Thread: Is La Raza Racist?

The following was written seven years ago but certainly comes about in todays issue:

Is La Raza Racist?

Mike Savage

December 8, 1999


To show you how deeply Marxian reversed logic has penetrated our society, let’s look at a recent article by a certain "Latino" gentleman. This Latino gentleman, if we can honor him with that title, states that with the aging of the white population in California, he doubts whether the Latinos — who he says are taking back the state — will want to continue carrying the older Whites on their backs. Of course, by "Latinos" we know he means activist Marxist Hispanics and the illegals they are exploiting for their socialist goals. The majority of Hispanics, naturally, the loyal Hispanic Americans, don’t count.

But isn’t his statement interesting? Especially the "continue" part of it. Those of us who are over forty, and not afflicted with Alzheimer’s, remember that until very recently, i.e., until the illegal invasion from south of the Rio, the overwhelming majority of citizens of this state were white. And they paid most of the taxes. The very taxes that are paying for the services our illegal friends are receiving free of charge.

How is it, then, that they are "continuing" to carry anyone, white, black, brown, or otherwise? God forbid that any of us, white or otherwise, should ever have to depend on them to "carry us on their backs." Even though, if we allow them to stay, maybe they owe us a debt of gratitude for letting them come here from the squalor of their homeland and receive free medical care, education, welfare, and other public services — which, by the way, whether you’re a legal or illegal alien, are still paid for primarily by that "cancer on the side of humanity," white European Americans.

We’ve all heard about the dog that bites the hand that feeds it, maybe we’ve even had such a dog at home. How is the Latino author of the above statement any different? And he’s right here in our home, our state, and a disgrace to his Hispanic heritage. He probably learned his Marxism in Chicano Studies 101 at one of our liberated State Colleges. If they give any grades at all, I’ll wager he got an A — like everyone else in his class, even those who didn’t attend.

Despite his successes at Chicano State, our "Latino" friend and those like him became stunted at around thirteen — you know, the age where you mock everything, reason be damned. For example, why is he proud of his Latino, or Hispanic, heritage but then condemns the Whites? Weren’t the Latins and Spaniards white? Yes, and I think they still are. Weren’t they as guilty of cruelty in the settlement of the Americas as the Anglos and all the rest? Yes, they were — except in the Marxist history books at La Raza State.

Or if he identifies with the American Indian part of his heritage (who were equally cruel to each other and the Whites), then why does he call himself Hispanic? The man is definitely confused, yet he and his ilk are trying to take over our state — and the entire Southwest. What is to be gained, I ask, by taking over the Southwest and turning it into another El Salvador, or even a Tijuana? The border to the southern paradises is close; so if that’s what you want, why not just stay there, or return there? It would save us all a lot of trouble.

During my radio talk show, the Savage Nation (KSFO, San Francisco), I had a caller just like the fellow above. The caller told me that the "Hispanics" were going to take over and make things like in the old days under the Aztecs, etc. I asked him what he thought of sacrificing innocent virgins on the alter of some pagan god or of a return to squalor under some Aztlan king.. He said that didn’t matter; for we, i.e., the Whites, would be gone, and they, i.e., the "Hispanics," would be in power.

I tried to reason with him, but the man was obviously a fanatic, a certified racist lunatic (didn’t Hitler want a return to worship of pagan Germanic gods?). But our "Latino" friend should spare himself the trouble; I’ll gladly pay his fare to the Latin American jungle of his choice. It’s all there waiting for him, ready made. Even the sacrificial altars are still intact, so maybe he should leave his daughters here. Please, give us a break!

The whole controversy is a hoax. "Reconquista" they call it, and "Aztlan." What is it these self-appointed "reconquistadores" are going to "re"conquer? Are they the descendants of the native California Indians? How could they be if they’re from south of the border? Those were different Indians down there, many of them hostile toward the California tribes. Or were their forefathers the Spanish settlers, the Alvarados, Picos, Verdugos, or Dominguezes of early California? Hardly. The descendants of the Spanish settlers have long become loyal Americans who contribute much to our society.

So how can brown racists like our "Latino" friend take back what they never had in the first place? What they really have in mind is conquest, not re-conquest. Their virulent hatred of the white man belies their claim that racism is limited to Whites; in fact, the Klan could learn a thing or two from them. And if you buy into their illogic, you are more deranged than they are.

In reality, if they have their way, what we will have here is not a return to some idyllic paradise of the Indian past but a tyrannic People's Democratic Republic of Aztlan, where we will, Hispanics and Indians as well, live on an all-inclusive government reservation under the boot of Big Brother.

Friends, Hispanics or whoever you are: It’s time to get real. It’s time to leave "Aztlan" and other "people's liberation" fantasies to the wiles of Hollywood, the media, the feds, the state colleges, and other fonts of Marxist delusion. We don’t need them to show us truth. God and common sense will do that. If we are to have a "re-conquest" of anything, let it be of the American Republic, where Hispanics and all of us can enjoy our Constitutional rights as free, individual American citizens.

One would think....although if you listen to the media, some ignorant Senate members, and various we-hate-whites groups....apparently only white anglo saxon people are capable of being "racists"

bark,

I'm going to fix that once and for all. I'm going to call it Reverse Racism. Do you think that will stick to some of them?

Dixie

unfortunately, I believe that has been attempted without success in the past (guys descriminated against in hiring when an AA was hired over them to fulfill quotas).
BTW...you misread my "Troll Alert" check it again

Originally Posted by Dixie

bark,

I'm going to fix that once and for all. I'm going to call it Reverse Racism. Do you think that will stick to some of them?

Dixie

I think it is interesting that La Raza means The Race. If they are "The Race" then they mean anyone else is not "The Race"...that's kinda racist don't you think? I bet if they had it to do over they would pick a different name.

...or perhaps it is meant to represent their actions in RACING over the border!

Originally Posted by AllAmerican

I think it is interesting that La Raza means The Race. If they are "The Race" then they mean anyone else is not "The Race"...that's kinda racist don't you think? I bet if they had it to do over they would pick a different name.

They want to take over...what a joke. Look at the squalor of Latin America. They can't run a country. If you handed it to them, it would be trashed overnight, as it is slowly becoming now. Latin America dictators have a lust for power and control and that's what these leaders are, little dicators without the power. That's why they want to rally all the illegals, so they will have a sense of power and they can do the Hitler thing.

My question is if these Hispanic "I hate white" groups take over land and god forbid they do, do you think Canada will sit idley by and allow their land to be taken over too.

Originally Posted by AllAmerican

I think it is interesting that La Raza means The Race. If they are "The Race" then they mean anyone else is not "The Race"...that's kinda racist don't you think? I bet if they had it to do over they would pick a different name.

I doubt they'd pick a different name. Not those racists!

Here's a little history on how La Raza came to be.

http://www.nclr.org/section/history/

Detailed History

NCLR traces its origins to the civil rights movement of the 1960s, as well as to previous efforts that preceded World War II, such as those related to early school and housing desegregation. Although Hispanics, especially Mexican Americans and Puerto Ricans, participated in both movements, they did not gain widespread media coverage or national visibility for their efforts. Without such recognition, legislation such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964, while creating enormous change in other areas of the country, had relatively little impact on the Hispanic community.

In large part, the invisibility that plagued the Mexican American civil rights movement was a result of the movement’s geographic isolation, which caused it to be overshadowed by the more highly visible national movements. Additionally, Mexican Americans lacked the kinds of institutions that were critical to the success of the Black civil rights movement, and around which they could rally, unify, and organize. As Helen Rowan explained in a paper prepared for the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights in 1968:

There was no Mexican American organization equivalent of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) or the National Urban League; no Mexican American colleges; and virtually no financial or other help from outside the community itself. It has thus been extremely difficult for the leadership to develop and pursue strategies which would force public agencies and institutions to pay greater and more intelligent attention to Mexican American needs and to make changes, where necessary, to meet them.

Recognizing that these hurdles imposed a critical barrier to the mobilization of an effective civil rights movement, a group of young Mexican Americans in Washington, DC decided to form a coordinating body that could provide technical assistance to existing Hispanic groups and bring them together into a single united front. In the early 1960s, this organization, which they called NOMAS (National Organization for Mexican American Services), met with the Ford Foundation to present a funding proposal. The meeting contributed to a Ford decision to finance a major study of Mexican Americans, the first of its kind in the United States. The Foundation also hired three highly-respected Mexican Americans, (Julian Samora, Herman Gallegos, and Ernesto Galarza) to travel throughout the Southwest and consult with other activists and leaders about what else might be done to help the Mexican American community.

The findings of these three consultants, published in two reports, revealed that Mexican Americans faced numerous obstacles, especially with respect to poverty. They also illustrated a clear need for more local, grassroots programmatic and advocacy organizations, for a source of ongoing technical assistance to help coordinate and strengthen the work of these local groups, and for national advocacy on behalf of Mexican Americans.

The following links provide snapshots of NCLR at crucial stages:

Formation of the Southwest Council of La Raza
Transition to a National Organization
Initiation of Research and Policy Efforts
Development and Growth of the Policy Analysis Center
Effect of Devolution on NCLR’s Legislative Approach

who would defend them? Their "Mounties?" (Dudley DoRights)

Originally Posted by SpinZone

My question is if these Hispanic "I hate white" groups take over land and god forbid they do, do you think Canada will sit idley by and allow their land to be taken over too.