Thursday, December 29, 2016

Cutting out Cali

Calexit would take the country's racial demographics back 15 years. The US' racial demographic breakdown as of 2015 as a whole/without California (Calexit change):

White (non-Hispanic) -- 61.6%/64.9% (+3.3)
Black -- 13.3%/14.2% (+0.9)
Hispanic -- 17.6%/14.7% (-2.9)
Asian -- 5.6%/4.3% (-1.3)
Other -- 1.9%/1.9% (0.0)

Not only does this take us back about a decade-and-a-half in terms of the racial distribution of the country, it also takes the total population back by about the same period of time.

Put in another way, in the last 15 years we've added the contemporary population of the state of California into the US! Another California has been glommed onto the country since Bush-v-Gore.

The country is too linguistically, ethnically, religiously, culturally, economically, racially, morally, and geographically divided to make sense as a single political entity. And there are simply far too many people for it to work. Increasingly the only argument in favor of holding the thing together is a mix of complacency and economic expediency.

A SurveyUSA poll conducted in November showed Californians opposing Calexit 57%-23%, with 20% unsure. That's a high mountain to climb, but with three years' of lead time it's not an insurmountable one. Hispanics are more supportive of it than any other group is, so it already enjoys the Diversity! seal of approval.

Speaking of Californians, the majority of those who voted for the wicked witch think Trump voters are indeed deplorable. Among Hillary voters who were asked if they thought Trump voters were good people or bad people, the distribution is as follows:

Good -- 27%
Bad -- 47%
Not sure -- 26%

It gets even better when the deplorability is put in precise terms. When Hillary voters are asked if Trump voters are racist:

Yes -- 65%
No -- 16%
Not sure -- 19%

Sexist:

Yes -- 61%
No -- 18%
Not sure -- 22%

6 comments:

Sigma K said...

I am delightfully all of those things.

Oh wait, I can't be as my heritage is Arab...

Sucks to be white.

Anonymous said...

Demographics are Sheep Destiny, except even as a majority the sheep were edged out as per above by importing diverse strain of Sheep.

Bullshit. Demographics as destiny is nonsense. If you're sheep numbers don't save you, they make you a fatter target to be shorn and slaughtered.

Geography on the other hand is absolutely fixed and destiny. Which means we surrender no territory certainly not the west coast, fixing our new and also entirely porous border along NEVADA AND COLORADO? This idea must be crushed. Any people who would surrender the Pacific Coast and so Pacific Ocean would of course surrender the rest. This is actually the point of what the enemy is doing.

We take it back not give it up. Any surrender of territory must be crushed. We'd become the Roman Empire overrun in an instant. Under no circumstances is it sane to surrender our matchless geographic advantage.

If we won't defend our own we do deserve and will DIE OUT.

Crush this idea.

vxxc

douglas said...

Here's a problem. Small weak countries neighboring giant powerful countries are always insecure and form alliances with other powerful countries. California next to the rest of the US would be subject to total domination and not for their benefit. Even the threat of excluding them from the US trade and banking would be fatal. (The US cowered the Swiss easily.) So an alliance with Mexico or the EU or China would better serve their purposes. Those other power centers would give California Republic better terms then the old US because they are rivals to the US, just as Russia gave Cuba better terms. Then we would have Chinese military bases in Sacremento.

Random Dude on the Internet said...

> A SurveyUSA poll conducted in November showed Californians opposing Calexit 57%-23%, with 20% unsure. That's a high mountain to climb, but with three years' of lead time it's not an insurmountable one. Hispanics are more supportive of it than any other group is, so it already enjoys the Diversity! seal of approval.

California just passed a law legalizing child prostitution. Even a place as culturally marxist as California would likely oppose such a measure by a large amount but yet it will be legal to pick up a child prostitute starting January 1, 2017. It seems like California has a small core of far leftists who get everything they want so long as they phrase it in a way that makes it seem like it benefits those who are higher on the progressive stack.

In other words, if you can convince the far leftists that Hispanics are down with #CalExit, it's not a matter of if but when it will be put to a vote. If we can meme Trump into the White House, we need to meme California into secession.

Audacious Epigone said...

Sigma K,

Use your inherent advantages to your--and our--advantage. Your identity affords you extra protection, no reason not to exploit that.

VXXC,

Hadrian was wise to give up Dacia. Should we keep Puerto Rico, too? California isn't just a demographic disaster, it's an economic one as well. Civic nationalism--which is where we realistically have to start--is a much surer thing without California. It leaves and Democrats permanently lose two senate seats, the presidency, and a net of about 25 house seats (and thus the house of representatives forever).

Douglas,

Why would California be excluded from trade and banking with the rest of the US? Nothing is by necessity changed save for the federal government's jurisdiction and California's representation in said federal government. Canada isn't our enemy. Conversely, if Canada was a part of the US, Hillary would've won the election.

Random Dude,

Right. It doesn't legalize prostitution with minors by adults, but it does allow it if the solicitor and the john are both underage. Were it put to referendum it would fail now. In ten years though? It would probably pass. Mexicans are big on sex with teenagers.

douglas said...

Why would the EU want to punish the UK? Why did the North object to the succession of the South? I think we've never had any interest in Canada, but California is of great interest. What happens to DC if other states get similar ideas?