the new report states, “assumed thernhnmigration and Reform [sic] Aet ofrn1986 (IRCA) would partially reduee undocumentedrn[i.e., illegal I immigration.”rnThat, indeed, was a major purpose ofrnthe aet, as its sponsors repeatedly assuredrnus, but “in faet, there is no evidenecrnof any reduction in the undocumentedrnmovement. In addition, thernImmigration Aet of 1990 allows morernimmigration. For these reasons, the futurernimmigration assumptions for undocumented,rnlegal and refugee immigrantsrnwere increased.”rnThe meaning of all these numbers,rnpercentages, and quotations should bernclear. By 2050, a white person born inrnthe United States in 1990 will at 60rnyears old be part of a minority in therncountry his forefathers founded. Thernracial and ethnic groups to which he belongsrnwill be dwindling in numbers andrnin their percentage share of the population.rnMoreover, since the Census Bureaurnreport uses the Office of Managementrnand Budget definition of “white”rnas “a person having origins in an’ of thernoriginal peoples of Europe, NorthrnAfrica, or the Middle East,” its count ofrnwhites living in the Ihiited States nowrnand in the future does not refer exclusivelyrnto European-descended elementsrnof the population but also includes non-rnEuropean, African, or Arabic strains thatrnmost white Americans have not historicallyrnconsidered to be white and withrnwhich they share little cultural kinship.rnThe conclusions of the Census Bureaurnbeancounters are not entireU’ new.rnIn 1982, demographers Leon Bouvierrnand Cary B. Da’is reached similar resultsrnabout the future population of thernUnited States in a studv distributed byrnthe Center for Immigration Researchrnand Education, but their monograph attractedrnlittle notice. A few years later,rn’lime magazine published a cover storyrn(April 9, 1990) which found that “byrn2056, when someone born toda’ will bern66 years old, the ‘average’ U.S. resident,rnas defined by Census statistics, v’ill tracernhis or her descent to Africa, Asia, thernHispanic world, the Pacific Islands, Arabiarn—almost anywhere but white Europe.”rnThese studies, howe’er, were notrnthe official word of the Americanrnmegastate itself, which the Census Bureau’srnnew report more or less is, butrnwhen the report was published last year,rneven though it made the front page ofrnthe New York limes, there appeared tornbe little reaction from anyone, especiallyrnwhites, to the news that the historicrncore of the population of the UnitedrnStates was about to experience a revolution.rnThe absence of shock from whitesrnthemselves at their imminent demographicrndemotion is perhaps not all thatrnsurprising. A population, ethnic group,rnculture, or race that allows itself to berntaxed without consent or understanding,rnruns off to fight wars for causes andrnagainst countries for reasons it can’t explain,rnand tolerates the level of criminalrnlawlessness and political corruptionrnthat Americans have come to acceptrnprobably just doesn’t much carernwhether it even exists or not, let alonernwhether it remains the core group of itsrnnation and civilization. Moreover, sornpermeated are our minds with the fantasyrnthat all cultures, races, and ethnicrngroups are the same, that a member ofrnone group can as easily doff his culturernand put on a new one as he can striprnoff a T-shirt, that most Americans whornwere aware of the impending demographicrnrevolution probably didn’t seernwhy it made much difference.rnNevertheless, it does make a differencern—probably more difference thanrnany of the various political, economic,rnand social changes the United States hasrnever experienced—and those Americansrnwho do care about their country and itsrncivilization ought to start thinking veryrnseriously about what they can do to stoprnthe revolution from proceeding. As thernfigures of the Census Report imply, thernprincipal cause of the demographic revolutionrnis immigration and the differentialrnin birthrates between nonwhiternimmigrants and white natives of thernUnited States. The main thing Americansrnmust do to preserve their civilizationrnand the ethnic base on which it isrnfounded is to stop immigration, especiallyrnfrom countries that do not sharernthe ethnic and cultural heritage of thernhistoric core of this nation.rnEven Time had the wit to understandrnthat what it called in its 1990 cover storyrn”the browning of America” “will alterrneverything in society, from polities andrneducation to industry, values and culture.”rnThis, from a magazine notoriousrnfor its superficiality, betrays a good dealrnmore common sense than the proclamationrnfrom xenophile and championrnof unrestricted immigration Julian Simonrnonly a week earfier in Forbes (Aprilrn2, 1990) that “the claim that our basicrnvalues, institutions, habits will be alteredrnby immigrants from a different culture,rnand permanently altered, is pure hooey.rn. . . At a time when barriers are fallingrndown everywhere, even trade barriers,rnthe only barrier that hasn’t fallen is thernbarrier to immigration.” It really doesn’trnrequire much imagination (thoughrnmore than Mr. Simon can muster) tornunderstand that the importation of massivernpopulation fragments from radicallyrndifferent cultures will affect the receivingrnculture.rnIndeed, in the last few years, the rolernof immigration in determining culturernhas been the subject of major historicalrnscholarship. The most comprehensive isrnprobably the work of historian DavidrnIlackett Fischer in Albion’s Seed (1989),rna thousand-page study of the role ofrnfour British subcultures in the formationrnof American civilization. ProfessorrnFischer identifies some 24 “folkways” orrn”normative structure [s] of values, customsrnand meanings that exist in any culture.”rnIn his view, folkways do “not risernfrom the unconscious even in a symbolicrnsense—though most people do manyrnsocial things without reflecting veryrnmuch about them. In the modernrnworld a folkway is apt to be a culturalrnartifact—the conscious instrument ofrnhuman will and purpose. Often (andrnincreasingly today) it is also the deliberaterncontrivance of a cultural elite.”rnThe folkways Fischer enumerates includernnormative patterns governingrnsuch settled ways of doing and thinkingrnas habits of speech, building, sex, food,rndress, sport, time, wealth, work, rank,rnorder, power, and freedom, and norndoubt he could have added others. ThernPuritans of East Anglia who settled NewrnEngland brought with them culturalrnhabits and beliefs that were significantlyrndifferent from those imported fromrnthe south and west of England to Virginiarnor from North Britain and itsrnCeltic fringe to the Appalachian hills,rnand those patterns of belief that immigratedrnto North America in the 17thrnand 18th centuries have persisted, oftenrnunconsciously, ever since. BertramrnWvatt-Brown, Grady MeWhiney, andrnForrest McDonald, among other recentrnmajor historians, have also pointed tornthe original British immigrants to NorthrnAmerica as the source of enduringrnAmerican cultural habits.rnIn The Rise of Selfishness in America,rna little-noticed but major book publishedrnin 1991, jazz historian James LincolnrnCollier discusses the equally imlO/rnCHRONICLESrnrnrn