2005 June 28 Tuesday
Latin American Amerind Anti-White Populism Spreading Northward?

Steve Sailer has written a very interesting article about the rise of Amerind (a.k.a. Indian or indigenous peoples) populist political movements in Latin American countries. An example of this phenomenon which has the Bush Administration upset is Hugo Chavez who as President of Venezuela is waging class warfare against middle class and upper class Spanish (i.e. white) people on behalf of the mostly Amerind lower class. Bush supported a failed coup against democratically elected Chavez, thereby demonstrating the limits to Bush's supposed trust in democracy as the panacea to solve the world's ills. The coup failed because the Amerind masses supported Chavez on the streets.

Steve points out that rising Amerind resentment toward whites in Latin American countries and could (and probably will) eventually translate into a similar resentment in the United States. A rising proportion of Mexican and other Latin American immigrants are Amerinds with bottled up resentment of white middle and upper classes.

This anti-white movement in Latin America will likely make the less white Hispanics more resentful and hostile toward non-Hispanic whites in America.

This could set off massive social change.

Many affluent white supporters of illegal immigration in the U.S. see Hispanics as genetically programmed to be their docile, cheerfully subservient maids and gardeners.

What is often forgotten is that their grandparents viewed blacks the same way. That's why corporations named famous food brands "Uncle Ben" and "Aunt Jemima"—the connotation was that by buying these products, you were virtually partaking of the rich man's luxury of having your own smiling, nodding black cook.

During the Black Pride movement of the 1960s, however, blacks came to resent servant jobs.

And how much can you blame them? There's something that's just not very American about the master-servant relationship.

The downside, of course, was that when blacks turned against their old jobs, many ended up resorting to crime to make money.

Which is why wealthy Americans discovered illegal immigrant Hispanic service workers. They came to assume that it was the natural order of things for whites to command Latinos.

I suspect that the anti-white movements in Latin America will, sooner or later, set off a revulsion among Hispanics in this country against servile jobs roughly similar to the Black Pride reaction of the 1960s.

I wouldn't be terribly surprised if, in a generation, wealthy Americans are smugly assuming that their new Indonesian immigrant servants are naturally deferential—unlike those sullen, crime-prone Latinos they had to let go.

And perhaps in two generations, the rich will tell each other that their new Indian Untouchable immigrant servants are born knowing their place, unlike those uppity Indonesians they had to fire.

Perhaps I'll be proved wrong.

But what if I’m not?

Shouldn't we at least be talking about these possibilities?

As always with American’s post 1965 Immigration Disaster: Why are we taking this risk?

I think the development of a large Hispanic servant class is a recipe for turning the political and social culture of the United States into something far more like Latin America's culture than like America's historical culture. We'd be much better off stopping and reversing the illegal alien influx and placing high skills and education requirements for legal immigrants while simultaneously decreasing the total number of legal immigrants.

Business interests in America focused on short term profits oppose attempts to prevent a demographic shift that will be deeply harmful in the long run. At the same time politicians in both parties are more interested in winning the immigrants over to their party than they are in doing what is best for the American people. While the Democratic Party's leaders are correct in seeing the lower class and less educated non-whites as easy recruits the Republicans around Bush are just plain deluded.

In Bolivia the conflict between the indigenous highlands Amerinds led to an indigenous blockade of La Paz which drove the most recent Bolivian President from office. The white Spanish reaction has taken the form of a movement for regional autonomy and even talk of outright secession among the Spaniards.

SANTA CRUZ, BOLIVIA – If Lorgio Balcazar Arroyo has his way, Bolivia will soon have a system of government like the United States.

Mr. Balcazar, from the industrial eastern part of Bolivia, is general manager of the Pro-Santa Cruz Committee, a key organizer behind a controversial referendum on regional autonomy that is scheduled for Aug. 12. Broad dissatisfaction with the central government has led to an independence movement in this industrial boomtown. Leaders here say autonomy would help buttress the area against such volatility in the west as the month-long protests in May that paralyzed the capital and led to the resignation of Bolivia's second president in less than two years.


But as the demands from Santa Cruz gain legitimacy, the rivalry between east and west here is increasingly delineated in racial terms. It's the eastern cambas (European-descended Bolivians) versus the western collas (a term often used to refer to western indigenous people).

At one extreme are groups like the Camba Nation, which calls for independence from the indigenous cultures, described on Camba Nation's website as "slow and miserable" and prone to "conflict and communalism."

62% of Bolivia's population is indigenous Amerinds and Bolvia has gone through 3 Presidents in the last 2 years as the indigenous groups have staged protests.

Bolivia's current crisis was sparked by the resignation of President Carlos Mesa earlier this month. Mr Mesa's political position became untenable after he opposed a hydrocarbon law calling for a tax on foreign energy companies to be increased from 18% to 50%. Foreign investors in Bolivia, including Britain's BP and BG Group, have invested $3.5bn in the country's gas fields since 1997.

Many among Bolivia's indigenous majority, led by Evo Morales, an Aymara Indian, are now demanding the nationalisation of the country's private energy assets as a way out of poverty.

Nearly 75% of Bolivia's 3.9 million indigenous people live below the poverty level, compared to a national average of 53%. Non-indigenous Bolivians, meanwhile, earn more than twice as much as their indigenous compatriots, who collect an average monthly wage of just 513 bolivianos (£35).

Santa Cruz region white Spaniards resent Aymara Indian politician Evo Morales.

Mr. Morales, leader of Bolivia's largest opposition party, the MAS, or Movement Towards Socialism, rose to prominence as the head of Bolivia's coca-growers association, and came a close second in Bolivia's last presidential election in 2002.

In a strange turn, Mr. Morales was himself "blockaded" yesterday, and prevented from entering the city of San Julian in the Santa Cruz region by people still angry at the MAS blockades, which along with achieving their political objectives kept essential supplies from being distributed to ordinary people. The incident ended peacefully.

The United States of America too will develop even deeper splits along ethnic and racial lines if current immigration trends are not stopped. Even if the foreign influx is entirely halted eventually lower class and predominantly Amerind Latin American imimgrants are going to develop greater resentment at their class position in American society. Racial preferences under so-called "Affirmative Action" programs will not make the Amerinds do as well as whites. So America looks set to enter a stage of greater political divisions across racial lines.

As we move further into the 21st century whites may eventually become a market dominant minority ala Amy Chua's World on Fire: How Exporting Free Market Democracy Breeds Ethnic Hatred and Global Instability. For more on this see my previous posts Identity Politics Building Ethnic Conflicts In Latin America and History Of American Interventions Bodes Poorly For Democracy.

Share |      By Randall Parker at 2005 June 28 10:54 AM  Immigration Culture Clash

John S Bolton said at June 28, 2005 12:39 PM:

It can be seen that political leaders, especially unelected ones, have power enhancing incentives to build up intercommunal conflicts. The conjunction of mass imigration of eligibles with racial quotas in recruitment for positions shows this as clearly as any other large scale policy. Many businessmen are entrained to take the initiative in accelerating this process, as they compete to have a larger share of cheaper labor than their competitors, forgetting about productivity competition, and putting ever larger percentages of their workers on to net public subsidy. Japanese and Korean businessmen would do this too, if they could get away with it. Anticaucasian attitudes are not only imported; they are generated artificially; either by direct propagandization, or indirectly, through the action of the policies which build up racial conflict every year to a higher level. Once the Latinos realize that they can use quotas to sue for jobs, even for illiterates, to be created for their people, the lawsuits will multiply asymptotically. When these trends curve up towards the impossible, a point is reached where only civil war, or reversal of the racial policies, is possible.

Invisible Scientistat said at June 28, 2005 3:05 PM:

John Bolton wrote:
"lawsuits will multiply asymptotically"

Clearly, your mastery of the English language and your trenchant remarks demonstrate that you have an impeccable liberal arts education, but it seems that you have misused the word "asymptotically" when you really meant to use the word "exponentially". An exponential growth, such as the growth of the exponential function (x)which grows very fast as its variable tends to infinity, is used in a metaphorical way, to describe the excessive increase in a certain social phenomenon. But "asymptotic growth" is a relative concept, in the sense that if a certain complicated mathematical function f(x) which depends on the variable x, is to be investigated as x tends to infinity, mathematicians and physicists often try to approximate it with by means of a simpler function g(x), which is said to be asymptotic to f(x) at infinity, if the ratio f(x)/g(x) tends to 1 as x tends to infinity. Note that g(x) does not have to approach f(x) as x goes to infinity, for the distance between f(x) and g(x) measured by f(x) - g(x) can still approach infinity even as the ratio f(x)/g(x) tends to 1 as x tends to infinity. For example, for a function like f(x)=exp(5*x)+x*exp(4*x), it turns out that the simpler function g(x)=exp(5*x) is an asymptote as x tends to infinity, because in this case f(x)/g(x) approaches 1 as x approaches infinity. However, the distance between f(x)-g(x)=x*exp(4*x) itself, still goes to infinity as x approaches infinity, even though the ratio f(x)/g(x) approaches 1 as x approaches infinity. On the other hand, the funtion f(x)=7+(1/(1+x*x)) actually tends to 7 as x tends to infinity, and f(x) always remains bounded (f(x) itself never goes to infinity), and the constant function g(x)=7 would be an asymptote for this f(x).

But in your next sentence, you wrote "When these trends curv up towards the impossible", then you could have correctly used the word "asymptotically"...

Bolo said at June 29, 2005 12:10 AM:

Affirmative action and race quotas will destroy the United States by the year 2025, probably much earlier. Racial preferences were remotely tolerable (while still being reprehensible and stupid) when they were carefully restricted just to blacks. But with affirmativa action benefiting the burgeoning Hispanic population, incapable of succeeding in American schools on their own scores and merits, the financial burden on the ever-shrinking white (and always small Asian) population will be utterly unbearable within a decade. America will split along ethnic lines, with a white, a black, and a Hispanic nation being carved out. Find yourself a nice apartment in Naples or Marseilles while you still can, b/c there won't be much left of the USA as affirmative action inexorably tears the nation apart.

Kenelm Digby said at June 29, 2005 2:34 AM:

Of course, the political class has the ideal solution up its sleeve.It's called feudalism and worked well in Europe for hundereds of years.
The Crown (in this case the American political class), invest certain favored groups ("peoples of color" ie Blacks, Mestizos)with certain legal and material priveleges, in the modern case "fiefdoms" consisting of soft government and affirmative action jobs and college places.
This system of acquiescence, depends of course, on the existence of a White majority serf class that generally pays its dues and supports the whole, vast, socially priveleged superstructure.
And as we all know, the Whites will dutibly serve their masters.

Stuka said at June 29, 2005 6:19 AM:

"And as we all know, the Whites will dutibly serve their masters."

Hopefully, not for long! Organized violence is the only way we are going to liberate ourselves and our children from this mess. Buy a gun. Sign up for firearms training. Find like-minded whites and organise, mobilise a la the Minuteman Project. Just as Africans and Asians fought wars of liberation against white colonials, besieged whites in the West must fight similar wars to free our homelands. The idea these problems will be solved by complaining about them on a discussion board is naive.

Braddock said at June 29, 2005 6:32 AM:

No, the political class has no idea what to do. Europe is no haven, but will instead be conquered by its own "barbarians" before north america falls.

Multiculturalism and affirmative action are political movements of the left, not corporate conspiracies to recreate medieval euro-feudalism. The left has no foresight, in fact the left rejects foresight as a white male conspiracy against authentic people.
We are all in for a long happy ride, an accidental ride of unhappy and spontaneous surprises.

Rick Darby said at June 29, 2005 10:58 AM:

Organized violence? No way. But it's true that the situation described in this and many other postings by Randall has become so extreme, our so-called leaders so unwilling to take the necessary legitimate measures, that just expressing our opinions will no longer do. In fact, I have a serious grudge against certain immigration reform sites, which seem to have no purpose other than to print news stories about The Invasion and view with alarm. If they accomplish anything, it's in the wrong direction: providing a safety valve for people who can see what's happening so they can blow off steam and feel better for a few minutes.

Well then, short of violence (which would be self-defeating as well as morally wrong), what can we do instead of griping?

We could all move to the Southwest and become a majority in states along the Mexican border (aside from California, which is already a lost cause).

We could form more Minute Man-like organizations.

We could discuss -- seriously -- where it makes sense to emigrate to if the United States ceases to exist except as a welcome wagon for everyone in the world who wants to escape their dysfunctional countries of origin, but in the aggregate will only transfer Third World poverty and ignorance here.

All those, except possibly the last, are without doubt quixotic and unlikely to prevail. We seem to be in one of those situations that occur throughout history where a civilization should be able to see a crash coming, but its powerful members for reasons of their own are unwilling to avert it, and the ordinary person has no recourse.

One thing I am sure of: writing angry letters and postings on web sites will not turn the tide.

Tell me what you think we should do, not as a matter of public policy -- we all know that -- but as individuals or groups of individuals. Because, while I'm a fairly smart bloke, I don't know.

noone said at June 29, 2005 1:58 PM:

"Tell me what you think we should do"

Wait for the next big terrorist attack.

John S Bolton said at June 29, 2005 2:00 PM:

There is a safety valve effect of being allowed to break the taboos against speaking of these developments. It is that way to such a degree that one can determine that the intention of edicts against the majority, speaking or publishing on the subject of negative effects from such minority influxes, would be to prevent just such a catharsis. This allows for the increase of intercommunal conflicts, and coincidentally enough, builds up the power of officials. What can be done is to privatize the government schools. These are the propaganda organs for the increase of state power through anticaucasianism. Peaceful resolutions are indeed unlikely; the situation could easily be already too far gone.

Dan said at June 29, 2005 3:12 PM:

John Bolton Affirmative action is necessary to slow down the development
of "Market Minority" in the US, scatterd limited quotas will not jurt us. in comparison to the market minrity development. I somewhat in agreement that affibrmative action be limited in regards to immigration. Also dont worry your gardener will be friendly for another generation.

Randall Parker said at June 29, 2005 3:42 PM:


I fail to see how racial preferences will slow the development of a market dominant minority in the United States. You want to explain that one?

The only thing that will delay the day that whites become the market dominant minority is a complete halt to allow immigration of those with lower intelligence. The only question in my mind is where should we draw the line? 120 IQ? 125? 130? I tend toward a higher number. If I could choose the minimum I'd probably draw it at 130.

John S Bolton said at June 29, 2005 4:18 PM:

The top 1% is ~135+, and close to all the irreplaceable and important contributions to the advancement of civilization come from that level. It would be better not to miss out on such levels of contribution, unless it were for a powerful national security consideration. Official anticaucasianism says that you have to take the good with the bad, but the top investment banks don't do that in their recruitment for their top openings. Every sort of recruitment for desirable positions which are heavily competed for, disdains to take the bad with the good, and they are right. An allmerit recruitment system in immigration would, if taking only the top 1% or so, would get very few who were especially hostile to the mahority. If they were mostly young single men, because each had to qualify individually, and not just be someone's relative, they would be sojourners if they were not so marriageable here. Those staying to raise families, would have married here, and this would greatly favor those with least hostility to the majority.

Stuka said at June 29, 2005 5:36 PM:

Rick said: "Well then, short of violence (which would be self-defeating as well as morally wrong)..."

Wrong. Violence works. It worked for our forefathers in the original 13 colonies in 1776, and it worked for Africans and Asians in the colonial wars of liberation in the 20th centuy. To name just two examples. If you're too nervous to consider fighting, and if griping won't work, then what's left? Emigration?

Hey Rick, what country are you considering immigrationg to?

Rick Darby said at June 30, 2005 8:47 AM:

Stuka: Violence can be morally justifiable for self-defense against a serious threat or to overcome a major evil -- provided that the violence has a reasonable hope of achieving its end. I do not see how that applies to the problem of out-of-control immigration. Who or what are you proposing violence against? Immigrants? Sorry, no sale. Most of our immigrants, legal and illegal alike, are not evil; and while I'm all for stopping The Invasion and deporting the illegals, the process should be based on legislation and law enforcement, not individual acts of vengeance.

So you want to start a revolution against the government of the United States? Get serious.

Yes, if it comes to that, I would consider emigration. Maybe that, too, is unrealistic, but I'd welcome a discussion of whatever options might be available. For instance, how do visitors to this site rate the chances of Australia avoiding a complete Third World immigration disaster? (Please, I know that Australia has an immigration problem too, but the issue is degree, not a search for the ideal.)

Noone: Why should the next big terrorist attack make any difference in the government's and the courts' attitudes about immigration from Latin America? It might concentrate certain minds on the security risks of open borders, but the liberal establishment will have no trouble insisting that security considerations shouldn't be an excuse for so-called "prejudice" against Latino border jumpers.

crush41 said at July 1, 2005 12:41 AM:

I predict Australia will be the last bastion of the West.


Why so high an IQ for entrance into the US? What of a Hoover-like policy that also requires a certain level of means, and set the IQ at 115? What is the harm in bringing in more if everyone coming in is bumping up the average (it would not result in any fewer 130+)?

Randall Parker said at July 1, 2005 9:10 AM:


I want to avoid regression to the mean in the children of immigrants.

John S Bolton said at July 1, 2005 3:31 PM:

Another good reason for a very high minimum IQ standard is the effect on the numbers of immigrants, which would start in the low hundreds of thousands, probably, and then diminish. Small numbers, with big paper trails, are very easy to monitor for terrorism or other such threats. Returning to anticaucasianism of immigrants; those with IQ below the average are not going to believe that the reason their people have unskilled jobs is because they are unequal. They will easily fall for the anticaucasian conspiracy theory account, which tells them that they are equal, but conspired against by whites. This is another cause of increase in intercommunal conflict which government deliberately foments through immigration policy. The more such conflict, the more power from them.

Bob Badour said at July 3, 2005 10:55 AM:

"I want to avoid regression to the mean in the children of immigrants."

I have a very smart friend who once used "Beware the Law of Unintended Consequences" as a .sig line.

What if the policy to raise the mean causes regression past the mean in the form of higher incidences of aspergers and autism or some other unknown consequence? (Regression to the mean in inevitable, and I assume you want to "raise the mean" by having offspring who land above the mean even after regressing.)

Jamisia said at July 5, 2005 8:24 AM:

Am I drawing the wrong conclusion here that the winner in prez 2008 will be some violent ant-immigration populist?

Ps. By all means, do cross the Atlantic. We could well use some Americans who know how to say their piec, offer interesting opposition and do not suck up to the Scandinavian model. Does that mean, if not for you, that EUrope will be conquered by its barbarians? No. Islamic population growth is already declining (isn't that regressing to the mean?) to the standard of every other european. I think your problems - thanks to the Mexican border - are much, much worse.

Randall Parker said at July 5, 2005 9:53 AM:


Am I drawing the wrong conclusion that you want to paint anyone who opposes immigration as violent?

I mean, am I drawing the wrong conclusion if I decide you don't actually want to debate immigration on its merits and would prefer instead to debate by character assassination of those who disagree with you?

A decline in immigration is not a regression to the mean. One of the reasons I want to stop the deluge of dumb immigrants is precisely so that the fraction of the population that understands such concepts as "regression to the mean" will not shrink. A democracy can't function if morons dominate at the ballot box.

Thor said at September 16, 2008 4:30 PM:

If any "euro " americans do not like the demographic changes that are coming to this land to restore it's balance after 400 years of European infestation and infection. Go back to Europe ... sooner rather than later. We never needed you and I think your own brethren back home in Europe do not want you back either. We (the Amerinds, and our Asian cousins, as well as Blacks and all the other people of color you fear)are everywhere are growing. We are the future... its too late to stop us .. just start learning Spanish, Chinese, and Aymara now. We are taking it ALL back. (oh and the Chinese have a message for you ... they want all that money they loaned you back) Cheney and Haliburton know what side their bread is buttered on.. they have moved to Dubai and left your sad situation here to be dealt with by us. OH and WE are forming our own minute man organizations as well if you want to take it to that level.

Derek said at February 16, 2009 9:31 AM:


How was Europe ever yours?

What makes you think that the Chinese or Japanese want any part of a genocide against whites?

What makes you think numbers will be the deciding factor when things get to that level as you put it? One man with a tractor can do the work of a hundred horses. A horse can do the work of ten men... you get the idea you hate-filled inferioid.


NONEUPYOURS said at May 19, 2009 6:06 PM:



If you have white people living in your neighborhood, go introduce yourself to them. Befriend them, teach them white nationalism. Form a gang. Use the power of the group to drive out invaders.

the best way you can fight, if your white is to just live a happy life, and make white babies!

The war is on! fuck darky and fuck darkies enablers.

white pride & power world wide.


If you are white, band together fight back the darkness!


Amerindian who has had it. said at December 22, 2009 9:31 PM:


Post a comment
Name (not anon or anonymous):
Email Address:
Remember info?

Web parapundit.com
Go Read More Posts On ParaPundit
Site Traffic Info
The contents of this site are copyright ©