Census Benchmark for White Americans: More Deaths Than Births
Source: New York Times
Deaths exceeded births among non-Hispanic white Americans for the first time in at least a century, according to new census data, a benchmark that heralds profound demographic change.
The disparity was tiny only about 12,000 and was more than made up by a gain of 188,000 as a result of immigration from abroad. But the decrease for the year ending July 1, 2012, coupled with the fact that a majority of births in the United States are now to Hispanic, black and Asian mothers, is further evidence that white Americans will become a minority nationwide within about three decades.
Over all, the number of non-Hispanic white Americans is expected to begin declining by the end of this decade.
These new census estimates are an early signal alerting us to the impending decline in the white population that will characterize most of the 21st century, said William H. Frey, a demographer with the Brookings Institution.
Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/13/us/census-benchmark-for-white-americans-more-deaths-than-births.html
Prepare the smelling salts for the GOPNRAteahadists.
BeyondGeography
(39,369 posts)eShirl
(18,490 posts)As a white American nerd, I welcome Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)Korea has been one of the most homogeneous countries in the world. Now there are 2 million foreigners and about 200,000 multicultural children in Korea. The estimate is 4 million foreigners by 2050 which would be about 10% of the population (which will drop from the current 48 million to around 40 million due to the high number of older people).
phantom power
(25,966 posts)"All we need is a voluntary, free-spirited, open-ended program of procreative racial deconstruction. Everybody just gotta keep fuckin' everybody 'til they're all the same color."
Or better yet, not until we're all the same, but until there is infinite variety
antigone382
(3,682 posts)There are no clear-cut, biologically identifiable "races" as we understand the term. Basically, when you look at the genomes of people of "different" races, there are as many variations between those of the "same" race as there are between those of "different races." If you don't know the specific genes which code for hair texture, skin color, eye shape, or the other arbitrary observable differences by which we determine racial identity, it is impossible to group people into separate racial categories based on their genes. Nevertheless, these endless variations in physical appearance are simplified by social conventions into arbitrarily defined racial categories.
These categories are different in different cultures, and even among different people in the same culture. Look at President Obama: we define him as "black" even though his mother is white and he has medium-toned skin, because his father is African. In general in the US, we determine someone's racial identity through the racial identity of their parents. In Brazil, this is less the case--racial identity is determined completely by physical appearance regardless of the race of one's parents.
Another interesting fact: the people of Papua New Guinea, who are darker-skinned and have what we consider "African" features, are actually more closely related to Europeans than they are to Africans, and Africans are in turn more closely related to Europeans than they are to those from New Guinea. Yet here, they would likely be lumped into the racial category of "African American," and assumed to share in the ancestry and culture of that "race."
hatrack
(59,583 posts)Demeter
(85,373 posts)SamKnause
(13,091 posts)The Quiverfull Movement better kick it up a notch and start getting busy.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)will not be fainting. It's tribal and since we REALLY haven't evolved that far from ancient tribal mentality, who knows the trouble brewing. I'm not happy at those thoughts. I'm sixty five, so hopefully I will have passed from this plane of existence before tribalism's violence returns, big time.
sinkingfeeling
(51,444 posts)get the red out
(13,461 posts)But I am afraid of the jack-asses who will be very bothered by it. Frightening people.
Berlin Expat
(950 posts)are freaking out, or are 'concerned' that it means the "end of 'Murica" or such nonsense.
DainBramaged
(39,191 posts)onehandle
(51,122 posts)azurnoir
(45,850 posts)Hekate
(90,637 posts)Only reading "Born Fighting" the superb book by Jim Webb, helped me understand part of the nativist fervor among such a large portion of whites in this country, because my own family mythology (waves of immigrants, waves of immigrants) and place of upbringing (multi-racial Hawai'i in the 1950s and 1960s) did not give me the tools to understand it. Webb points out that for a century, at least, the overwhelming preponderance of immigration to the US was English and Scots-Irish. If it was unsettling to suddenly get a wave of Irish, Italians, and Jews, at least they finally assimilated and -- ahem -- were white.
But the country, in very significant areas, still has a mythology of the core of America as being English-speaking and of British Isles stock.
Hang on folks, it's going to be another bumpy ride. But we'll be the better for it, ultimately.
Sognefjord
(229 posts)We simply got our own parts of the state (Iowa, Minnesota, Dakotas) with our own farms and towns and churches. The Hollanders did the same.