Why Our Politicians Do Not 'Look like America'

To the perennially triggered political left, everything is just "too white" when it comes to men in positions of power -- or anything that involves them having a high net worth or salary. Gripes and fashionable hashtags about Hollywood so white, sports team owners so white, and Fortune 500 CEOs so white are some of the most prominent examples.

But most of all, leftists really despise that the clear majority of state and federal level politicians are white.  Seeking some unattainable Utopian fantasy world, some of them believe the occupiers of such jobs should start to look "more like America" as a 2018 article from the Washington Post lamented.

Extracted from a photo of the White Lives Matter Too Much May Day 2017 in New York City

Photo credit: Alec Perkins

Well, I've managed to solve the mystery as to why Congress remains stubbornly white in 2019, and the reasons behind it are not merely subtle. They should in fact be quite obvious, if people like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and the rest of the Squad actually bothered to think about two geographical and chronological variables.

What "Looks Like America" Depends on Where You Live

First of all, to say that most of our (white) top dog politicians "do not look like America" is a 'no true Scotsman' fallacy in its own right. Yes, the United States is increasingly non-white. Some states (California, Texas, Hawaii, New Mexico, Maryland, Nevada) are already majority non-white, and several others (such as Georgia) will be crossing that threshold very soon.

However, the nation is still a little over 60% Caucasian among people of all ages, which means that a clear majority of white politicians at both the state and federal levels are to be expected -- even by late 2010's standards.

More so, numerous states across New England, the Upper Midwest, and Mountain West are still over 80% white.

And since most of us tend to not venture out of our own states for the lion’s share of the year, the "America" known to the citizens of Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine, North Dakota, Wyoming, Montana, or Idaho is considerably whiter than Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's ultra-diverse New York City.

Accordingly, most of the congressmen, governors, senators, and presidential candidates hailing from all these aforementioned states will also likely be white.

That about covers it for geography, and now for the much more important variable. Generational demographics.

Boomers and Generation X Are Much Whiter Than Millennials and Generation Z

Would you entrust our country’s financial, trade, and military policies to somebody who was twenty-five? Yeah, neither would I.

And this is where the Democrats completely miss the mark in regard to their gripes on the racial composition of our high-level politicians.  Baby Boomers and Generation X -- who are over the age of 40 and accordingly of feasible age for national leadership -- are of far whiter generations than the younger Millennial and Generation Z crowd.

Why? Because with the sole exception of the rather substantial African-American minority group -- which has been part of the United States from day one -- the overwhelming majority of all other non-whites in the country can trace their family history to no earlier than the end result of the 1965 Immigration Act.

That is only 54 years ago, and the real effects of this new immigration policy would not have been felt for several more decades. (After all, the newer non-white arrivals in the 1970's and 1980's were still competing against the natural birthrates of a still 80-something percent white United States.)

So should the large number of present day non-white Generation Z teenagers and small children be a deciding factor in how our pool of politicians should look racially?

Of course not. Our politicians could, would, and should be at least middle aged in order to be making the most responsible decisions for the nation, and by none other than the virtues of their much greater life experience and maturity.

Yet all of these important variables and facts seem to be completely lost to many in the blue half of the voting population.

A gradual reduction in the proportion of white politicians will be the inevitable result of speedy demographic changes in this country, and as the younger and more diverse generations eventually age into viable contention for the roles. (You know, like around age 40 instead of 14.)

However, the Left can't seem to get enough of "your time is up!" or "it's about time!" exclamations when an older white man is removed from cultural, business, or political prominence -- and a (preferably) younger woman of color immediately takes his place.

And they want this all to happen in the here and now -- while whites are still the greater part of two-thirds of the country.

If that isn't cultural Marxist / clown world politics to fit a subversive agenda, I don't know what is. 

To the perennially triggered political left, everything is just "too white" when it comes to men in positions of power -- or anything that involves them having a high net worth or salary. Gripes and fashionable hashtags about Hollywood so white, sports team owners so white, and Fortune 500 CEOs so white are some of the most prominent examples.

But most of all, leftists really despise that the clear majority of state and federal level politicians are white.  Seeking some unattainable Utopian fantasy world, some of them believe the occupiers of such jobs should start to look "more like America" as a 2018 article from the Washington Post lamented.

Extracted from a photo of the White Lives Matter Too Much May Day 2017 in New York City

Photo credit: Alec Perkins

Well, I've managed to solve the mystery as to why Congress remains stubbornly white in 2019, and the reasons behind it are not merely subtle. They should in fact be quite obvious, if people like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and the rest of the Squad actually bothered to think about two geographical and chronological variables.

What "Looks Like America" Depends on Where You Live

First of all, to say that most of our (white) top dog politicians "do not look like America" is a 'no true Scotsman' fallacy in its own right. Yes, the United States is increasingly non-white. Some states (California, Texas, Hawaii, New Mexico, Maryland, Nevada) are already majority non-white, and several others (such as Georgia) will be crossing that threshold very soon.

However, the nation is still a little over 60% Caucasian among people of all ages, which means that a clear majority of white politicians at both the state and federal levels are to be expected -- even by late 2010's standards.

More so, numerous states across New England, the Upper Midwest, and Mountain West are still over 80% white.

And since most of us tend to not venture out of our own states for the lion’s share of the year, the "America" known to the citizens of Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine, North Dakota, Wyoming, Montana, or Idaho is considerably whiter than Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's ultra-diverse New York City.

Accordingly, most of the congressmen, governors, senators, and presidential candidates hailing from all these aforementioned states will also likely be white.

That about covers it for geography, and now for the much more important variable. Generational demographics.

Boomers and Generation X Are Much Whiter Than Millennials and Generation Z

Would you entrust our country’s financial, trade, and military policies to somebody who was twenty-five? Yeah, neither would I.

And this is where the Democrats completely miss the mark in regard to their gripes on the racial composition of our high-level politicians.  Baby Boomers and Generation X -- who are over the age of 40 and accordingly of feasible age for national leadership -- are of far whiter generations than the younger Millennial and Generation Z crowd.

Why? Because with the sole exception of the rather substantial African-American minority group -- which has been part of the United States from day one -- the overwhelming majority of all other non-whites in the country can trace their family history to no earlier than the end result of the 1965 Immigration Act.

That is only 54 years ago, and the real effects of this new immigration policy would not have been felt for several more decades. (After all, the newer non-white arrivals in the 1970's and 1980's were still competing against the natural birthrates of a still 80-something percent white United States.)

So should the large number of present day non-white Generation Z teenagers and small children be a deciding factor in how our pool of politicians should look racially?

Of course not. Our politicians could, would, and should be at least middle aged in order to be making the most responsible decisions for the nation, and by none other than the virtues of their much greater life experience and maturity.

Yet all of these important variables and facts seem to be completely lost to many in the blue half of the voting population.

A gradual reduction in the proportion of white politicians will be the inevitable result of speedy demographic changes in this country, and as the younger and more diverse generations eventually age into viable contention for the roles. (You know, like around age 40 instead of 14.)

However, the Left can't seem to get enough of "your time is up!" or "it's about time!" exclamations when an older white man is removed from cultural, business, or political prominence -- and a (preferably) younger woman of color immediately takes his place.

And they want this all to happen in the here and now -- while whites are still the greater part of two-thirds of the country.

If that isn't cultural Marxist / clown world politics to fit a subversive agenda, I don't know what is.