The Wall in a Nutshell: It’s About White Racial Consciousness and the “Browning of America”

Of all things Trump, the most defining and distinguishing is his advocacy of, and identification with, a wall to curb illegal immigration across our southern border. It was the signature issue in the announcement of his candidacy, an issue no other major candidate would have dared to advocate, an issue that catapulted him into an immediate lead in the polls, and an issue which gained him the immediate and unprecedentedly vehement and bitter opposition and hatred of the “left-wing” media (even greater than their hatred of Nixon, with endemic comparisons to Hitler) and all the other branches of the Anti-White Coalition that dominates the political, corporate, academic, media and cultural establishment.1

Despite the dissimulating and misdirecting rhetoric to the contrary, chiefly from establishment Republican politicians, operatives and “strategists” attempting to rationalize their support for the wall by any means other than race, the wall is widely — and correctly — seen as very much about race, as part of the larger issue of mass non-White immigration and the displacement of Whites as the majority population group and their dispossession and replacement by non-Whites. So it is not surprising that its support and opposition are sharply divided on racial lines. Non-Whites (including semi-European and non-European Caucasians) know that the wall is about race and so they overwhelmingly oppose it. Mass support for the wall is limited to Whites, but because Whites are less racially conscious and because they are less motivated by their racial interests — and therefore more racially divided on political lines — than non-Whites, they support it by only a slight majority.2

While the debate over the wall has been exclusively defined in terms of secondary issues by its proponents, carefully evading and even denying the primary racial issue, its more radical opponents have been honest (and correct) to express their opposition to it racially, defining it as a racist (i.e., pro-White) and therefore immoral means to slow the racial transformation of the country from White to non-White now openly referred to, celebrated and advocated as the “browning of America.” The more moderate opponents of the wall, like its proponents, prefer to dissimulate and evade the racial issue by justifying their opposition in terms of secondary concerns, such as its cost (negligible compared to the expenses associated with illegal immigration) or its supposed ineffectiveness, with the strength of their opposition being the most accurate indicator of how effective they really fear it would be. But for both sides the wall is not really about the money. It’s about the racial future of the country.

Both sides are primarily motivated by underlying racial interests which are the source of the passionate intensity of the debate. The Anti-White Coalition instantly recognized the wall as something that would slow the rate of racial transformation, the dispossession and replacement of Whites by non-Whites, the “browning of America.” Similarly, those Whites who support the interests of their race, the White cause, consciously or subconsciously, explicitly or implicitly, share this recognition, and so see the wall as something that will help preserve their race from the agents and causes of its destruction.

The secondary concerns cited by both sides cannot explain the emotional intensity and passion that characterize the issue, indicating they are euphemistic evasions of the real primary issue, just another avoidance of the underlying concern of our time: the issue of White racial dispossession, and a more or less gradual, more or less violent, process of White racial destruction eventually ending with White extinction. For that is the direction in which we have been heading, with steadily accelerating speed, since the formation of the present World Order in the aftermath of World War II.

The direction in which we have been heading is not by accident or chance. It is by design, the deliberate and intentional agenda of the globalist World Order of open borders, one world, one race and one global economy. The wall, whatever its level of effectiveness, is a barrier raised against that agenda. In the context of the general issue of mass non-White immigration and the resulting racial transformation, the wall is a symbol of White resistance to the “browning of America,” of a White awakening to, and rising against, the causes of its racial destruction. It is therefore seen as a potent threat to the multiracialist project and the entire agenda of the Anti-White Coalition. However effective the wall is as a barrier or deterrent to illegal non-White immigration, it is as a visible symbol of a new assertion of pro-White purpose and determination, of a resurgent White will to live, that it has taken center stage as the primary bone of contention in the apocalyptic battle for survival of White America and its White population.

The issue of non-White immigration, symbolized by the wall, is the dividing line between those who want unrestricted mass non-White immigration, the browning of America, the dispossession and replacement of the White population by non-Whites, the racial transformation of the country from White to non-White, and the anti-White racial revolution, versus those Whites who want their race to continue to exist, and to have control of their existence in the continued possession of their own country.

The Democrats, as the primary political vehicle of the Anti-White Coalition, oppose the wall for the same reason they support mass non-White immigration in general, as well as sanctuary cities and states to prevent deportation of illegal non-White immigrants. They want as many non-Whites to enter and stay in the country as possible, legally or illegally, as fast as possible, to speed the browning of America and the dispossession of the White population. For them, the wall is a symbol of White racism, of the White desire to keep the country majority White, retain possession of their country, and not be displaced by non-Whites for as long as possible, and thus immoral under their anti-White value system.

Except for Trump, the Republican leadership is not leading on the wall. They are responding to the pressure from the Republican base, the majority of which passionately wants the wall, a passion motivated by opposition, however implicit, unspoken or sublimated, to the browning of America. Perhaps even Trump is now responding to this pressure more than leading on this issue, with Pat Buchanan adding to the push with his essay Memo to Trump: Declare an Emergency:

[M]ass migration from the global South, not climate change, is the real existential crisis of the West. … America’s southern border is eventually going to be militarized and defended or the United States, as we have known it, is going to cease to exist. And Americans will not go gentle into that good night.3

The wall is not a normal political issue. Stripped of obfuscation and dissimulation it is fundamentally a racial issue, a symbol of the White will to live, to continue to exist and control its existence in its own countries. By awakening long dormant and repressed White emotions, the wall has become the focal point and energizing force of a resurging White racial consciousness, a quickening of resistance to White racial death, a new determination that the White race will not go gently or quietly to its destruction, and “will not vanish without a fight.” The Anti-White Coalition, with a default race-centered view of almost every issue, sees and understands this with the clarity of finely-tuned racial instincts and so must accept battle and commit all its resources to defeat it and the emotions it has stirred to life, or find its dominance challenged by a growing pro-White movement. As declared by anti-White film actor-director-producer Rob Reiner:

Make no mistake, this shutdown boils down to one thing: RACISM. GOP frightened to death of the browning of America. They will lose this last big battle of the Civil War. Diversity is our strength.4

To Reiner, the browning of America — and the resulting destruction of White America — is not only a moral imperative, with any resistance to it being racism. The Anti-White Coalition correctly targets Trump for instigating this unexpected challenge to the smooth advancement of their White replacement agenda. A CNN contributor accuses Trump of “trying to whip up fear about the browning of America,” and of

reverting back to playing on white anxieties regarding the browning of America — which I like to refer to as racism. Or, for those who prefer the more academic term, fear of losing status.5

The anti-White reaction to what they see as Trump’s threat to non-White interests has been nothing if not hyperbolic, with Black commentators perhaps the most extreme. Eugene Robinson, an associate editor of The Washington Post, echoing Nancy Pelosi, accuses Trump of “trying to make America White again,” and asserts Trump’s proposals to curb chain migration “can only be seen as an attempt to halt the browning of America.”6

Unfortunately for those who want the White race to continue to exist, it is now much too late to stop, much less reverse, the browning of America simply by the restriction or even the complete halt of non-White immigration. The agents of White destruction are already inside our borders in far more than sufficient numbers to seal our fate. Adding more only shortens the time to our ruin.

The Anti-White Coalition portrays the browning of America, and the racial replacement and destruction of the White population by multiracialism and intermixture, as inevitable, and its inexorable advance since the 1960s seems to confirm that belief, as described in an Irish Examiner article titled “Browning’ of the US is a battle Trump has lost:”

Trump’s moves are too late, says Michael Clemens, an Economist at the Center for Global Development, because the demographic revolution has already happened and a new, multiracial America is fast evolving.

“His attempts to make America whiter are doomed to fail, because the demographic revolution is now irreversible,” says Clemens. “Whites are already a minority of all children under age five. So, if all immigration ceased tomorrow, the country is still inexorably on a path to a new multiracial reality.”7

Obviously, a wall alone could not stop the browning of America, but it would slow it, giving those who would reverse it, those who actually want to make America White again or create a new White America, more time to advance their efforts. The only way the browning of America can be stopped is also the only way it can be reversed. The only way there can be a White America is by the spinning off of the non-Whites into their own separate countries or ethnostates, with the remaining America becoming a self-consciously White country or ethnostate. Only a racial separation at this level can save the White race now.

We are witnesses to something that has not happened before in the already long age of the decline of White America. The agents of that decline have finally met some very unexpected stirrings of resistance. Are these stirrings harbingers of a White rage to come, portents that this rage is finally beginning to take form and coalesce around the issue of non-White immigration? The real reason non-Whites and their White allies oppose Trump with such passionate intensity is because he represents resistance to the “browning of America” and the anti-White agenda. Not as much resistance as we would like, but perhaps as much as is now politically possible, and however slight or weak his resistance might seem to us, that it is any degree of resistance at all has shocked and unleashed the full fury and power of the Anti-White Coalition, who must crush this resistance before it gains a foothold and becomes a fixture of the political and cultural landscape that the White cause can rally around as it gains ground, a rallying point for a growing White “rage against the dying of the light,” the on-going extinguishing of the life of our race.

If we who want our race to live, the advocates and supporters of the White cause, have provided some of the tinder, Trump has provided the spark that has kindled a growing fire that the outraged and shocked Anti-White Coalition. They are reacting with panic and consternation and are desperately trying to extinguish by every means — fair or mostly foul — before it grows so great that their entire anti-White project is consumed by the flames and a White ethnostate rises, phoenix-like, from the ashes of its predecessor. The anti-White project is not yet fireproof. It is still built mainly of straw and sticks rather than brick and stone. They hate and fear us for providing tinder and kindling, and Trump for being a spark, a dangerous arsonist.

In these dark times it is a wonder that such embers ever glowed at all in the Oval Office, and hardly to be expected they could do so for very long. At times it has seemed Trump’s spark has been dampened. But in his resumed fight for the wall, however late the hour, for at least one more brief shining moment a flame of hope is burning bright again. Long may it burn.


  1. “White,” as used in this essay in capitalized form includes only persons of European ancestry and racial type, i.e., the European racial group. In the non-capitalized form “white” it coincides with census bureau, official governmental and general common usage as including all semi-European (e.g., Ashkenazi Jews) and non-European Caucasians (e.g., North Africans, Middle-Easterners, Central Asians, etc.). The “Anti-White Coalition” includes all those who are against the most fundamental and vital — or existential — interests of the White race, especially its continued existence and control of its own existence, and the condition of racial separation these interests require. With rare exceptions, this coalition includes essentially all non-Whites present in Western countries, as well as those Whites who for whatever reason are aligned with non-White interests (diversity/multiracialism and White dispossession/replacement) against the existential interests of their own race.
  2. According to a January 13, 2019 ABC/Washingon Post poll a majority of 54 percent of White Americans support the wall while 72 percent of non-Whites oppose it. This poll was conducted when illegal border crossings were exceeding 50,000 per month.

  1. Pat Buchanan, “Memo to Trump: Declare an Emergency,” January 10, 2019

  1. Rob Reiner tweet of January 21, 2018, quoted in Edwards, Ethan. “The Last Big Battle of the Civil War.” A Fair Hearing: The Alt-Right in the Words of its Members and Leaders, edited by George T. Shaw. Arktos, 2018, pp. 77-86.

5. Note that this quote refers to mere anxiety by Whites about their dispossession and replacement as racism.

“Trump is trying to whip up fear about the browning of America,” Dean Obeidallah, CNN, November 4, 2018

  1. “Trump is trying to Make America White Again,” Eugene Robinson, The Washington Post, January 29, 2018
  2. Irish Examiner, “‘Browning’ of the US is a battle Trump has lost,” July 24, 2018








50 replies

Comments are closed.