Dear Guno: I can show you a couple of examples where you show a "less than inclusive equal" view of people, but are in fact projecting a bias against a group outside yourself.
1. "Whites have arguably had their time in the sun. Now, it would seem, they must give way to the “new” races that are growing rapidly in both numbers and confidence."
This statement clearly DIVIDES "Whites" from "other groups / new races"
instead of addressing people of all cultures as equals.
Whatever distinction you were trying to make, dividing it by "Whites" vs. "other races"
already shows exclusion by external grouping as a "generalization" where you imply something "negative" about one instead of respecting all their contributions equally
as having a lasting influence and impact in society.
This bias may be why you come across as "hateful" or "rejecting/reactionary" to others.
2. Your signature line, citing Sinclair Lewis equating fascism with carrying the Cross?
OMG! How is that NOT playing into the stereotype that inclusion and diversity means "going against White Christians". This line, and your own words seeing the Whites as something that needs to accept being REPLACED?
3. My bias is different from yours and stands out in contrast:
I believe that both Constitutionalism (which came from natural laws passed down from White European tradition) and Christianity provide America structure that ALLOWS for free exercise, inclusion and protection of diversity.
This foundation of America does not need to be REPLACED but EXPANDED where all people are able to enjoy equal access, education and experience in the laws for self-government.
So I see the process as being ADDITIVE, not divide and conquer, remove and replace.
The bias you have seems to set up "people who value the European traditions" as a "mutual threat" that is competing or in conflict.
So if you come across as negative, I am guessing it is because you do NOT see this other "White" cultural tradition as equal in value, but see these as competing in conflict.
If the point is equal inclusion and valuing the diversity and contributions of all cultures,
shouldn't we INCLUDE the best strengths from our European roots in Constitutional and Christian laws along with all the other contributions from other people and cultures.
Funny. I've never thought of the U.S. as a "white" nation. I've always seen it as a diverse and interesting country.
I guess folks like you, guano, need to broaden the way you think...
Nope born an raised in NYC in a multiracial multicultural Environment, have an interracial family, have traveled the world on business from South america to Asia and Europe and Africa. The ones who are going to have a hard time are certain groups who accuse me of hate when I post articles about the demographic shift . which are facts. If they have facts to prove otherwise they are free to post them, but I have seen is a major freak-out when it is brought up. This is something that should be discussed as the changes are happening with or without them.
Why the mentality of "them vs us", why isn't it framed as changes WE are going through.
Do you see the difference in bias? One is inclusive, addressing all people as equally members. The other is saying "they" are outside the process and not equally critical to it?