“We” the “Minorites” of the…

In Uncategorized on July 28, 2009 at 9:41 pm

wethepeopleIt is commonly taken for granted, that the very notion of majority and minority – is relatively new to politics, not to mention the social sciences. The French and American revolutionaries spoke of the nation and the people in reference to the electorate, and of factions, divisions, conspiracies and oppositions when describing political intrigues involving the numerically inferior; “minority” was the Latin equivalent of “small” and occasionally used to speak of political positions that were marginal, and unpopular.

Naturally, the history of a term is not the history of a concept, nor a process which it denotes. It is rather in the absence of a term’s equivalents, that scholars may discern its importance relative to a period in which it is commonly used.

The protection of community rights is as old as organised society. Tribe conquering tribe would accept tokens of servility in place of pursuing acculturation or assimilation. Depending on the degree of cooperation, the vanquished could even continue with some degree of political autonomy, provided they did not threaten the newly introduced  order.

It is with the coming of democratic government, that homogeneity becomes an issue in the daily life of a larger polity. Self-rule presumes a “self.” In a community, such a “self” becomes a shared attribute across a demographic. It is no coincidence, that true democracy first appeared in ethnically homogeneous Mediterranean states (Greek, Carthage, Republican Rome) and would not reappear until the emergence of homogeneous ethnic groups in Europe, at the end of the 18th century. Equally, there is no mystery as to why the concept of genocide accompanies the rise of democracies. Democracy, apparently, is the midwife of demographic massacres.

Both the Founding Fathers of the United States of America, and the Revolutionaries of Republican France, took their demographics for granted. In using the terms “nation” and “people” they assumed a mass of kinsmen, united by a common heritage, blood, literary language, and aspirations. The term “fraternite” was no mere appendage to the traditional French “liberte” and  “egalite”. Nor was the pronoun “We, the People of the United…” a mere two letter self-reference to the scribes of the founding document of the American Republic, even if amongst 200 of their number, nearly all were English.

It should then come something as a shock, that a term signifying the very antithesis of the “we” and “fraternity” of a “nation” and a “people” should be no older than three decades, and yet command such unanimous adulation, as to render the terms of the founders of all modern democracies, mute and obsolete!

The nomenclature of democracy, originates in demographics. In the early 19th century, that part of the electorate which lost the vote, was sometimes properly called a minority. Their rights, we were reminded – were to be respected. Towards the end of the 19th century, a minority increasingly became that part of the demographic, which adhered to a peculiar religion. As with voters, their rights were to be respected also. Sometime in the 1920s, the first reference to ethnic minorities rears it’s head. Entirely in connection to self-determination (there’s that “self” again!), their rights, were to be respected as with all aforementioned minorities.

Contemporary usage harks back to the seventies. As a result of the successful establishment of preferential revenge racism for “Negroes” other “numerically disadvantaged” groups, sought to game the democratic system in their favour. Demanded on the pretext of “respecting our rights,” few inquired what was happening to the old American “we” when terms such as minority now came to signify the people.

In their political campaigns Negroes insisted that the old “we” had been an exclusive term, property of Whites. Democracy, Republicanism, private property and land, property of Whites. Political nominations, ownership of capital and access to education, property of Whites. The “w” in “we” stood for “Whites”; the “e” for  “Exclusively”; The “We” in the “people of the United States” read as “Whites Exclusively!”

In the sixties, a few Negroes believed, that  Whites could not voluntarily cede any part of their We, and Revenge Racism was needed. That such a Revenge could only be carried out by the introduction of  a new “we” to counterbalance the old – went un-though. That Negroes could demand Racism as payback,  only by assuming that they had an exclusive Black “we” with a  “self” distinct from that of the upper-case “We,”  went unnoticed.

Now, almost four decades later, the universal American “We” is rapidly falling into decline. In its stead, lurks the inevitability of a new separatist White “we”, as low-capital as the Negro one.  White seperatism will be the undoing of a Nation whose last hope of a universal “We” faints with the rise of a self-conscious White “minority.”

The tides of demography, will obliterate the Republic, of 200 or so Englishmen, as it will obliterate the Republic of their French cousins whose assumptions were equally dubious.

When there is no longer a single dominant group capable of accomodating minority parochialism, those  who sought to improve their status at the cost of the common “We,” will reap the fruit of their Revenge Racism; the permanent loss of a Nation, will overshadow any possible gains of a tribe. The minorities which lived off the American People, will devour its cadaver, and subsequently die of hunger. For they will have eaten their mother, and with her, the source of their own life.


  1. Ok – a bit confusing. What are you driving at?

    I don’t understand the relationship between We and we. You admitted that for Blacks, the American We was “whites exclusively” so how can you then conclude with “universal” we?


    • It’s simple.

      Have you ever heard “We the ‘white’ people of the United States”?

      Now contrast with what you never heard in a black brain “We the ‘people’ of the United States”

      So while everyone else is thinking with a hyphen, the only group which actively promoted a lofty notion that transcended race, were those who identified as Americans.

      This is not a trait of “minorities”.

      The White reaction, which minoritizes itself, will annul the loftiness of the national ideal.

      What comes after that, is anyone’s guess.

  2. Are blacks stupid David? Just kidding.

    The “WE” refers to All Americans. The point is to feel unity, in our democratic fraternity. To be one people. To stop with the hyphens!

    I totally understand the issue of a dying cow. It’s right on! When the white majority collapses, we are all done for.

    Another brilliant post. You gotta write for Huffington Post man!

  3. ANOTHER RACIST RANT BY UNDERCOVER KKK. We know who you is, and we gonna wax your ass!

    The White man stole it all from the red man, brown man, black man, any man that wasn’t white, it was taken from! What kind of fucking “We” is you talking about honkey!? Ain’t your fucking country. And now that we is getting up – you gonna get up and run or you gonna do what?!

    Truth is your dominance is coming to an end, and you is waxing moonshine over it. That’s all there is to it. “We” are just as ready to be Americans as you was! We don’t need YOU to DOMINATE US keep this country rich, beautiful, and free. So either YOU join us in that new multiethnic tapestry, or you go the road you made the red man take.

    It’s a new society. Quit whinning!

  4. […] because when a nation is forced to choose between itself, and the other, the nation which no longer has a “self,” must be the first to […]

  5. […] consensus, individual sexual practice, and taxation, but guns are about the second Amendment to the United States Constitution which belongs to the stratosphere of those basic and inalienable rights which make America America, […]

  6. That illiterate apeshit creation “Black” should take a course in basic English grammar and spelling and then try to post.Jeesh just another Black POS…illiterate,retarded and as useless as teats on a boar.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: