The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 iSteve BlogTeasers
NYT: "Latinos Onscreen, Conspicuously Few"

The NYT notices something I’ve harped on for about a dozen years:

DEMOGRAPHIC SHIFT

Latinos Onscreen, Conspicuously Few

Anna Bahr

JUNE 18, 2014

If you went to the movies in 1946, when Latinos constituted barely 3 percent of the American population, you might have caught Carmen Miranda, reportedly the highest-paid woman in the world at the time, dancing with her improbably tall fruit hat. By the 1950s, Desi Arnaz graced network TV as a star of “I Love Lucy.”

But it was more likely that the Latino actors seen on big and small screens occupied a narrow range of stereotyped background roles.

Actually, after WWII, Hispanics tended to be, if anything, over-represented in movies. They were featured prominently in Latin Lover roles, such as Fernando Lamas, whose image lives on in his sailing buddy Jonathan Goldsmith’s Dos Equis beer commercial character “The Most Interesting Man in the World.” George Clooney’s uncle-in-law José Ferrer won the 1950 Best Actor Oscar for Cyrano de Bergerac. Ricardo Montalban was on the cover of Life Magazine in 1949. The best of the Latin actors, Anthony Quinn, had been working steadily since the 1930s and ascended to stardom in 1952, winning the Best Supporting Oscar playing Marlon Brando’s brother in Viva Zapata.

There was a lot of pro-Latin American propaganda and warm feelings during the 1940s in America, such as Mayor LaGuardia of NYC renaming Sixth Avenue the “Avenue of the Americas” in 1945. I imagine there were several reasons for this trend, including

- To encourage Latin America to side with the Allies rather than the Italians and Germans or sit it out like the Spaniards;

- Because Latin America prospered mightily during WWII (for example, in 1946 the Mexican League tried to become a third major league in baseball by raiding 18 American big leaguers), thus making Latin America economically fashionable for awhile.

- With movie markets in Continental Europe cut off, Hollywood focused on cultivating the Latin American market.

Still, relative to the total population, the stardom of even a few prominent Latinos was culturally and statistically significant.

It would seem that way if you project today’s attempt to racialize Conquistador-Americans as an oppressed minority back on to the past. There’s a huge effort today to rewrite the past to make it seem like Latinos were treated like blacks in order to emotionally justify amnesty and affirmative action as reparations for white racism.

But 65 years ago, a white guy from Argentina was a white guy with a sexy accent, while a mestizo like Quinn was a Cliff Curtis-type who was popular in Hollywood because he could plausibly play an Arab or an Eskimo.

In general, being Latin deracialized individuals in mid-Century American eyes. For example, the color line in baseball wasn’t actually broken by Jackie Robinson in 1947, it was broken by several Cuban players for the Washington Senators in the late 1930s. You’ve probably never heard their names, because it wasn’t a big deal at the time: there was some resistance to playing guys who were obviously part black, but mostly the Latin understanding that one drop of white blood makes somebody more or less white was applied to these ballplayers. Organized Latin lobbies like LULAC wanted Latins to be seen as white, so the Census Bureau stopped counting them in the 1950 and 1960 Census. Our crime statistics to this day mostly count Latinos as white.

In fact, terms like “white” and “nonwhite” probably confuse matters more than they help. Something like “core” v. “fringe” is more useful.

In 1950 people felt it benefited them to seem more core American (although being a little bit of something else as long as it wasn’t African-American, especially a little American Indian like Herbert Hoover’s Vice President Charles Curtis, could be glamorous). Being a black American was a major problem, but everything else was more or less negotiable.

Today, however, ambitious people almost all understands the advantages of claiming to be more fringe. (Mormons are the only ones who don’t get it, yet. But I’d hardly be surprised if there is a BYU grad student write now compiling the magnum opus that will re-redefine his people as an oppressed minority.)

Today, Latinos make up 17 percent of Americans, but there has been little change in network television in the number of Latino lead actors and in Latino roles, according to a study, “The Latino Media Gap: A Report on the State of Latinos in U.S. Media,” released on Tuesday by Columbia University’s Center for the Study of Ethnicity and Race.

When roles calling for Latinos appear today, they tend to fit generations-old labels: the cop or the criminal, the illegal immigrant or the emotional sex kitten. During the 1994-1995 network TV season, 6 percent of Latinos on television were linked to a crime; from 2012 to 2013, 24.2 percent of all Latino TV actors played criminals. Behind the screen, the study found that no Latinos wrote network TV pilots in 2011 and 2012.

The nightly news on TV offers an even more limited view. During the 1995-2004 period, stories about Latinos, most of which focused on illegal immigration and crime, made up less than 1 percent of network news. There are no Latino anchors or executive producers on any top English-speaking network news programs, according to the study.

Frances Negrón-Muntaner

“The narrative that gets circulated in news is pretty much the narrative that Latinos are foreigners and somewhat threatening to America,” said Frances Negrón-Muntaner, the lead researcher of the study and an assistant professor of English and comparative literature at Columbia. Latinos, she went on, “are only important in the news when they confirm something about our world that we already hold true — stories about illegal entry, for example, reinforce the idea that we don’t belong here.”

Or when Conquistador-Americanas like the (not very) Negron-Muntaner pen studies hyped in the New York Times about how they suffer under the lash of racial discrimination.

A notable finding in this new study is the sluggish growth in representation despite a fast-growing Latino population — and in particular of a fast-growing population of enthusiastic media consumers. Latinos, for example, buy 25 percent of all movie tickets in the United States and watch more hours of video online than the average American, according to Nielsen, the ratings company.

… Still, even as Latino consumer power grows, media presence seems to shrink. If diverse programming seems to give networks an advantage, why the disparity? The researchers for the study argue that in many media companies and networks, a significant majority of decisions are made by upper-class, middle-aged white men. The people responsible for hiring writers and actors look for people who are similar to themselves, hurting Latino representation, the study said. “In my interviews, I found that many people, consciously or not, are trying to preserve their privilege,” Ms. Negrón-Muntaner said. “People would say, ‘Oh, if we open up to tell new stories, then we’re displacing ones that are tried and true.’  ”

Back in 1996, Marlon Brando went on the Larry King show to protest the mistreatment of two Mexican immigrants by the police and to encourage Hollywood executives to give more and better roles to Latinos, just as they had worked to boost the image of blacks during the Sidney Poitier Era. (Here’s the transcript.) You may remember the upshot of Brando’s attempt at raising Hispanic diversity sensitivity awareness among entertainment industry executives:

Weeping Brando apologises to Jews

Saturday 13 April 1996

Los Angeles (Reuter) – The actor Marlon Brando, who sparked a storm of criticism for saying Hollywood was run by Jews, broke down and wept yesterday when he met Jewish leaders to apologise for his comments.

“It took 30 to 45 seconds before he was able to compose himself,” Rabbi Marvin Hier said of the Oscar-winning star of the Godfather, whom he met for three hours.

“Mr Brando broke down and cried … to show his affection for Lew Wasserman and other people who are his idols,” Rabbi Hier said, referring to the chairman emeritus of MCA, the parent company of Universal Pictures. Mr Wasserman had deplored Brando’s comments last week, but defended the actor as a friend of the Jews.

In an appearance on CNN’s Larry King Live last Friday, Brando said he was angry with some Jewish film-makers for not showing more sensitivity in portraying minority groups in a negative fashion while not portraying Jews in the same way.

“Hollywood is run by Jews. It’s owned by Jews and they should have a greater sensitivity about the issue of people who are suffering,” he said on the programme.

 
• Category: Race/Ethnicity • Tags: Hispanics, Hollywood 
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
[Filtered by Reply Thread]
  1. Mr Brando broke down and wept yesterday when he met Jewish leaders to apologise for his comments

    Let us not forget he was the finest actor of his generation.
    …let me see now, what’s my motivation? Well, my obituaries can all begin with some variation of “Marlon Brando, possible anti-Semite…” Cue waterworks.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are only available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also only be used once per hour.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    http://www.unz.com/isteve/nyt-latinos-onscreen-conspicuously-few/#comment-586303
    More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  2. “It would seem that way if you project today’s attempt to racialize Conquistador-Americans as an oppressed minority back on to the past. There’s a huge effort today to rewrite the past to make it seem like Latinos were treated like blacks in order to emotionally justify amnesty and affirmative action as reparations for white racism.”

    there are so many examples of this kind of thinking. Here’s an example from the ATLANTIC:

    “Television has always been able to get away with more than the movies. I Love Lucy featured an interracial couple back in 1951, when the Production Code still forbade it in film. “(http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2014/02/what-em-star-wars-em-casting-of-adam-driver-says-about-hollywood/284119/)

    Apparently this guy is too ignorant to realize that people did not view the Arnaz-Ball relationship as an interracial marriage in 1951; if they had, I LOVE LUCY would never have aired.

  3. “It would seem that way if you project today’s attempt to racialize Conquistador-Americans as an oppressed minority back on to the past. There’s a huge effort today to rewrite the past to make it seem like Latinos were treated like blacks in order to emotionally justify amnesty and affirmative action as reparations for white racism.”

    So many examples showing how the Black paradigm does not work with Hispanics:

    Lynda Carter: Mother was of Mexican descent. Does this make TVs WONDER WOMAN non-White? No one in the 1970s thought so.

    Catherine Bach (AKA Daisy Duke from THE DUKES OF HAZARD): Mother was of Mexican descent. Yet no one minded her playing one of the uber Southern Dukes.

    Raquel Welch: Hispanic on mother’s side. One of the biggest sex symbols of the ’60s-’70s. No one thought that she wasn’t White.Indeed, her status as a White woman made her inter-racial sex scene with Jim Brown in 1969′s 100 RIFLES rather controversial.

    Ricardo Cortez: Golden Age Hollywood actor (played Sam Spade in the first adaptation of THE MALTESE FALCON). Actually a Jewish guy named Jacob Krantz. Yep, in Golden Age Hollywood a Jewish guy wanted people to think that he was Hispanic.

  4. Let’s not forget Rita Hayworth, born Margarita Carmen Cansino, Spanish from her Father, Irish from her Mother. She dyed her hair and adopted her Mother last name but today she would do the exact opposite: emphasized her Latina origins and hide her Irish origins.

  5. Carmen Miranda was a Portuguese-born Brazilian. Just thought it might be an interesting curio.

  6. The Brando kerfuffle slays me. Basically , it was don’t say “the Jews run Hollywood”, or the Jews in Hollywood will make sure you never work in Hollywood again.

    LoL!

  7. bjdubbs,

    It has to do with the Atlantic Monthly article by Coates. The progressives are getting ready to “evolve” on reparations just like they “evolved” on homosexual marriage.

    Steve keeps speculating what progressives will do next after their successes on marriage (and eventually government benefit) rights for homosexuals and transsexuals. It is obvious that white elite progressives are “nerving” themselves up to support race-based reparations for anyone who claims to be black.

  8. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    When roles calling for Latinos appear today, they tend to fit generations-old labels: the cop or the criminal, the illegal immigrant or the emotional sex kitten.

    Stupid. Even two generations ago, a “Latino” couldn’t be an illegal immigrant.

  9. @bjdubbs–John Derbyshire has an theory for it. It’s because “racism” has become problematic due to the fact that non-whites, especially blacks, are often so racist. Cultural Marxism requires that all sin emanate from whites. A term was needed that could only be used to stigmatize only them, hence “white privilege.”

  10. This is hilarious as Spaniards pretend they’re down with their 5-foot tall Aztec homies.

  11. The researchers for the study argue that in many media companies and networks, a significant majority of decisions are made by upper-class, middle-aged white men.

    I would correct this statement and note that a significant majority of decisions are made by upper-class, middle-aged Jewish men, but Brando beat me to it.

    Today, Latinos make up 17 percent of Americans, but there has been little change in network television in the number of Latino lead actors and in Latino roles, according to a study,

    What about the leads in shows and the news anchors on telemundo and univision? Doesn’t that count for something? I also think those spanish networks siphon off hispanic viewers so that hispanics are probably a lot less than 17 percent of the viewing audience of the English language networks. Also, how many Anglos are represented on univison and telemundo?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    "The researchers for the study argue that in many media companies and networks, a significant majority of decisions are made by upper-class, middle-aged white men."

    "I would correct this statement and note that a significant majority of decisions are made by upper-class, middle-aged Jewish men..."

    I would correct this statement and note that a significant majority of decisions are made by upper-MIDDLE class, middle-aged Jewish men..."

    High income, assets, or power does not equal upper class status either in America, England, or Europe. There are very few jews among the American upper classes. Wealthy jews are typically middle or upper-middle.
  12. What Steve has called the ‘most interesting newspaper’ today has a piece on Francis Galton: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2661278/Think-know-cut-cake-Think-Scientist-reveals-100-year-old-trick-involving-parallel-lines-rubber-bands.html

    As on unz/isteve.com, highbrow and lowbrow are united in a single awesome unibrow.

  13. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    So, what’s it going to take for people to stop reading the NYT? They can’t have any influence if they have few readers.

  14. Conspicuously few Latinos onscreen?

    Umm, do the mighty brains at the Times not know that there are entire networks that have nothing but Latinos onscreen? And that back in July of 2013, Univision for the first time was the top rated network IN AMERICA? And that Latinos have an entire universe of music they listen to that doesn’t include Taylor Swift or Iron & Wine?

    It would seem to anyone not completely deluded that there is no shortage of Latinos onscreen; they just happen to be where they make the most sense, on networks that broadcast IN SPANISH.

  15. When Lena Horne was starting out in show biz in the ’30s & ’40s, she was strongly advised to declare herself “Latin”, in order to gain public acceptance.

    She refused, and and remained proudly and strongly identified as black all her life, although this decision did cost her in terms of lost opportunities in starring film roles.

    Speaking of “I Love Lucy”, only one black actor ever appeared on the show, as a train porter.

    There were, however, a few clearly mixed-race Hispanic band members shown throughout the series, somehow, no one ever had a problem with this…

  16. WhatEvvs [AKA "Cookies"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    In NYC there are a lot of trailers on the street for filming. One door is always labeled “Lucy”, leading lady, the other “Desi” – leading man.

    Not so bad – there’s a Latino presence on every film set. A significant one.

  17. Cuba was the Las Vegas of the 30′s through the 50′s. Sounds cool to me.

  18. “Television has always been able to get away with more than the movies.”

    I don’t if I have ever heard anything more stupid (except the author’s especially stupid specific example). The hierarchy of ability to get away with sexual/violent/profane content has always been books > plays > movies > TV. If HBO (not network TV) has leapfrogged ahead of movies, it has only been in the last decade.

  19. Because Latin America prospered mightily during WWII (for example, in 1946 the Mexican League tried to become a third major league in baseball by raiding 18 American big leaguers), thus making Latin America economically fashionable for awhile.”””””””””””””””

    One of the 18 included borderline HOFer Sal Maglie “The Barber” known for his inside curve that “shaved” opposing batters chins. He played for NY Giants, Brooklyn Dodgers and NY Yankees.

    One thing: Cuban RH Pitcher Dolph Luque played from 1914-35, debuted for Boston Braves. He was inducted into Cincinnati Reds HOF in ’67 as well as the Cuban HOF in ’57. He was a very well known pitcher (ERA 3.24; 194 wins, etc). He continued to play winter ball in Havana for several decades. But technically, as a Cuban, he started in MLB way back in the 1910s. Borderline HOFer.

    Btw, Antony Quinn’s dad was Irish.

  20. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    No hard data on this, but it’s my perception that even if self-identified Latino actors aren’t so common, the skin tone of actors is becoming swarthier and the actors somewhat ambiguous of race …

  21. It would seem to anyone not completely deluded that there is no shortage of Latinos onscreen; they just happen to be where they make the most sense, on networks that broadcast IN SPANISH.

    Liberals seem to feel discomfort if there are not a certain number (not TOO high!) of minorities in all the venues they frequent–the ballet, national parks, the Metropolitan Museum, Yale, Whole Foods, etc. That there are Latinos on Telemundo doesn’t matter–they must be on “Downton Abbey.”

  22. “OT but I wonder if Steve or anyone else has a theory for the explosion in “white privilege.”

    http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=%22white%20privilege%22&geo=US&cmpt=geo” – racism as a meme isn’t working anymore, and they need a new one.

  23. iSteveFan and peterike both nail this. The “dearth” of Hispanic entertainers is an illusion. It’s just that they play to the Hispanic media empire which is as distinct and independent from American Idol as nopales are from green bell peppers.

  24. “racism as a meme isn’t working anymore, and they need a new one.”

    Racism as a meme isn’t specifically anti-white. It’s used that way but in theory it’s universalist and as white people are susceptible to universalist morality it was necessary to use something like that when white people were a majority.

    White privilege is specifically anti-white and something specifically anti-white will be necessary for the next stage as white people become a minority.

  25. “”””””””””””Liberals seem to feel discomfort if there are not a certain number (not TOO high!) of minorities in all the venues they frequent””””””””””””””””””””””””

    Otherwise they might start to feel embarrassed of their own whiteness. As in “Hey! How come all the ones here are just like us? Where’s all the diversity?”

    “”””””That there are Latinos on Telemundo doesn’t matter–they must be on “Downton Abbey.” “””””””

    For those seemingly impossible tasks when no other minorities can be found on a moment’s notice, at least they can summon the Gays, which will do in a pinch for adding a touch of diversity, specially for those hard to find nearly all vanilla enclaves as the Ballet; Opera; figure skating; museum; etc. Just add and sprinkle in a few and voila! Instant diversity.

  26. The most deplorable one [AKA "Hard Line Realist"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    “But I’d hardly be surprised if there is a BYU grad student write now ”

    Right now, perhaps.

    I wonder if they will forgive Mel Gibson? After all, he has the same first name as Mel Brooks.

  27. The most deplorable one [AKA "Hard Line Realist"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    I checked my privilege and it’s not good enough! Where can I get some more?

  28. Priss Factor [AKA "Cloudcastler"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    “Latinos, for example, buy 25 percent of all movie tickets in the United States and watch more hours of video online than the average American, according to Nielsen, the ratings company.”

    Because Indiginos like to see blancos on the big and small screen.

    How many browns want to see short stubby brown women in movies and soap operas?

    They wanna see glamorous and rich white women.

  29. “the study found that no Latinos wrote network TV pilots in 2011 and 2012″

    I wonder how many WASPs wrote network TV pilots in 2011 and 2012. I expect there were several, but that they were massivly underrepresented as a share of the US population.

  30. This is hilarious as Spaniards pretend they’re down with their 5-foot tall Aztec homies.

    I’ll never confuse Raquel Welch in that doeskin bikini with any squat Aztec chica, no matter how old I get.

    I also don’t recall any Dads back in the day who would have complained if their son brought her over to the house.

  31. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    “When roles calling for Latinos appear today, they tend to fit generations-old labels: the cop or the criminal, the illegal immigrant or the emotional sex kitten. ”

    Minus the illegal immigrant, aren’t those pretty much the lion’s share of ALL roles available, regardless of race?

  32. “When roles calling for Latinos appear today, they tend to fit generations-old labels: the cop or the criminal, the illegal immigrant or the emotional sex kitten. ”

    Minus the the illegal immigrant, aren’t those the lion’s share of ALL roles available, regardless of race?

  33. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Let’s also not forget Ricardo Montalbán. According to Wikipedia – and who knows, it might be correct – he was the first Hispanic actor to appear on the cover of Life magazine and that took place in 1949. I remember him from Star Trek and I never thought of him as anything but white, even with his name as actors often take on exotic-sounding names just to get noticed.

  34. “When roles calling for Latinos appear today, they tend to fit generations-old labels: the cop or the criminal, the illegal immigrant or the emotional sex kitten.”

    The cop or the criminal? Perhaps that’s because police/crime shows figure prominently in TV schedules. There are a lot of TV shows about cops. There aren’t many TV shows about civil engineers.

    And it is disingenuous for the author to bring up illegal aliens (not “immigrants”) – are illegal aliens ever portrayed as anything other than saints on TV? Has a TV show ever shown an illegal alien drinking a whole six-pack of beer, driving down the wrong side of the freeway, and anihilating an entire family in their minivan?

  35. “hey you says:
    June 18, 2014 at 9:07 pm

    The Brando kerfuffle slays me. Basically , it was don’t say “the Jews run Hollywood”, or the Jews in Hollywood will make sure you never work in Hollywood again.”

    Yeah, ………….. Jews have no power in Hollywood. And if you ever say they do – they will crush you.

  36. You know, the conspicuously concerned could just click on over to their local Univision affiliate and see what racial types are featured in what is a %100 Hispanic environment: fictional entertainment is dominated by Caucasian types, especially the women. Almost the only time you see Mestizo types is either the comic (always male) foil in comedy skits or in the audience for El Sabado Gigante or some other tacky variety/game show. Virtually no black presence despite their higher numbers in Latin America.
    I’ve noticed something in advertising too; they’re using a lot of actors that are just-barely Hispanic looking–more like Mediterranean Caucasians than Mestizos, as if to straddle the demographics. How clever of them.
    Reminds me of yet another Nat’l Lampoon bit: the Voyage of Montezuma, told in letters parodying the formal style of Columbus’ reports back to the Crown. Montezuma includes a sketch he’s made of his first encounter with the Europeans: short and portly Montezuma is standing next to a tall, lithe pair of Spaniards; the caption: “notice the short, squatty beauty of the Aztec against the ugliness of the inhabitants…”

  37. That there are Latinos on Telemundo doesn’t matter–they must be on “Downton Abbey.”

    Whats theirs is theirs, whats ours is theirs.

  38. Let is not forget the rich Hollywood tradition of noble Mexican caballeros and disreputable bandits!

    Duncan RenaldoThe Cisco Kid.

    Leo Carrillo – the Kid’s sidekick and a distinguished actor, conservationist, and preservationist who donated his Malibu ranch to the State of California as a state park and famous beach (among other parks he helped establish in his native California.)

    http://www.carrillo-ranch.org/Carrillo.html

    Alfonso Bedoya – of “I don’t have to show you no stinking badges!” fame.

    Alfonso Arau – the distinguished director of Like Water For Chocolate who famously played Lt. Herrera in The Wild Bunch. “Ha, ha, ha. Very smart. That’s very smart for you, damn gringos. So nobody can rob the guns.”

    http://www.wearysloth.com/Gallery/ActorsA/492-21298.jpg

  39. >>James Hedman said:

    “””””””””””””””””””””””””Let is not forget the rich Hollywood tradition of noble Mexican caballeros and disreputable bandits!’””””””””””””””””””””

    Missed an important one.

    Pedro Armandariz, the Clark Gable of Mexico who made a career playing caballeros. He also starred in some US Westerns. John Ford’s ’3 Godfathers’ and ‘Fort Apache’ (both co-starred John Wayne).

    Armandariz’s final screen role was in 007′s “From Russia With Love” opposite Sean Connery.

  40. Latinos are boring, that’s why they aren’t in the movies. Although the one in “Castle” can act a little.

  41. Ted Williams’s mother was Mexican.

    James Jesus Angleton too. Likely the only major thing those two guys had in common.

  42. Let us not forget he was the finest actor of his generation.
    …let me see now, what’s my motivation? Well, my obituaries can all begin with some variation of “Marlon Brando, possible anti-Semite…” Cue waterworks.

    If you want Jews to be less jumpy about anti-Semitism perhaps it would help if the “critics” weren’t overwhelmingly accusing Jews with lies (“200 Years Together was Anti-Semitic” except it wasn’t, “supporting non-white immigration before WWII”, “Jews caused the Holodomor”) or of supporting something gentile elites also support.

  43. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    I have said it before and I’ll say it again: the future ruling elite of the U.S is going to be white Latinos. Not Jews, not East Asians and not Asian Indians: white Latinos. The reason for this is that they are on average significantly wealthier and better educated than white Americans, and there are MILLIONS of them.

    Historically, these people did not emigrate to America because they are very wealthy and powerful in the countries of South and Central America, so they never had a reason to. But over the last couple decades, there have been innumerable Marxist and proto-Marxist revolutions in those countries, and they have been forced to flee, and the the place they have went in largest number is Florida. At first, there were only the Cubans, but now there are the Colombians, the Venezuelans and the Argentineans. What all these groups have in common is that they are all more affluent and better educated than white Americans. The average Cuban-American, for instance, is almost two and a half times more likely than the average white American to earn more than $100,000 a year.

    This does not bode well for the U.S as a nation, because the wealthy white Latinos resent Anglos even more than the indigent brown Latinos do. The reason for this is that, even today, the white Latinos take the pains of Spain in it’s long struggles against England, and they see the U.S as a continuation of England on the other side of the Atlantic. And unlike East Asians and Asian Indians, white Latnos are aggressive and hate playing second banana. They WILL strive towards political power with all their wealth, intelligence and numbers.

    So the real question for 21rst Century America is: How to make the white Latinos stop resenting the U.S and Anglo Amaericans and be a good elite to their new people?

    THAT is the question. The Cubans at 0.1% of the nation’s population have become poweful enough to more-or-less decide immigration policy last year. Now imagine when the white Latinos are 4% or 5% of the population…

  44. Well, I seen some old photos of Anaheim High school yearbooks, the whitest period was the 1960′s. There was several Mexicans in the 1940′s and 1950′s when there was lots of farmwork and Mexicans started appearing again when Loretta and Linda Sanchez went to school there in the 1970′s again. It seems that many high schools in Anaheim were at least 10 to 15 percent of sometimes 20 percent in every decade except the 1960′s when lots of whites in the Midwest or south moved to Anaheim. In fact one Mexican kid had a grandmother attend Anaheim High in the 1940′s.

  45. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Because Indiginos like to see blancos on the big and small screen.

    How many browns want to see short stubby brown women in movies and soap operas?

    They wanna see glamorous and rich white women.

    My guess is Indios don’t make casting decisions. Most countries tend to feature locals in their TV programming, and local films do better than similarly-budgeted productions from abroad. It’s tribalistic, but people tend to want to watch people who look like themselves, not just in the US, but abroad as well.

  46. Luis Guzman and Danny Trejo say things are perfect just the way they are.

  47. “The Undiscovered Jew says:
    June 19, 2014 at 7:43 pm

    If you want Jews to be less jumpy about anti-Semitism perhaps it would help if the “critics” weren’t overwhelmingly accusing Jews with lies (“200 Years Together was Anti-Semitic” except it wasn’t, “supporting non-white immigration before WWII”, “Jews caused the Holodomor”) or of supporting something gentile elites also support.”

    “supporting non-white immigration before WWII”? What a ridiculous straw-man argument. Nobody has ever accused Jews of supporting non-white immigration “before WWII”. Do you deny that Jews have been prominent in supporting non-white immigration AFTER WWII? Or how about recognizing that Jews were very prominent among the Bolsheviks. They did not cause the Holomodor – but some Jews were quite prominent in carrying it out.

    How about – if you want Gentiles to be less resentful of Jews, stop giving us reasons to be resentful. Stop acting as if all gentiles are latent nazis. And stop expecting us to NOT notice things that are self-evidently true – like the prominence (or even dominance) of Jews in certain areas, such as Hollywood, finance, the Law, etc. – and the often baleful (for white Gentiles) influence they wield in those areas.

  48. The most deplorable one [AKA "Hard Line Realist"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    “My guess is Indios don’t make casting decisions. Most countries tend to feature locals in their TV programming, and local films do better than similarly-budgeted productions from abroad. It’s tribalistic, but people tend to want to watch people who look like themselves, not just in the US, but abroad as well.”

    I guess that’s why whitening cremes sell so well in India. No, wait, that’s white privilege.

  49. “Also, how many Anglos are represented on univison and telemundo”?

    Not many Anglos, but the majority of their newscasters and leads in telenovellas are nearly indistinguishable from Western Europeans. They hire and cast some of the most attractive people you’ll see anywhere in the media on Spanish language television, and they are rarely of majority Mestizo or Indio origin.

  50. Priss Factor [AKA "Cloudcastler"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    “Mr Brando broke down and wept yesterday when he met Jewish leaders to apologise for his comments”

    They made him an offer he couldn’t refuse, so he took a dive.

  51. The BYU grad student you’re looking for is actually a history professor at the University of Utah, Paul Reeve. He has a book soon to come out with Oxford University Press, Religion of a Different Color: Race and the Mormon Struggle for Whiteness. “It considers the ways in which 19th-century outsiders constructed Mormons as physically different. It argues that Mormons were racialized in ways similar to immigrants from southern and eastern Europe and suggests that the Mormon struggle for acceptance in the 19th century was not merely a political struggle for Utah statehood, but a social and cultural struggle for whiteness. Mormons contested ideas of physical degeneracy with discourses of physical superiority and thereby placed Mormon bodies at the center of racialized arguments over citizenship and religion.”

  52. Nobody has ever accused Jews of supporting non-white immigration “before WWII”.

    The Chapter’s called “Jewish Involvement in Shaping American Immigration Policy, 1881-1965:”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_B._MacDonald#On_Jews_and_immigration_policies

    MacDonald’s main thesis centers on the period preceding the 1965 Immigration Act when strict, country-of-origin based quotas existed, mostly favoring immigration from Europe. According to MacDonald, while most of the ethnic communities in that period were somewhat active in trying to affect the increase of immigration quotas from their own countries of origin (i.e., the Irish for immigration from Ireland, Greeks for immigration from Greece, etc.), only the Jewish community activists were requesting (and ultimately obtained in 1965) the dismantling of country-of-origin quotas and an increase in immigration across the board.[citation needed]

    Do you deny that Jews have been prominent in supporting non-white immigration AFTER WWII? Or how about recognizing that Jews were very prominent among the Bolsheviks. They did not cause the Holomodor – but some Jews were quite prominent in carrying it out.

    Those all fall under bad ideas elite gentiles also backed to the hilt. Western Europe has been lacking in Jews but still managed to import dusky yokels from their ex-colonial properties before we could start in 1965.

    Jews were on already out of favor with Stalin (a very bad position to be in) by the time of the Holodomor. More importantly, Uncle Joe held 110% of all decision making so it hardly mattered what ethnicity he chose his henchmen to be.

    As for the Bolshevik Revolution, every ethnic group of Imperial Russia (including ex-aristocrats like Kropotkin) participated in revolution.

    Per Solzhenitsyn’s 200 Years Together:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_Hundred_Years_Together

    Solzhenitsyn says that, despite the presence of Jewish Leon Trotsky, the 1917 February and October Revolutions were not the work of Judaism. Solzhenitsyn says that the Jews who participated in revolution were effectively apostates splitting from the spirit of tradition.[1] Solzhenitsyn emphatically denies that Jews were responsible for the revolutions of 1905 and 1917. At the end of chapter nine, Solzhenitsyn denounces “the superstitious faith in the historical potency of conspiracies” that leads some to blame the Russian revolutions on the Jews and to ignore the “Russian failings that determined our sad historical decline.”[9]

  53. As Murdock and his team make evident, what’s under way here isn’t just a racial changing of the guard but also a generational change. In a state where the average NHW woman is already on the fertility exit ramp and the average Hispanic woman has more than a decade of potential childbearing ahead of her (and is already likely to have more children than her NHW counterpart as it is), NHWs will provide no more than 2 percent of our overall population growth over the next generation, while Hispanics will account for 70 percent. That means that if Texas is to continue its present prosperity, we’ll increasingly depend on younger Hispanics to replace aging NHWs, both as earners and spenders.

  54. @The Undiscovered Jew

    Jews do not have a monopoly on bringing this nation down. But don’t forget the old WASPs types wrote the restrictive 1924 immigration act while congressman Emanuel Cellar would spend the next forty years making “immigration reform”, i.e. overturning that 1924 act, his life’s work. He finally succeeded in 1965. Was he solely responsible? No, although Cellar was the one who introduced the legislation into the House. Sen. Hart introduced it into the Senate and, of course, LBJ signed it into law. But Cellar was the brains behind the legislation, who put in the hard work spanning both the pre and post WW2 period.

    Jews were on already out of favor with Stalin (a very bad position to be in) by the time of the Holodomor.

    Yet Stalin relied upon Lazar Kaganovich to carry out the collectivization of Ukraine which led to the Holodomor.

  55. […] Steve Sailer and the NY Times think that “Latinos” are underrepresented in Hollywood. […]

  56. Jews were on already out of favor with Stalin (a very bad position to be in) by the time of the Holodomor. More importantly, Uncle Joe held 110% of all decision making so it hardly mattered what ethnicity he chose his henchmen to be.

    So, it could’ve just as well been Jews carrying out Hitler’s orders. In fact, we might as well go ahead and say it was. I mean, if it hardly mattered…

  57. Those all fall under bad ideas elite gentiles also backed to the hilt.

    Sort of like, “there’s good and bad in all races”? Do we get Occam’s butterknife next?

    Western Europe has been lacking in Jews but still managed to import dusky yokels from their ex-colonial properties before we could start in 1965.

    Jews are smart, but not smart enough to stop using this dog of an argument. I think one thing that annoys me is that I really do expect better from such a clever race. It’s disappointing.

    Western Europe has been lacking in Jews, and lacking in the sort of immigration woes we attribute to Jews in the USA. Might want to stop pointing this out, lest people start noticing the correlation. I mean, is “fewer Jews = fewer non-native immigrants” really the correlation you want pointed out?

    As for the Bolshevik Revolution, every ethnic group of Imperial Russia (including ex-aristocrats like Kropotkin) participated in revolution.

    And there’s good and bad in all races. Any more liberal boilerplate you want to deploy?

    Solzhenitsyn says that, despite the presence of Jewish Leon Trotsky, the 1917 February and October Revolutions were not the work of Judaism. Solzhenitsyn says that the Jews who participated in revolution were effectively apostates splitting from the spirit of tradition.

    I think Solz is wrong, and probably hasn’t looked enough into the Jewish penchant for crypsis.

    Solzhenitsyn denounces “the superstitious faith in the historical potency of conspiracies” that leads some to blame the Russian revolutions on the Jews and to ignore the “Russian failings that determined our sad historical decline.”

    Sounds like Solz is beating a straw man, for whatever reason.

  58. “The Undiscovered Jew says:
    June 20, 2014 at 9:51 pm

    The Chapter’s called “Jewish Involvement in Shaping American Immigration Policy, 1881-1965:”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_B._MacDonald#On_Jews_and_immigration_policies

    MacDonald’s main thesis centers on the period preceding the 1965 Immigration Act when strict, country-of-origin based quotas existed, mostly favoring immigration from Europe. According to MacDonald, while most of the ethnic communities in that period were somewhat active in trying to affect the increase of immigration quotas from their own countries of origin (i.e., the Irish for immigration from Ireland, Greeks for immigration from Greece, etc.), only the Jewish community activists were requesting (and ultimately obtained in 1965) the dismantling of country-of-origin quotas and an increase in immigration across the board.[citation needed]”

    And? Is MacDonald wrong? You may harbor a bias against Kevin MacDonald. I see no reason why I should. Perhaps I should revise my statement. Perhaps they were prominent in promoting immigration, even before WWII.

    “Those all fall under bad ideas elite gentiles also backed to the hilt. Western Europe has been lacking in Jews but still managed to import dusky yokels from their ex-colonial properties before we could start in 1965.”

    The Hart-Cellar act was authored by Emannuel Cellar, who had lobbied long and hard (even, I believe, before WWII) for elimination of the national origins quota. The UK was not lacking in the Milliband brothers – powerful and influential laborite government officials during the time that labor opened the floodgates to immigrants in the late 1990s – early 2000s. My guess is that other examples could be found as well.

    And the notion that Stalin had turned on Jews before the Holomodor is simply factually and historically wrong. He had not turned on Kaganovich or Yagoda at the time, both of whom held prominent and powerful positions in his government.

  59. “The Undiscovered Jew says:
    June 20, 2014 at 9:51 pm

    Per Solzhenitsyn’s 200 Years Together:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_Hundred_Years_Together

    Solzhenitsyn says that, despite the presence of Jewish Leon Trotsky, the 1917 February and October Revolutions were not the work of Judaism. Solzhenitsyn says that the Jews who participated in revolution were effectively apostates splitting from the spirit of tradition.[1] Solzhenitsyn emphatically denies that Jews were responsible for the revolutions of 1905 and 1917. At the end of chapter nine, Solzhenitsyn denounces “the superstitious faith in the historical potency of conspiracies” that leads some to blame the Russian revolutions on the Jews and to ignore the “Russian failings that determined our sad historical decline.”[9]”

    And yet, that book has never been published in full, in English, by a US publishing house. Now why is that? A book written by the 1970 winner of the Nobel Prize in Literature can’t find a publisher, while every wisp of mental flatus by Abe Foxman can?

  60. But don’t forget the old WASPs types wrote the restrictive 1924 immigration act while congressman Emanuel Cellar would spend the next forty years making “immigration reform”, i.e. overturning that 1924 act, his life’s work.

    Opposing the 1924 immigration act in 1924 meant retaining the status quo of large scale European immigration, which is a completely different issue than non-European immigration. Before WWII, Cellar was most likely trying to help Jewish refugees escape. As for the WASPs, they were either squishy Rockefeller Republicans or left liberals after WWII. There were no Jews on the WASP dominated Supreme Court from 1969 to 1994 when many liberal rulings on race and immigration were handed down. Richard Nixon’s 1960 immigration platform was similar to JFK’s in its calls to abolish the national origins quota.

    WASP president GHW Bush signed the 1990 immigration act which raised legal immigration from 600,000 a year to 1 million. And then there are his sons open border sons George and Jeb.

    Western Europe has been lacking in Jews, and lacking in the sort of immigration woes we attribute to Jews in the USA. Might want to stop pointing this out, lest people start noticing the correlation. I mean, is “fewer Jews = fewer non-native immigrants” really the correlation you want pointed out?

    America’s demographics deteriorated faster because we’ve historically been over 10 percent native black while Western Europe traditionally 100% white aside from Roma. If Western Europe, which is now 85-90% white, had been 10% black in the 1960s they would be in about the same shape we are.

    And there’s good and bad in all races. Any more liberal boilerplate you want to deploy?

    Let’s make this simple: If Russians, Poles, Lithuanians, Georgian, Ukrainians and the other ethnic groups of the Russian Empire aren’t expected to collectively apologize for the Russian Revolution then why do you have standing to ask Jews alone to do so? Have you ever called for ethnic Russians to apologize for Bakunin, Kropotkin, Nikolai Gorbunov, and Molotov? If not, why not?

    And? Is MacDonald wrong?

    There’s reason to think he’s lying. He has a history of deception and twisting his sources out of context (such as claiming Two Hundred Years Together collectively blames Jews for the Russian Revolution when quite the opposite is true) and he’s the main source for the allegation Jews wanted non-white immigration pre-WWII. In reality, his sources suggest Jews during the time were worried about immigration only the extent it affected their own group just like Irish, Italians, etc*. And given his history he shouldn’t be considered a reliable source about the 1965 act either.

    The Hart-Cellar act was authored by Emannuel Cellar, who had lobbied long and hard (even, I believe, before WWII) for elimination of the national origins quota.

    Before WWII he, along with other white ethnics, was trying to keep the door open to European immigrants. After WWII, the establishment also wanted the quota to be scrapped. And of course there was Ted Kennedy.

    Btw, polls of Jewish opinions on immigration show they want less legal and illegal immigration.

    And yet, that book has never been published in full, in English, by a US publishing house. Now why is that?

    Since I can’t speak Russian I’m all for releasing an English translation.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_B._MacDonald#Academic_criticism

    *MacDonald has particularly been accused by other academics of academic fraud, saying that he has promoted anti-Semitic propaganda under the guise of what he says is a legitimate and academic search for truth.[27] He has also been accused of misrepresenting the sources he uses in that regard. Fenris State University professor Dr. Barry Mehler cited for example a quote from a 1969 dissertation by Sheldon Morris Neuringer titled American Jewry and United States immigration policy, 1881-1953 where MacDonald surmised that when Neuringer noted Jewish opposition in 1921 and 1924 to the anti-immigration legislation at the time was due more to it having the “taint of discrimination and anti-Semitism” as opposed to how it would limit Jewish immigration, MacDonald wrote, “…Jewish opposition to the 1921 and 1924 legislation was motivated less by a desire for higher levels of Jewish immigration than by opposition to the implicit theory that America should be dominated by individuals with northern and western European ancestry.” “It seems to me Mr. MacDonald is misrepresenting Mr. Neuringer in this case and I posted my query hoping that a historian familiar with the literature might have a judgment on MacDonald’s use of the historical data,” Mehler wrote, citing other examples.[28]

  61. anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    “MacDonald has particularly been accused by other academics of academic fraud, saying that he has promoted anti-Semitic propaganda under the guise of what he says is a legitimate and academic search for truth.”

    Well, that certainly clears it all up then (and how might these other academics be?). Nothing to see here, move along.

    In cases like this I’d encourage people to go to the source and investigate for yourself. This seems to be his website The Occidental Observer.

  62. America’s demographics deteriorated faster because we’ve historically been over 10 percent native black while Western Europe traditionally 100% white aside from Roma. If Western Europe, which is now 85-90% white, had been 10% black in the 1960s they would be in about the same shape we are.

    Your math doesn’t work. America’s now 60-65% white, down from 90%, while W. Europe at its most non-white (Britain) is 85%+ white (IIRC), and they’re pretty far “ahead” of the rest.

    Let’s make this simple: If Russians, Poles, Lithuanians, Georgian, Ukrainians and the other ethnic groups of the Russian Empire aren’t expected to collectively apologize for the Russian Revolution then why do you have standing to ask Jews alone to do so? Have you ever called for ethnic Russians to apologize for Bakunin, Kropotkin, Nikolai Gorbunov, and Molotov? If not, why not?

    I don’t haven’t demanded any apologies. But if I was, I’d be demanding more from Jews than the others, for a variety of reasons.

    There’s reason to think he’s lying. He has a history of deception and twisting his sources out of context

    No, he doesn’t. If there was a real case to be made here, it would have been made.

    Btw, polls of Jewish opinions on immigration show they want less legal and illegal immigration.

    Compared to whom?

    *MacDonald has particularly been accused by other academics of academic fraud, saying that he has promoted anti-Semitic propaganda under the guise of what he says is a legitimate and academic search for truth.

    Most of us here are pretty familiar to what typically constitutes “anti-Semitic propaganda.”

    Fenris State University professor Dr. Barry Mehler cited for example a quote from a 1969 dissertation by Sheldon Morris Neuringer titled American Jewry and United States immigration policy, 1881-1953 where MacDonald surmised that when Neuringer noted Jewish opposition in 1921 and 1924 to the anti-immigration legislation at the time was due more to it having the “taint of discrimination and anti-Semitism” as opposed to how it would limit Jewish immigration, MacDonald wrote, “…Jewish opposition to the 1921 and 1924 legislation was motivated less by a desire for higher levels of Jewish immigration than by opposition to the implicit theory that America should be dominated by individuals with northern and western European ancestry.” “It seems to me Mr. MacDonald is misrepresenting Mr. Neuringer in this case and I posted my query hoping that a historian familiar with the literature might have a judgment on MacDonald’s use of the historical data,” Mehler wrote, citing other examples.

    This is really blowing my skirt up. Tell me more.

  63. Notable Latinos on TV
    Freddie Prinze from Chico and the Man
    That Pureto Rican on Sanford and Son

    The HBO series OZ had the Latino gang.
    The Puerto Rican on Welcome Back Carter.

    Officer Frank Poncherello

    Hill Street Blues had a few.

    Miami Vice had several Latinos in prominent roles.

    The A Team seemed to spend a lot of it’s time rescuing troubled Latino youths in the inner city or fighting evil white farmers who abused their Latino farm laborers.

  64. The Undiscovered Jew:”Jews were on already out of favor with Stalin (a very bad position to be in) by the time of the Holodomor. More importantly, Uncle Joe held 110% of all decision making so it hardly mattered what ethnicity he chose his henchmen to be.”

    Stalin didn’t start becoming seriously paranoid about Jews until after 1945.Simon Jonathan Sebag Montefiore, in his COURT OF THE RED TSAR, argues that Stalin’s turning point was the rapturous response from Soviet Jewry that greeted Golda Meir when she became minister plenipotentiary to the USSR in the late ’40s.

  65. The Undiscovered Jew:”Jews were on already out of favor with Stalin (a very bad position to be in) by the time of the Holodomor. More importantly, Uncle Joe held 110% of all decision making so it hardly mattered what ethnicity he chose his henchmen to be.”

    Regarding Stalin and the Jews, some observations from Esau’s Tears: Modern Anti-Semitism and the Rise of the Jews, by Albert S. Lindemann :

    “Determining Stalin’s real attitude to Jews is difficult. Not only did he repeatedly speak out against anti-Semitism but both his son and daughter married Jews, and several of his closest and most devoted lieutenants from the late 1920s through the 1930s were of Jewish origin, for example Lazar Moiseyevich Kaganovich, Maxim Litvinov, and the notorious head of the secret police, Genrikh Yagoda. There were not so many Jews allied with Stalin on the party’s right as there were allied with Trotsky on the left, but the importance of men like Kaganovich, Litvinov, and Yagoda makes it hard to believe that Stalin harbored a categorical hatred of all Jews, as a race, in the way that Hitler did. Scholars as knowledgeable and diverse in their opinions as Isaac Deutscher and Robert Conquest have denied that anything as crude and dogmatic as Nazi-style anti-Semitism motivated Stalin. It may be enough simply to note that Stalin was a man of towering hatreds, corrosive suspicions, and impenetrable duplicity. He saw enemies everywhere, and it just so happened that many of his enemies—virtually all his enemies—were Jews, above all, the enemy, Trotsky.
    Jews in the party were often verbally adroit, polylingual, and broadly educated—all qualities Stalin lacked. To observe, as his daughter Svetlana has, that ‘Stalin did not like Jews,’ does not tell us much, since he ‘did not like’ any group: His hatreds and suspicions knew no limits; even party members from his native Georgia were not exempt. Whether he hated Jews with a special intensity or quality is not clear.” (WIKIPEDIA)

  66. It seems that just about any conversation about Hispanics in America in HBD circles inevitably becomes an argument over the role of organized Jewry in shaping American immigration policy.A few points then:

    1. Jewish support for large scale immigration has not been monolithic. Samuel Gompers, for example, the leading Jewish labor union leader, strongly supported curbs on immigration:

    “Gompers, like most labor leaders of his era, opposed unrestricted immigration from Europe because it lowered wages and opposed all immigration from Asia because it lowered wages and represented (to him) an alien culture that could not be easily assimilated. He and the AF of L strongly supported the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 that banned the immigration of Chinese.[23] The AF of L was instrumental in passing immigration restriction laws from the 1890s to the 1920s, such as the 1921 Emergency Quota Act and the Immigration Act of 1924, and seeing that they were strictly enforced.”
    (WIKIPEDIA)

    2. Having said that, it is fairly clear that organized American Jewry has embraced the idea of mass immigration to the USA with great fervor.

    3. Of course, it must be borne in mind that this position reflects the elite consensus in the USA. At present, everyone supports large scale immigration to the USA: The Catholic Church, Agri-Business, the leadership in both the Republican and Democratic parties, Organized Labor, etc. The MSM discourse on immigration revolves around two points: Mass Immigration or Open Borders. Support anything else, and you are outside the bounds of respectable opinion.

  67. Mr Anon:”MacDonald’s main thesis centers on the period preceding the 1965 Immigration Act when strict, country-of-origin based quotas existed, mostly favoring immigration from Europe. According to MacDonald, while most of the ethnic communities in that period were somewhat active in trying to affect the increase of immigration quotas from their own countries of origin (i.e., the Irish for immigration from Ireland, Greeks for immigration from Greece, etc.), only the Jewish community activists were requesting (and ultimately obtained in 1965) the dismantling of country-of-origin quotas and an increase in immigration across the board.[citation needed]””

    Jews were scattered across Europe: Hungary, Russia, Poland, Ukraine, etc. If a Jewish leader wanted to increase Jewish immigration to the USA, he would, of necessity, have to argue for increases in immigration from a host of countries. In contrast, an Irish activist can simply focus his concentration on Ireland and not have to worry about millions of Irishmen in, say, Latvia.

  68. Svigor:”Jews are smart, but not smart enough to stop using this dog of an argument. I think one thing that annoys me is that I really do expect better from such a clever race. It’s disappointing.

    Western Europe has been lacking in Jews, and lacking in the sort of immigration woes we attribute to Jews in the USA. Might want to stop pointing this out, lest people start noticing the correlation. I mean, is “fewer Jews = fewer non-native immigrants” really the correlation you want pointed out?”

    Comparing the USA to Europe on immigration is…..difficult:

    1. Historic support for High Levels of immigration: Millions of Germans and Catholic Irish were allowed to pour into the USA in the 19th century. Then, in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, there was an additional flood of Italians, Poles, Jews, Greeks, etc. All of this occurred before Jews, as a group, wielded the kind of power that they hold today. American Gentile elites have a history of supporting the immigration of alien races.

    2. Lack of a Socialist Tradition: This, to my way of thinking, is key. European nations (England, France, Germany, Italy) have socialist traditions; they are used to thinking collectively.To them, the nation is an organic unit. America lacks this kind of history. Hence, America has no socialist tradition, and , compared to Europe, her labor unions are quite weak.Bearing this in mind, it’s not surprising that America’s immigration history is so freakish.

  69. Regarding Stalin and the Jews, some observations from Esau’s Tears: Modern Anti-Semitism and the Rise of the Jews, by Albert S. Lindemann :

    There are many degrees of anti-semitism below Nazism.

    While Stalin’s Russia included Jews in senior leadership even after WWII, as time went on they did make up proportionally less and less of the Soviet hierarchy than they were in the first several years after the Revolution when Jews were at their peak influence of ~20% of the top posts. By the time of the Holodomor, gentiles were gradually pushing the proportion of Jews down, so the atrocity can hardly be pinned on Jews.

  70. Your math doesn’t work. America’s now 60-65% white, down from 90%, while W. Europe at its most non-white (Britain) is 85%+ white

    France and the Netherlands are down to high 80s. If they were 10% black in the 1960s they’d be in the low 70%. And bear in mind illegal immigration is proportionally less of a problem in Europe than America because the Mediterrean is harder to cross than desert or the Rio Grande. If we had less illegal immigration and without the 400-500K illegal alien births we’d still be over 70% white even with no change to legal immigration.

    Syon,

    Jews were scattered across Europe: Hungary, Russia, Poland, Ukraine, etc. If a Jewish leader wanted to increase Jewish immigration to the USA, he would, of necessity, have to argue for increases in immigration from a host of countries.

    MacDonald is suggesting in 1924 Jews were lobbying for non-white immigration, immigration from anywhere on earth. Absurd given helping Jewish refugees from pogroms and, later, Nazism would have been their priority and when at the time even immigration of white Catholics was controversial.

  71. The Undiscovered Jew:”There are many degrees of anti-semitism below Nazism.”

    Sure.But, as Lindemann points out, it’s pretty clear that Stalin’s feelings towards Jews (as with other populations: Chechens, ethnic Germans, Poles, etc) was highly situational in character.

    TUJ:”While Stalin’s Russia included Jews in senior leadership even after WWII, as time went on they did make up proportionally less and less of the Soviet hierarchy than they were in the first several years after the Revolution when Jews were at their peak influence of ~20% of the top posts. By the time of the Holodomor, gentiles were gradually pushing the proportion of Jews down, so the atrocity can hardly be pinned on Jews.”

    Well, yes. Given the fact that Stalin was ruling the USSR, it would be be pretty foolish to blame the Ukraine Famine (or the Great Purge, or the Katyn Massacre, etc) on anybody else. As with Hitler and Mao, ultimate responsibility in a dictatorship rests with the dictator. On the other hand, it would also be silly to try to argue that individual Jews like Yagoda were not responsible for their actions during Stalin’s rule.

    Discussing Jews and the USSR is a rather difficult subject. One must constantly maneuver between madmen (who argue that Jews were secretly running the USSR) and apologists (who maintain that Jews had no agency between the Bar Kokhba Revolt and the establishment of the state of Israel).

  72. @#64
    “Have you ever called for ethnic Russians to apologize for Bakunin, Kropotkin, Nikolai Gorbunov, and Molotov? If not, why not?”

    Oi,Oi,Oi… Where to start with this jewel of cognitive dissonance?

    1.Bakunin
    This Johny Lydon of politics was drop-dead rotten in….. 1876.
    So, unless his Patrick Swayzye inspired spectre-along with Vlad Ulyanov and his entourage – was haunting Europe in the Sealed Train during a winter of 1917, a cry for an apology seems to be overreaching . If not, why not?

    2.Kropotkin
    This bad and 100% blue-blooded boychik, albeit being certified troublemaker, had refused to gang-bang with Bolsheviks upon his return from exile in 1917.
    And ,according to Wikipedia,“his enthusiasm for the changes happening in the Russian Empire turned to disappointment when the Bolsheviks seized power in the October Revolution. “This buries the revolution,” he said. He thought that the Bolsheviks had shown how the revolution was not to be made; by authoritarian rather than libertarian methods.”Eventually, Kropotkin’s lungs parted away with his rebellious guts somewhere in 1921,full three years before the signature designer of Red Terror was tutancanonized in Kremlin. Therefore, do you really want to put this geographer, economist, philologist, zoologist, evolutionary theorist, philosopher, writer and prominent anarchist in the same “you-better- apologize” bag with ,let say this child of the revolution? If not, why not?

    3.Gorbunov
    The fact that yours Number 3 of Ruskies Gone Wild list was at one time personal secretary to the above already twice mentioned Cheka founder, tells enough about his hierarchy on the Bolshevik’s totem pole…”Nikolai Gorbunov in August 1918 was appointed as a chairman of the Scientific and Technical Division of the Supreme Council of National Economy . Being from 1920 a manager the affairs of Sovnarkom, he coordinated the activities of numerous government commissions which were set up to guide research in the field of science and technology, and since 1926 led the organized of the department of Academic Institutions at the Sovnarkom SSSR. Gorbunov played a crucial role in the creation of new scientific institutions – including such large as VASHNIL – designed to integrate basic and applied research. In 1937 he was CEO of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

    Seems that this particular apparatchik was in charge of overhauling Russian science institutions so they can reflect the values of the new rulers. And as a result of the despotically, NEP imposed ,marriage between the STEM focused education and industrial espionage, Laika was able to hit the exosphere some 20 years later. So, again do the ethnic Russians have to apologize for the all oxygen intake of this minor episodist of the social experiment named USSR ? If yes, why yes?

    4.Molotov
    When your Comrades conspiratorially dub you as “The Mace”, many decades before Occupy This & That pimpled activists had rediscovered allure for the cocktail concoction named after that very same nickname, there is strong chance that -except maybe for your mom- nobody has a single nice thing to say about you.
    This is what Churchill said about Vyacheslav Mikhailovich-Hammer : “In the conduct of foreign affairs, Mazarin, Talleyrand, Metternich, would welcome him to their company, if there be another world to which Bolsheviks allow themselves to go.
    Undoubtedly,this top-notch sociopath is the only legitimate entry on the list. As a signatory of the Law of Spikelets and by being Koba’s long time confidante( they used to be BFF ,until split happened over the girl), Molotov made his case undefendable. He was Ribbentrop’s vodka unt schnaps buddy. He was a high-roller in Teheran and Yalta.He carved more maps than birthday cakes. He died in his slippers,rehabilitated, unrepentant,and at the age of 96, although ,among other things, being indirectly responsible for a mass starvation of hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians.

    Its hard to think of some other Soviet leader with such a record.

    I mean that guy should be some really crafty ,almost caricature-villain character; an ultimate survivor capable of unexpected and multiply comebacks.
    Some kind of bureaucratic Kaiser Sose, or maybe Hyman Roth – minus lead consumption provoked tummy-ache at the end….

    Oh wait, there’s one.

    No ifs and whys.

  73. What is interesting is Mexicans in better income states like Baja have dropped to 1.7, it will be interesting to see if 2nd and 3rd generation Mexicans and Mexican immigrants from the rural states head more under 2.0. In the long term they gain on whites because whites are aging but in the long term whites might gain slightly back.

  74. Texas had the largest numeric increase of Latinos, over 200,000. The state with the fastest Latino population between 2012 and 2013 was North Dakota—its population increased by 17 percent.
    As Steve Stated, Hispanics go where the jobs are, conservatives screaming how better Texas or North Dakota does better than California and New York might not be so smart since minorities are not stupid they go where they can get jobs and lots of Mexicans particularity 2nd and 3rd have done blue collar construction or other related fields. In fact Texas did grow in whites about only about 31,000 even blacks were I think around 50,000 or so.

  75. Bored identity,

    Mikhail “if God existed it would be necessary to destroy him” Bakunin and Kropotkin founded Anarchism. That kind of thing warrants labeling them on the violent left no matter how much the latter felt practice strayed from theory. There are still those saying Stalinism wasn’t real Communism; please try not to puting yourself in a position of – as a conservative – arguing ‘Real Anarcho-Socialism hasn’t been tried yet’ just because you want to whitewash the overwhelming majority role of gentile revolutionaries (80% vs 20% Jewish).

    I listed Gorbunov to show Slavs had plenty of say in the Soviet state. If blood thirsty-ness is your thang’ there’s the ex-aristo Felix Dzerzhinsky.

  76. Hard Line Realist says:
    June 19, 2014 at 11:13 am

    Now we get to see if gay trumps black:

    http://www.campusreform.org/?ID=5688

    Even better than being gay he is described as being Elizabethwarren colored whereas he is in fact a genuine member, as distinct from pretend, of an Indian tribe – the Choctaws!

  77. Raising L.A. hospitality workers’ minimum pay above $15 may burden the local hotel industry to the point of causing a loss of tax revenue for the city, according to a study released Thursday.

    The California Hotel & Lodging Association issued a summary of the study, which was conducted by PKF Consulting USA, which has offices in Los Angeles and collects data on hotel industry performance.

    The study reports that increasing L.A. hotel workers’ minimum wage to $15.37 citywide would lead developers to rethink plans to increase hotel space in Los Angeles, while hotel operators could curtail services or amenities in Los Angeles. This could reduce occupancy and lead to a reduction in the amount of hotel taxes collected by Los Angeles.

    “The minimum wage proposal, as it currently stands, will hurt some industry employees, reduce city hotel-related taxes, and slow or prevent critically needed hotel expansion,” Bruce Baltin, PKF consulting senior vice president, said in a statement published by the industry group.

    PKF’s study also criticizes the potential inequities among hotels and employees that may result if only unionized hotels are covered by the law.

    Proof that conservatives against minimum wage hikes have helped the employment of illegal immigrants since hotels and restaurants are built when wages are low but when wages are higher less service jobs. If La was 15.000 per hr were in placed, a lot less dishwashers, maids, cooks and so forth. Conservatives whine against illegal immigration but they help it by keeping thousands of low skilled jobs available by keeping wages low.

  78. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Let’s not forget the amazing Katy Jurado, who, in High Noon, dominated every scene she was in.

  79. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @iSteveFan
    The researchers for the study argue that in many media companies and networks, a significant majority of decisions are made by upper-class, middle-aged white men.

    I would correct this statement and note that a significant majority of decisions are made by upper-class, middle-aged Jewish men, but Brando beat me to it.

    Today, Latinos make up 17 percent of Americans, but there has been little change in network television in the number of Latino lead actors and in Latino roles, according to a study,

    What about the leads in shows and the news anchors on telemundo and univision? Doesn't that count for something? I also think those spanish networks siphon off hispanic viewers so that hispanics are probably a lot less than 17 percent of the viewing audience of the English language networks. Also, how many Anglos are represented on univison and telemundo?

    “The researchers for the study argue that in many media companies and networks, a significant majority of decisions are made by upper-class, middle-aged white men.”

    “I would correct this statement and note that a significant majority of decisions are made by upper-class, middle-aged Jewish men…”

    I would correct this statement and note that a significant majority of decisions are made by upper-MIDDLE class, middle-aged Jewish men…”

    High income, assets, or power does not equal upper class status either in America, England, or Europe. There are very few jews among the American upper classes. Wealthy jews are typically middle or upper-middle.

  80. I now understand why white male leftists/progressives running the media believe that businesses routinely discriminate against women and minorities. It is because they do so they assume everyone does.

  81. […] Vibrant is a code word for Nonwhite in our Multicultacracy. As Steve Sailer often points out, though, they aren’t particularly vibrant. The USA’s now-20% Hispanic population is almost […]

  82. […] Vibrant is a code word for Nonwhite in our Multicultacracy’s lexicon. As Steve Sailer often points out, though, many Vibrant Americans aren’t particularly “vibrant”. The USA’s now 20 percent […]

  83. Anonymous says: • Website     Show CommentNext New Comment

    So this is what middle-aged virgins do in their mothers’ basements in their spare time.

    At least it keeps them from breeding and propagating their vile kind.

    Carry on, Sailer Mooney!

  84. @syonredux
    "It would seem that way if you project today’s attempt to racialize Conquistador-Americans as an oppressed minority back on to the past. There’s a huge effort today to rewrite the past to make it seem like Latinos were treated like blacks in order to emotionally justify amnesty and affirmative action as reparations for white racism."

    So many examples showing how the Black paradigm does not work with Hispanics:

    Lynda Carter: Mother was of Mexican descent. Does this make TVs WONDER WOMAN non-White? No one in the 1970s thought so.

    Catherine Bach (AKA Daisy Duke from THE DUKES OF HAZARD): Mother was of Mexican descent. Yet no one minded her playing one of the uber Southern Dukes.

    Raquel Welch: Hispanic on mother's side. One of the biggest sex symbols of the '60s-'70s. No one thought that she wasn't White.Indeed, her status as a White woman made her inter-racial sex scene with Jim Brown in 1969's 100 RIFLES rather controversial.

    Ricardo Cortez: Golden Age Hollywood actor (played Sam Spade in the first adaptation of THE MALTESE FALCON). Actually a Jewish guy named Jacob Krantz. Yep, in Golden Age Hollywood a Jewish guy wanted people to think that he was Hispanic.

    Let’s don’t forget Geraldo Rivera.

  85. In an appearance on CNN’s Larry King Live last Friday, Brando said he was angry with some Jewish film-makers for not showing more sensitivity in portraying minority groups in a negative fashion while not portraying Jews in the same way.

    I recall being in grad school and watching that Brando interview; my friends and I just sat there with our jaws in our laps. We just could not believe what we were hearing. And he was unrepentant in his charges, he just went full bore ahead. Could not believe it.

    I don’t recall hearing about the tearful mea culpa that you describe here in this post though. I think I recall some sort-of backlash and then some kind of pussyfooting reply from Brando. But I don’t recall reading about him breaking down crying and asking Wasserman for forgiveness.

    But if that’s completely true then that just adds a hilarious footnote to the incident.

  86. Sailer:
    Didn’t you get the announcement?
    African-Americans have been appointed as the official representative of “.People of Color” in the US.
    So when you see a black in a commercial or news show, you must not an African-American. But all PoC. And when the is a female A-A then you will know that she indeed represents all people except the Dominant White Male.
    It is certainly a remarkable coincidence that this viewpoint coincides with all of the Duck-Dynasty Ubermensch. Both believe that all non-DWM are interchangeable. And First Settlers and Hispanics all have mixed blood and are therefore Afro-American.
    While estimates of those self-identified A-A’s with actually some European genes (And gasp in LA. and SC 12% of self-identified Whites have some of that dark stuff) my non-scientific seem to be that A-A in movie and TV most seem pretty light-skinned. Certainly we are not seeing the 75% all Africans (Except as commentators/announcers on sports shows) I am stumped trying to decode that message.
    In short Latinos have beening represented. By Oprah

Comments are closed.

PastClassics
The unprecedented racial transformation of California and its political consequences.
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.