An Indian Reader Suggests We Try A Diversity Argument With The Young Folks
Print Friendly and PDF

[Previous Letter: An Anonymous Reader on Pat Buchanan, Bill O’Reilly, and New Blacklister Cathy Areu ]

Re: James Fulford’s article Brimelow At CPAC: Al SHARPTON Is Complaining About "Hate"?

From: An Indian-American Reader [Email him]

Immigration patriots are not framing the debate on migration and diversity for the long haul.

I have carefully thought and considered all your arguments on immigration and here is my advice which will help you make your case more effectively:

1. Frame the idea as "Decline of Diversity" not "Failure of Multiculturalism and Diversity" to capture young as well as older generation:

I frequently come across young, mostly white kids (18-25 years old) in Salt Lake City, Utah. These Middle-American kids just won't consider the angle you are presenting. Imagine advocating it to children and adults in multicultural utopia of coastal regions.

The "So what if we are declining", "We are all humans" idea has completely taken over their thinking. However, they have been told "diversity" is the most important value, and more diversity is always wonderful. College campuses are saturated with diversity-speak.

So hammering home the idea that "declining white populations and more non-Western immigration means declining diversity" will face less vitriol and more traction than "Multiculturalism and Diversity are bad".

This is a subtle but key distinction which, like martial arts will turn the opponents "diversity" momentum to your advantage. When demagogues will question and fume over your motives and smear you with R-word, you can always tell them

"You see, I love diversity more than you do, but here we are facing a decline of diversity. Hundred years ago, there were 3 whites and 7 non-whites among every 10 humans, but today there is only 1-white and 9 non-whites among every 10 humans. Diversity is rapidly vanishing before our eyes. This is not just the death of the West, it is the death of Diversity".

2. Make the case that whites are a "Global Minority, not "Western Majority": Psychologically, people sympathize with the underdog, the minorities, the few, the little, the beleaguered. Why postpone the D-day to 2041 by raising the specter that Americans and Europeans are an impending "regional" minority in US and Europe?

Why not sell the idea that the crisis is "here and now" not in 2039? That whites are not the majority, they are a minority, and a rapidly dying minority. Expunge the phrase “Declining White Majority", since it will tend to lull the people, not shake away their paralysis. Generally, people care more about the present, because they are experiencing "now", not the "future".

Hammer the idea that whites are an endangered global minority in precipitous decline, who are 10% today, will be 4-5% in 2041, and 1%? in a 100 years from now, instead of 62% today, 49% in 2039, and 20% a 100 years from now in America.

Hence, to preserve this global minority, we need to curb or freeze immigration, so Western communities and culture can thrive again.

Multiculturalism is good, healthy and great. And multiculturalism is in-built in our common humanity, that is why we have China, India, Africa and Europe.

But mass immigration means declining diversity, since there are declining spatial opportunities for Westerners to thrive.

Forge the link between mass immigration and genocide, forge the link between immigration freeze and diversity, and you’ll have a greater appeal.

See a previous letter from the same reader here.

James Fulford writes: This is very clever thinking, however, it may fall under the heading of “too clever by half.”

Print Friendly and PDF