Rarely does a left-wing progressive book actually manage to call it. In fact, leftist academia is a bizarro cottage industry where predictivity is downright frowned upon and actively avoided. An author predicting that some new educational gimmick will turn Detroit’s school system around will continue enjoying applause and support, and nobody will demand a refund when the author’s idea is proven wrong. It’s all about “hope,” “miracles,” “new beginnings,” and conspiratorial babble about “institutional racism,” “the patriarchy” and other villains known by their signature lack of identifiability or falsifiability.
However, anti-White immigrant ideologue Marissa Abrajano can’t be accused of missing the mark in her recent book, White Backlash: Immigration, Race, and American Politics, published in March of this year. Within a couple months of its publication, Donald Trump picked up the abandoned issue of immigration restriction and ran with it to become the undisputed frontrunner in the Republican Party within mere weeks. Rarely does a social scientist’s attempt to predict a social phenomenon prove so timely or prophetic.
The mainstream media, late as ever to the actual discussion about what’s actually going on, is just now starting to ask if there might perhaps be a “White Backlash” afoot in NBC News’ coverage of the book, Is There ‘White Backlash’ to Latino Immigration? Author Says Yes. At this point, given the grassroots groundswell of White voters stampeding to support Trump because of immigration, dragging the rest of the GOP field out of their amnesty-friendly comfort zone, is this even a question?
A new book by two professors at the University of California at San Diego posits that mass immigration by Latinos has touched off a wave of bitterness among white voters who are voicing their disapproval with a migration of their own to the Republican Party – who is receiving them with open arms.
What was a gentle rolling wave of Dixiecrat-style White working class refugees from the DNC to the RNC is looking like more of a tsunami at this point.
The authors look that looks at the stark reality of how voters are hardening their positions on policies based on their views of Latino immigrants, attitudes that the authors say don’t carry over to Asian American immigrants.
The author never pauses to consider the wealth of social science data which offers a more parsimonious conclusion than the author’s, that Asian immigrants are less disruptive to the communities they invade by any and every objective metric. She would have us believe that some sort of media conspiracy exists which biases us against Latin American migrants while biasing us in favor of Asian migrants.
Even though other issues are important to Republican voters, immigration has once again risen to the top as a predictor of support for Republican policies, and despite Republicans who say that they welcome “legal immigrants” but not “illegal immigrants”, Abrajano says the data paints a different story.
“From most people’s minds, this distinction – legal immigration versus illegal immigration – doesn’t make all that much of a difference because from most people’s minds when they think about immigration they already have their notions and beliefs of what immigration is, and to a large extent it’s a negative perception of immigration,” Abrajano said in an interview with NBC News.
The legal and illegal distinction is a necessary fig leaf White Americans rely upon, given that there’s a strict taboo against the perfectly natural and sensible position that we have more than enough Latin American immigrants, thankyouverymuch. Heck, even if we really are stoked on diversity, why not mix it up with some Sri Lankan, Turkish, and Malaysian migrants? If you’re in it for the ethnic restaurants and enriching interactions with exotic people, why not turn back the tide and make some room for authentic Tajiki cuisine, or whatever?
For example, unlike Latinos, greater migration into states from Asian-Americans is unrelated to support or lack of support for social welfare policies, and there is greater leniency with respect to the death penalty when associated with Asian-Americans.
In other words, the authors say that the backlash is a response to the country’s negative views of Latino immigrants, not so much their negative views of immigrants in general.
In other words, the authors avoid saying that the backlash is a response to the Latino immigrants’ negative behavior.
So why is this backlash largely focused on Latinos? Abrajano and Hajnal argue that Americans’ sense of threat by Latinos comes largely from the media.
“The media plays an important role in how they portray good immigrants versus bad immigrants. Asians are stereotypically portrayed as ‘model minorities’,” says Abrajano. She argues much of the negative reaction to Latinos is related to the type of attention the media gives Hispanics versus how Asian Americans are portrayed.
Anticipate the next season of your favorite shows and series to feature some brilliant and noble Nicaraguan rocket surgeons in the revised cast. That’ll repair America’s increasingly tribalized political powderkeg. What a relief that the whole White Backlash turned out to be just a silly little mistake in media depictions of Mestizos, rather than, say, visceral anxieties about demographic displacement or displeasure with the impact they’re having on our communities.
The role that the media plays in shaping how Latinos are portrayed could not be understated. Abrajano and Hajnal trace media attention to immigration back to 1980 and find that the greater the attention the media pays to the issue of immigration, the more diminished white support for the Democrats becomes. The focus on negative stories gives rise to the anxiety of Americans and the perception that Latinos are a threat.
Of course, this “scientist” fingers the media’s reporting of the unflattering facts about immigration rather than, you know, the unflattering facts being reported. In what other discipline could such a naked correlation error go uncontested? This is as asinine as “linking” the AIDS epidemic to positive AIDS tests. Sure enough, diagnosing people with AIDS often leads to a host of health issues. Doctors telling people they’ve got AIDS and the media telling people they’ve got crime waves and sweeping cultural changes must be stopped.
In the short term, the Republican Party has been able to capitalize on these attitudes, say the authors, white voters made up almost 90 percent of their voters in the 2012 presidential election. Yet the realities of the influence of the growing Latino population leave one to wonder what the long term impact will be.
One of my favorite things about being White is my having agency and moral accountability for my actions, both individually and collectively. If Latin Americans were as human as I am, then it would make sense to ask them whether their flooding into our country by the tens of millions is morally questionable, given how it’s destabilizing the political landscape and displacing vulnerable laborers. The new White Supremacism doesn’t whip or beat non-Whites, it patronizes and condescends to them as benighted inferiors. The growing Latino population is understood as some sort of inhuman process, like stalactite formation, one which can’t possibly be morally challenged or reversed.
Prof. Abrajano, an ethnic advocate masquerading as a scientist, has “discovered” that White Americans responding to her relentless ethnic advocacy with their own ethnic advocacy are very bad and ought to knock it off.
Prof. Abrajano offers her professional prognosis; White Genocide.
And while the GOP has reaped short term benefits, the long term may be a different story. In this, Abrajano says that is largely up to the Republican Party and that sooner or later their strategy will implode if they continue on the same path.
“It’s really up to the Republicans on what they want to do,” said Abrajano. “The ball is in their court. So far, Trump has been appealing to the voters of now, not those they want to cultivate.”
The book is, of course, ethnic advocacy for her tribe* disguised as some perfectly dispassionate scientific research. Marissa Abrajano has discovered that the media must depict her people in a more charitable light. She’s also discovered that the GOP must stop trying to control its borders and go in for yet another round of election-losing hispandering. In an upcoming study, this researcher will discover that White Americans owe her people even more free stuff than we’re already transferring to them.
Future projections from recent historical trends aren’t etched in stone. We have every right to fight back against the invasion. Furthermore, winning is achievable. It may seem unthinkable within academic and beltway circles, but Trump’s just a foretaste of how fragile the anti-White elitist and minority token status quo truly is. Few things in this world are inevitable, and it’s truly foolhardy, given our previous purges of both the Amerindians and earlier Spanish settlers, to take it as gospel that White Americans couldn’t or wouldn’t possibly get restless and start defending their homeland.
Update: Some readers are claiming she’s Filipino rather than Mestizo. In the American immigrant context, Filipinos occupy a buffer zone between Latino and Asian immigrants. Their darker features and Spanish colonial heritage empower them to identify with and speak on behalf of Latin American immigrants while technically being and generally behaving like Asian immigrants.