A Reader Who Remembers The Alamo Wonders If Modern-Day Americans Are Still Willing To Do Battle
Print Friendly and PDF

NOTE: PLEASE say if you DON'T want your name and/or email address published when sending VDARE email.

06/30/11 - A South Carolina Reader Blames LBJ And The Voters Who Elected Him In 1964

Re: Gerald Martin's letter A Dallas Reader Points Out That the Last Person Who Said 'It's Basically Over for Anglos in Texas' Was Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna in 1836

From: Carlos Perera  [Email him]

No one is a greater admirer of the martial valor and civilizational energy shown by the Texans of 1836, but, pace Mr. Martin, the Texan demographics of 1836 were quite different from those of today.

True, the population of Mexico proper was about seven million, but they were south of the Rio Grande, concentrated in the Central Plateau region, well away from Texas, and could not be mobilized effectively.  In Texas itself, according to the Texas Historical Society, the 1836 numbers greatly favored the "Anglo" Texans, approximately 30,000 (and rapidly growing!) versus 3,470 "Hispanics," a nearly 9:1 ratio in favor of the Anglos.  Fast forward to 2010:  Texas' population, according to the U. S. Census, was 37.6% Hispanic—which, I need not tell VDare.com readers, essentially means Mexican or Mexican-American—and growing, while non-Hispanic whites account for 45.3%.  

The demographic advantage that Anglos now enjoy is merely 1.2:1, and quickly eroding.  So, yes, the demographics almost certainly will start to favor the Mexican sector of the population in a few short years.  Anglo-Texans really have a rather narrow window of opportunity to turn things around within the framework of the existing polity.  (I have no doubt that Anglo-Texans could prevail in a civil war long after the demographics turn against them, but nothing in the recent history of the U. S. supports the idea that white Americans would be willing to fight such a war, even in the cause of racial or civilizational survival.

Print Friendly and PDF