White California RIP: The Death of a Dream

RIP White California. We knew thee well.

The photo above is of Cahuenga Pass, Los Angeles, in 1954. I was born not far from here in Inglewood (back when Inglewood was a White city!) in 1957. I can recall scenes not too different from that photo very well. That was my once upon a time. It’s gone now, and it’s never coming back. The dream is over.
I am not sure how many of you lived in California when it was still a White state (mostly in the 1950’s and 60’s), but I did, and it was a special time in a special place.
The state’s gotten a lot more crowded and diverse in the meantime. The crowding has made the state much worse (thanks real estate developers), and I hate to say it, but with all the diversity has come a noticeable decline in the state overall. In addition, we are starting to become like a Latin American country with a rich and upper middle class with a lot of money, a whole lot of poor and low income folks pretty much groveling in the American equivalent of shantytowns, and an ever-declining middle class. This state is now unbelievably unequal, and it didn’t used to be that way.
At least here in California, the trend of going from a 90% White state to a 45% White state has been characterized by a very noticeable decline. I am not sure if one is related to the other, but I suspect they are related. In other words, I suspect that instead of making this a better state, the diversity has made California into a worse state. What’s so good about diversity anyway? We act as if diversity is some automatically good thing that is positive merely in and of itself. Excuse me, but that’s bull.

Please follow and like us:
Tweet 20

0 thoughts on “White California RIP: The Death of a Dream”

  1. True, but Italian Americans and Irish Americans have both risen to the middle class now. The thing with Mexicans may not be forever. However, to WNs of course, they don’t care, because they just don’t want Mexicans here, even wealthier ones, because they want to protect the white culture and physical appearance (blonde, red hair, blue, green eyes, white skin)

    1. Not really, still significant population of both in crime & unsavory conditions. Same w/ e Euro.

    2. Mexicans are NOT the new Italians. Even after five generations, there is NO improvement. They never turn into Italians. It doesn’t happen. They just stay Mexicans forever apparently.

      1. Genetic engineering is around the corner. 10-50 years from now.
        Genetic engineering and artificial intelligence (AI) will shape the future more than anything else. Rare recessive genes will be preserved–e.g.light hair and eyes–(and become more common!) and people will be smarter as well!
        Listen to this:

  2. Dear Robert
    Diversity is never a blessing, but the effect of diversity should be separated from the effect of quality. Let’s compare 2 German soccer teams. One is local and poor and has only German players. The other is rich and buys a lot of players from Africa and Latin America. The second team is more diverse and superior. However, it isn’t superior because it is diverse but because it can buy the best soccer talent from the world. The faculty of Harvard is more diverse than the faculty of the University of North Dakota. But again, the academic superiority of Harvard is not due its diversity but due to the fact that it is rich enough to buy academic talent from a global pool.
    Now let’s take 3 countries, each with 5 million white inhabitants. All 3 import 2 million immigrants. One imports 2 million Haitians, the second 2 million Mexicans, and the third 1 million Koreans and 1 million Poles. In terms of diversity, the third has now more of it than the other 2, but is it worse off? I doubt it. We shouldn’t look only at the level of diversity but also at the quality of the subpopulations that comprise diversity.
    When it comes to assimilation, diversity is a blessing. If 20% of the population of a country is born abroad, then it makes a significant difference from how many different language or religious communities these immigrants came. If the whole 20% consists of Spanish-speaking Catholics or Arabic-speaking Muslims, then assimilation is going to be slower than if these immigrants speak 40 different languages and belong to 5 different religions.
    One mistake that the US made is that it allowed too many immigrants who speak Spanish. As a result, Spanish is now unofficially the second official language of the US, and Hispanics are regarded as a pseudo-race and entitled to affirmative action. That would not have occurred if the number of Spanish-speaking immigrants had been much smaller. I have nothing against the Spanish language of course, and I qualify as a Spanish-speaker myself, but there is no advantage for the US to see a second language become prominent. Linguistic unity has been one of the strengths of the US.
    Regards. James

    1. James, the “diverse” soccer team is not German. There is the problem.
      Sure, I could replace my wife and kids with ringers, and say my “family” is now earning more money, but its not my family. Only the name remains.
      I’ve improved NOTHING. I’ve just replaced something with something else, and calling the something else the think I have dispensed.
      I mean, what if we gave someone else your identity, and pushed you into the wilderness, and got them to manage your finances and life better than you? Would you then get to say your life has improved, because the person representing your name, owning your assets is doing it better?

  3. Do you think diversity is a cause of the decline, or a symptom, or both in some sort of feedback cycle?
    It’s something I’ve given a lot of thought about. In my home city of Melbourne, I can’t say that diversity has mady any place better. Sure, some where shitholes before the diversity moved in, but all in all, when the whites move out, it doesn’t become a better place. Melbournes now discovering the joys of African crime, though doesn’t want to admit it yet.
    But some of this I think is due to neo-liberalism, or the idea that a country is just a resource, citizens are just ’employees’, and that people can be moved and interchanged at will. The rich, despite what the Trotskyites say, love diversity. The love masses of cheap labour, they love the masses of potential renters and debt slaves, they just don’t want them near their homes or near their daughters, dammit! I worked for a company run by a family who thought very much that way.
    I think in some ways, diversity is a symptom of a country that lost its sense of identity, it sense of self. The middle class is being hollowed out by the rich “elite”, and their using diversity to paper over the holes. It’s just not the same, it weakens the structure even more.
    The left only blame Capitalists/Neoliberals and the 1%, and the right think if it weren’t for the wrong culture and the wrong ethnicities, everything would be great, but I think the reality is some kind of synthesis of the two. You can’t be against the 1%, and continue to love their program of diversification and immigration, and likewise, being an anti-immigrant “patriot” whos pro-capitalist and pro-big business is an exercise in punching yourself in the face repeatedly.
    Australia was a better place decades ago. I remember my parents and grandparents being able to do so much with their modest jobs. I remember space and lack of crowding. I remember neighbourhoods which were safe, where people knew each other. All this is being torn apart now, and its sad to see.

    1. Just a small point, it seems absurd on the face of it that Australia is crowded and lacks space. It’s about the same size as the USA in land are, yet the entire nation’s population could fit just in the New York City metro area. They have a massive amount of land to spread out. Far more so than we do.

  4. What do you think of greater Toronto area? 6 mil people, half foreign born. No one minority more than 15% & large diversity among whites too, ie Slavs, Latins, Germanics, English, French, etc. Many enclaves with more or less authentic recreations of cultures. Black population admittedly low & cause most of social problems. I see it as E Vs S Vs N Asian race war in 25 years. Some liberal n Asians, ie Euros, think it’s greatest thing since bread.

  5. Any government that allows too many immigrants into its own country is working against its own people.

  6. Horace makes good points, but alot of the things he cites are really just the effects of world overpopulation.
    The places with the highest birthrates have generally been the places with the blacks and the browns. And the owners of the wealthier, mostly white countries decided to alleviate the overpopulation of the poorer black and brown countries by having the surplus move into the wealthier countries. It would be interesting to speculate on what would have happened if they hadn’t done this, but what is written is written.

  7. “and I hate to say it, but with all the diversity has come a noticeable decline in the state overall.”
    Really?, although it could be to a certain extent, coincidental, what about the huge technology industry over there…perhaps it expediting the gap…
    “In addition, we are starting to become like a Latin American country with a rich and upper middle class with a lot of money, a whole lot of poor and low income folks pretty much groveling in the American equivalent of shantytowns, and an ever-declining middle class.”
    Like Charles Murray warned….

  8. Diversity only means against christian white males. Non white nations are under no pressure to diversify. Europe, Canada, Australia , the US are all having diversity shoved down their throats. Add that most immigrants are males and its only a push to eliminate white populations with either out breeding or in breading so whites disappear.

  9. Does this look like decline to you?
    California has the 7th largest economy in the world. It is not declining. A lower percentage of whites is not synonymous with decline. If CA ends up being only 20% white, it’s still going to be a dynamic, flourishing and economically vibrant state. In fact one can argue that without immigration CA would not be as successful as it is today.
    California being my home state I can assure you that the quality of its citizens is not determined by skin color.

    1. It does appear to have a strong economy, at least for some.
      I would like to see Robert elaborate on this one,
      I also thought he believed “White genocide” or “White decline” type ideas to be stupid?

    2. It’s mass immigration that has ruined this state.
      The “California economy” is Silicon Valley and Hollywood. That’s it. A booming economy does not make a state great. There are more or less slums and gangs all over this state now. It sure didn’t use to be that way. A lot of towns and even cities look like somewhat upgraded versions of Mexico. What’s so great about that? What’s so good about turning your state into Mexico?

      1. Not a place for someone like you, I suppose, someone who won’t join/detests the upper class, and is hence stuck in a barrio?

      2. The “California economy” is Silicon Valley and Hollywood. That’s it. A booming economy does not make a state great.

        California has one of the most advanced and diverse economies in the world. It is hardly just Silicon Valley and Hollywood. Read the article I posted.

  10. But Robert, don’t you know that illegal immigrants pay taxes and raise the GDP?!
    Sarcasm aside, pro-business elites – as well as leftist useful idiots – always try to assert that immigration is an economic boon. And immigration is an economic boom – for THEM. Immigration does indeed benefit the affluent, who enjoy access to cheap labor, cheap services, ethnic restaurants, etc. They’re also shielded from any of immigration’s deleterious effects on society at large.
    As I’ve argued before, the embrace of immigration by many whites is more than just bleeding heart fruitiness: it’s class warfare.
    But anyway, good post. Simple empiricism can always refute tired arguments about how immigrants improve the GDP. After all, can anyone seriously argue that California’s quality of life today is better than it was 5 decades ago? There’s more to a good life than misleading statistics about economic growth; and why should that be the end-all-be-all anyway? So many liberals and leftists turn into neoliberals when it comes to this issue.

    1. It could be argued that because the extremeish K-selectivity of our native population- that the population over generations is really going to hurt- even this soon into “modernity” our linear growth rate is 0.5% for the next 50 years. Not good…now that has helped contribute to a low growth rate (along with many other factors), and if we didn’t have immigrants we might even be a more Monetaristic/Thatcherite economy than what we are now.
      Plus, it brings the median age down.
      I had said that for months and Obama said it Saturday in Warsaw (juxtaposing us to countries with like Japan, whose median age is sky-rocketing).
      There are good arguments on both sides, like in just about anything.

    2. the lower than median age, to a certain point, the better.
      and guy, I do enjoy your blog but using “idiots” and “bleeding hearts” and “empiricism” when the guy you are rebutting has a source and you don’t..it looks silly…
      just saying;
      It’s not about “GDP” and only economic fools would say it is, it’s about productivity relating to median age…now if IQ was a more accepted notion in society that could be countered with “x immigrants should be less productive than native born peoples/ detracting because they have less potential to produce because of their IQs”.

      1. thought you were responding to “Chindeu”..never mind, although my point on median age and productivity still stands.

    3. but..if the statistics are misleading, and you hence disregard them how is that “Empiricism”?

    4. To Bay Area Guy:
      Sarcasm aside, pro-business elites – as well as leftist useful idiots – always try to assert that immigration is an economic boon. And immigration is an economic boom – for THEM. Immigration does indeed benefit the affluent, who enjoy access to cheap labor, cheap services, ethnic restaurants, etc. They’re also shielded from any of immigration’s deleterious effects on society at large.
      A few years ago I went to a blog that was pro open borders and stated that their should be brothels in Silicon Valley with the slogan “Doing the jobs that Americans won’t do” emphasizing a diverse workforce of immigrant labor (Eastern European, Hispanic, East and South Asian women). They didn’t seem to like the idea.

    5. The economy is booming! All is good.
      Now that is something that is going to make peoples minds blow. That the immigrants the left love, are actually weapons of class warfare against the proletariat whites…
      As Robert said earlier, Cultural Leftism is about loving immigrants. You have to love immigrants over everything else.

  11. White people are evil. They’re hogging all the diversity. Other countries can’t have diversity because White countries are taking it all.

    1. Politicians in the west are often saying “diversity is our strength” I’ve stopped believing just about everything or everything they say.

      1. read my posts about economics.
        There are all pitfalls but it’s not as simple as “oh poor Whites”, and “Joos”….
        I understand that Alt-Reichers have average IQs like -1SD from your average White, but guys, come on….

  12. Robert,
    Globalization wrecked California and its economy. Not immigration.
    And, as to that portion of California’s economy that is still thriving, have you ever been inside the typical Silicon Valley corporate entity, and, particularly, walked among its engineers/programmers? Far from a lily white environment. High proportions of Asians, Indians, Pakistanis, and Middle Easterners.
    Immigration’s impact has been a mixture of good and bad, but I suspect much of the bad is rooted in the insanely self-destructive policies of globalization and domestic de-industrialization, and the attendant loss of middle class jobs, pursued by corporatocracy. Even Detroit’s black neighborhoods were quite nice, safe, and prosperous back when Detroit was an industrial boomtown.

    1. Those Asiatics were all brought in to work for peanuts as H-1B’s so they fire the White workers! They’re nothing but scabs. We don’t need foreigners to run our computer companies. Whites can do it just fine. Anyway I am in favor of some immigration, just not at this level. Maybe 350,000/year would be ok.

      1. Fair enough, and you are not incorrect. But you ignored my larger point about the impact of globalization on California’s economy.
        H1-B’s are, in my opinion, a subset of the same filthy thinking that leads one to tout globalization as a good thing.

        1. Globalization fucked up California. If not for that shift, your Hispanic neighbors would be working prideful and lucrative factory jobs — and, most likely, not stealing hubcaps and car stereos.
          See the bigger picture, Robert.

  13. Reblogged this on TIERRA LIMPIA by Charles Lincoln and commented:
    Robert Lindsey is a raging liberal…. far, far, far to the left on most issues. It’s very interesting to see his perspective here…. I would beg to differ with him on one point however: CULTURAL AND RACIAL DIVERSITY ARE BOTH UNAMBIGUOUSLY GOOD, POSITIVE FEATURES OF BOTH BIOLOGICAL AND CULTURAL EVOLUTION, AS WELL AS WORLD HISTORY. In fact, I would go so far to say that the generation of diversity IS the heartbeat of all kinds of evolution and history. But the California Melting pot (and Globalism generally) create THE ANTITHESIS of diversity. A world of the dichotomous Rich and Poor, of those who shop on the Monte Carlo Riviera, London S.W. 7, Paris Rive Gauche, and Beverly Hills 90210 especially Rodeo Drive, against those who shop exclusively at CVS, Target, and Walmart, is not an evolving world. It is a frozen world. A world where all cultures come together and become one, a world where all races come together and become one, is standing at the end of history in my opinion. California DOES seem to me to be in an apocalyptic moment, about to fall, willingly, into a Millennium of Degraded Human Slavery called Socialism. Governor Brown and A.G. Harris and Senators Boxer and Brown are the Apostles and Acolytes of this Horrible Brave New World. The California soup is now so dark…. there is no room for light. Even during my High School Years in the early 1970s, Los Angeles was mostly a White Christian City, with what we then thought was “admirable” tolerance for Buddhists and Jews and Muslims who were still distinct and very small minorities. In fact, it was in the 1980s that I really saw the change, when I came back with my soon to be wife (a Greek-born UCLA Cheerleader interested in Maya archaeology), the city was still majority white but Reagan had unleashed the floodgates—yes, Ronald Reagan, whose name is so reviled by the multi-culti crowd… is the one who really did the major damage to white California….

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)