.

 

...In the vicinity of the towns of Paramount, Artesia, Clearwater, Bellflower, and Norwalk, in southern California, is a dairy industry which produces 500,000 gallons of milk a month and yields $61,000,000 annually.  This industry has been built up largely by Dutch immigrants who started settling in the area at the time of the first World War. 

 

-Carey McWilliams in California: The Great Exception, page 115-116. First published in 1949.

 

Bottom line is that all the immigration bashing and refusal to engage in discussions regarding the promotion of a more just and equitable society is almost quite literally biting the hand that feeds you.  Please, you folks living in the United States, try to remember that the next time you pick up a piece of food with your fork and place it in your mouth, or sip a glass of milk.  Try to remember where that sustenance came from. It is not that hard a mental exercise to undertake.

Isn't your name Joe? Or am I confusing you with someone else here?

 

BTW, beautiful summary and very interesting information! :)



#7
caltrek

caltrek

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,665 posts

^^^I think you are confusing me with somebody else. I am glad you enjoyed my summary and the information I provided.


The principles of justice define an appropriate path between dogmatism and intolerance on the one side, and a reductionism which regards religion and morality as mere preferences on the other.   - John Rawls


#8
Futurist

Futurist

    Aspiring cross-dresser

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,108 posts
  • LocationSouthern California, United States of America, Planet Earth

Oh; well, thanks for clarifying this part! :) And Yeah, this summary that you provided was certainly extremely nice! :)



#9
Futurist

Futurist

    Aspiring cross-dresser

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,108 posts
  • LocationSouthern California, United States of America, Planet Earth

BTW, I wonder--do you think that a similar trend of diversification would have occurred in Russia over time had it avoided its Bolshevik coup back in 1917?



#10
joe00uk

joe00uk

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,121 posts
  • LocationUK

As America "diversifies", the time will come nearer and nearer that it will break apart into separate countries, and eventually that will be the only solution to what will become really unbearable problems. And I'm not saying that because I think I'm some sort of prophet or have some "divine insight" or anything like that. No, I know that by just looking at history, because diversity never works - it never does. When you have so many different groups of people forced to live together in the same country and there's nothing that unites them - they don't have united heritage, a united language, a united religion, no united history and no united culture, sooner or later, they're going to break apart. I mean, that's the United States now (and the United Kingdom). Ironically, it's the United States - they're not united! They're going to break apart. That's just the way history works, unless you have a really strong police state, then you can kind of keep it together for a while, but when the police state falls apart, the different nations will start to break off. There are so many examples. There's the Roman Empire, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia - just to name a few. Once the central control of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia broke apart, you had all these different countries which wanted to break away from Serbian domination which resulted in years of brutal warfare. Once the authority of the CPSU crumbled in the Soviet Union, it wasn't long before the Union dissolved and more than a dozen countries broke apart and became independent. When there was a strong authoritarian regime, yes, they could keep all these factions in line but that was never going to last forever and eventually all these "diverse" empires broke apart. This always happens, and it will happen to the US, because there's nothing beyond shallow consumerism that actually unites the different peoples living there. Just like Lenin said of the Russian Empire, it was a prison house of nations, and the United States is the same today. 

 

It used to be that people who said this sort of thing would be called "crazy conspiracy theorists" by all the "sensible" liberals who are far too rational for that sort of thinking. And no doubt those types are still around today, but really, look who's saying this now, that the US could have a possible secession and civil war. It's the Democrats! And this is that John Podesta, he was running these war games with all the head Democrats and they put this as one of the scenarios. It's not necessarily the most likely scenario, I don't think that will happen in this election, but they put it down. So this is like the top leaders, the elite, they are seeing that secession and civil war are real possibilities. And we shouldn't be surprised. The United States was founded on secession and civil war. They were. And some people still need to get this through their heads, the US broke away from the British Empire back when it was just the Thirteen Colonies. They wanted to be separate because the local elites just didn't have strong enough ties to the British elite to warrant being subject to them. Obviously it's more complicated than that, but that was really the issue, so they rose up and became a separate country. And then of course they had the Civil War because the southern elites didn't want to be subject to the northern elites and so they wanted to leave the Union, although the North won that war after four years of conflict so that secession failed but the attempt itself became one of the defining periods of American history. 

 

There's also another civil war that most people have really forgotten about which came before the Confederacy. This was when Texas wanted to break free from Mexico and either join the US or become independent in the 1830s and 40s. The reason for that was because the demographics changed. Even though Texas was technically a territory of Mexico, so many American settlers moved in and had families that the majority of Texas at that time was white. They were white people from America, they had nothing in common with Mexico. If that doesn't sound familiar, it should. So you had all these Texans and white families in what might technically have been Mexico, but all the people there were American, they spoke English, they were Protestants - they didn't have any ties to Mexico and that led to the break-off and with the help of the US during the Texas Revolution, Texas was able to secede from Mexico.

 

Secessions have always been an essential part of American history, and it's not necessarily a bad thing if that continues to be the case in the 21st Century. This is self-determination, which used to be one of the top values of American liberals, and all it means is that people with shared culture and values should be able to rule themselves. If you don't have that, you can't really function as a society when you have different groups of people that hate each other and have decades or even centuries of built-up grievances against each other. There's just no way to keep a country like that together, there are separate peoples living within it, and the truth is that they need their own countries. That's a good thing, it's healthy, it's the way to provide peace and happiness. Looking at 2020, this couldn't be more obvious what with the BLM movement, along with Antifa, and if they don't want to live under what they feel is a "white supremacist" system in America, well, if they put their efforts into secession, surely that would be a much more viable long term solution than trying to extract reparations from working class white people. We don't need to look at secession as a horrible thing, and we don't need to keep pretending that diversity works because we don't want to offend anyone because that's ridiculous. The human cost of pretending it works is far greater and the consequences far more brutal for everyone. Empires always break up, secessions always happen in some form or another, it's inevitable. The idea that America always has to stay together is actually quite stupid if I'm being honest - that never happened historically, and these break-ups of different territories always happen throughout world history. It's organic and it's just a process of change that will always happen. If we can learn anything from the history of the last two millennia, it's that separate peoples need their own homelands if we're to have any reasonable degree of peace and prosperity.



#11
Futurist

Futurist

    Aspiring cross-dresser

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,108 posts
  • LocationSouthern California, United States of America, Planet Earth

Joe, you're forgetting one thing--and this is that it's going to be rather hard for white Americans to secede from any part of the US when there are ultimately going to be few parts of the US where they are actually going to remain a majority of the total population. Plus, not all white Americans are even on board with secession; white liberals certainly aren't, for instance.



#12
joe00uk

joe00uk

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,121 posts
  • LocationUK

Joe, you're forgetting one thing--and this is that it's going to be rather hard for white Americans to secede from any part of the US when there are ultimately going to be few parts of the US where they are actually going to remain a majority of the total population. Plus, not all white Americans are even on board with secession; white liberals certainly aren't, for instance.

There will be areas where they hold out as a majority for longer, like New England or the Rockies. And it's not just about whites breaking off, it's also about African-Americans and Hispanics breaking off in areas where they're the majority. Already there's the paramilitary group NFAC which wants a black ethnostate carved out of what is currently the US. White liberals will be impotent because eventually they'll be the only group (and a rapidly shrinking one at that), as well as the elites, that want to keep America together but they'll kind of be a joke by the time the dissolution of the US actually happens (whenever it does). They'll be like the monarchists in Russia after the February Revolution. They might kick up a fuss, but they won't be able to do anything about it and even if they do, they'll be defeated because no one else will want to support them. They won't have anything to offer other than returning to a past which everyone else will have abandoned. 



#13
TranscendingGod

TranscendingGod

    2020 is here; I still suck

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,017 posts
Race relations are the best that they've ever been in the United States. This is an unequivocal fact. If the United States breaks up it won't be due to race relations.
The growth of computation is doubly exponential growth.

#14
Futurist

Futurist

    Aspiring cross-dresser

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,108 posts
  • LocationSouthern California, United States of America, Planet Earth

Race relations are the best that they've ever been in the United States. This is an unequivocal fact. If the United States breaks up it won't be due to race relations.

I wouldn't necessarily say the best that they're even been; after all, did you see the race riots in the US over the past year?

 

 

 

Joe, you're forgetting one thing--and this is that it's going to be rather hard for white Americans to secede from any part of the US when there are ultimately going to be few parts of the US where they are actually going to remain a majority of the total population. Plus, not all white Americans are even on board with secession; white liberals certainly aren't, for instance.

There will be areas where they hold out as a majority for longer, like New England or the Rockies. And it's not just about whites breaking off, it's also about African-Americans and Hispanics breaking off in areas where they're the majority. Already there's the paramilitary group NFAC which wants a black ethnostate carved out of what is currently the US. White liberals will be impotent because eventually they'll be the only group (and a rapidly shrinking one at that), as well as the elites, that want to keep America together but they'll kind of be a joke by the time the dissolution of the US actually happens (whenever it does). They'll be like the monarchists in Russia after the February Revolution. They might kick up a fuss, but they won't be able to do anything about it and even if they do, they'll be defeated because no one else will want to support them. They won't have anything to offer other than returning to a past which everyone else will have abandoned. 

I REALLY don't think that US blacks and US Hispanics (other than fringe groups among them, that is) are going to want their own ethno-states for the very simple fact that their quality of life is likely to severely suffer if they will stop being a part of the US. One could just take a look at Sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America and compare these regions with the US.



#15
joe00uk

joe00uk

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,121 posts
  • LocationUK

I REALLY don't think that US blacks and US Hispanics (other than fringe groups among them, that is) are going to want their own ethno-states for the very simple fact that their quality of life is likely to severely suffer if they will stop being a part of the US. One could just take a look at Sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America and compare these regions with the US.

I do agree with that actually, that materially they would be worse off, but like you said yourself, look at the race riots this year. Nationalism usually wins out over materialism. Whites are due to become the minority in the US by the early 2040s, but they'll still be blamed for the ills that America will continue to experience. African-Americans and Hispanics (as well as the myriad other groups) will continue to resent whites and each other, and in the long term, the only solution will be to break apart. If they don't break apart, then America's problems will continue to get worse and worse until it really does sink to the level of sub-Saharan Africa and any united federal American state by that point will become incredibly weak and unstable. But maybe it will be White Americans who take the lead in trying to break off eventually, who knows? There are many, many ways this could play out.



#16
TranscendingGod

TranscendingGod

    2020 is here; I still suck

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,017 posts
One will always be able to point to some event that appears to buck the trend but looking at the statistics will allay any such misconceptions. Of course these "race riots" were mostly peaceful demonstrations about a present injustice in law enforcement. Some, but not all, suffered from rioting and looting by a minority of "participants" if one can call them that. So, yes, I do think that race relations are at an all time high or very near it. The fact that we have these protests at all is a sign of progress.
The growth of computation is doubly exponential growth.

#17
caltrek

caltrek

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,665 posts

When you have so many different groups of people forced to live together in the same country and there's nothing that unites them - they don't have united heritage, a united language, a united religion, no united history and no united culture, sooner or later, they're going to break apart. I mean, that's the United States now (and the United Kingdom).

 

But we do have a "united" heritage - one that can be trace back to the late 1700s.  We also have basically two official languages with a high tolerance for other linguistic groups.  The two languages, IMO, being English and Spanish.  Spanish deserves special consideration because of the bi-lingual nature of the convention that established the California constitution. Still, I don't have a problem with the argument that English is and ought to be the dominant language. Most Spanish speaking people realize that, and know that the best policy is for themselves to become bi-lingual.  We are also a largely Christian nation, although that is changing. What is also changing is exactly what does it mean to be a "Christian".   I look at that as being a very broad category that can include Buddhists, Muslims, Mormons, Agnostics, and Jews.  In this case, "Christian" being an adjective, not a noun.  As in "he has a very Christian attitude."  

 

To say that we must  break apart is equivalent to saying that I must "break apart".  As you may recall I am of mixed heritage. So to me, that is a nonsensical proposition.


The principles of justice define an appropriate path between dogmatism and intolerance on the one side, and a reductionism which regards religion and morality as mere preferences on the other.   - John Rawls


#18
caltrek

caltrek

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,665 posts

This always happens, and it will happen to the US, because there's nothing beyond shallow consumerism that actually unites the different peoples living there. 

 

No, there is also a Constitution that was drafted specifically with the idea of uniting many diverse communities into a united federal system. 


The principles of justice define an appropriate path between dogmatism and intolerance on the one side, and a reductionism which regards religion and morality as mere preferences on the other.   - John Rawls


#19
caltrek

caltrek

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,665 posts

There's just no way to keep a country like that together, there are separate peoples living within it, and the truth is that they need their own countries. 

 

That is why they formed as a federation of states, so that each state could function with some autonomy.

 

Edit:  Fairly good comments from Joe on secession.  Problem is that all of this talk of secession is mostly fueled by outsiders to the United States. The Soviet Union failed, but it relied way too much on force to keep it together.  The U.S., by contrast, has almost 250 years as functioning as one country. Or at least the original thirteen colonies have that history. (Also remember, Maine split from Massachusetts to become its own state, and West Virginia split from Virginia - so that right there bumps the number up to fifteen original state - just that two later seceded from their parent state.)  

 

Worse yet, we have a Republican party that has dedicated itself to white supremacy.  Most whites don't want to be identified as belonging to a white supremacists party, hence the Republican party's slow motion collapse.  A collapse that will be fueled by demographic trends.  

 

Yes, there will be tensions between geographic regions. A lot depends on an overall commitment to justice. "United we stand, divided we fall."  "All for one, and one for all." "The needs of the many-out weighing the need of the one, and the need for the one out-weighing the needs of the many."  Etc.


The principles of justice define an appropriate path between dogmatism and intolerance on the one side, and a reductionism which regards religion and morality as mere preferences on the other.   - John Rawls


#20
joe00uk

joe00uk

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,121 posts
  • LocationUK

But we do have a "united" heritage - one that can be trace back to the late 1700s.  We also have basically two official languages with a high tolerance for other linguistic groups.  The two languages, IMO, being English and Spanish.  Spanish deserves special consideration because of the bi-lingual nature of the convention that established the California constitution. Still, I don't have a problem with the argument that English is and ought to be the dominant language. Most Spanish speaking people realize that, and know that the best policy is for themselves to become bi-lingual.  We are also a largely Christian nation, although that is changing. What is also changing is exactly what does it mean to e a "Christian".   I look at that as being a very broad category that can include Buddhists, Muslims, Mormons, Agnostics, and Jews.  In this case, "Christian" being an adjective, not a noun.  As in "he has a very Christian attitude."  

 

To say that we must  break apart is equivalent to saying that I must "break apart".  As you may recall I am of mixed heritage. So to me, that is a nonsensical proposition.

Minority groups who can't trace their family history to the US in the late 18th Century don't share the same heritage as those who can, just like White Americans whose ancestors may have arrived in the 17th Century don't share the same heritage as Native Americans who have been there for thousands of years. As for two official languages, well that's my point, there are many separate cultures and identities in the US right now which come from different nations of people. Also, most people aren't mixed race in America so you can't exactly use your own mixed heritage to deny what is essentially a historical law, that you can't force different nations of people to live together in the same country forever and ever. 






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users