So it looks not impossible that our new politically purified multiracial multicultural U.S. Army might actually have to fight, you know, a war in Europe against Russia. This raises lot of interesting questions, but one of them is what is happening to the reputation of the last U.S. Army that fought and won a major war in Europe: World War II. The answer: that army is being, as they say, “reimagined” by the same forces that unleashed mass non-traditional immigration in 1965 and the elevation of questionable non-white role models such as Harriet Tubman and Martin Luther King as part of the Great Replacement, demographically then culturally, of the Historic American Nation.

No matter what his accomplishments are—in this case, defeating the Axis Powers in World War II—the white man leaves behind nothing but a trail of tears. Thus when Edward J. Gitre, a professor at Virginia Tech, delivered “The American Soldier in World War II,” an online project detailing surveys of World War II vets, the Washington Post sprang into action: ‘Greatest Generation’ runs counter to its wholesome image in survey on race, sex and combat during World War II, by Michael E. Ruane, December 20, 2021.

Can't load tweet https://twitter.com/TheCoolJew/status/1473661038797238274: Sorry, that page does not exist

WaPo’s Ruane opened his story about the federally funded project this way:

In August 1944, an American soldier finishing up an Army survey was asked whether he had any further remarks. He did.

“White supremacy must be maintained,” he wrote.

“I’ll fight if necessary to prevent racial equality. I’ll never salute a negro officer and I’ll not take orders from a negroe [sic]. I’m sick of the army’s method of treating … [Black soldiers] as if they were human. Segregation of the races must continue.”

Another soldier wrote: “God has placed between us a barrier of color … We must accept this barrier and live, fight, and play separately.” …

Some of the harshest language came from White soldiers commenting on the segregated Army. A general survey found that 75 percent of soldiers from the North and 85 percent of soldiers from the South thought Blacks and Whites should train and serve separately.

On the other hand, blacks didn’t much care for whites either [RIOTS AND RACIAL DISTURBANCES, p. 59, US Army Ground Forces Study No. 36: The Training of Negro Troops, by Major Bell I. Wiley, 1946].

“The army stinks,” one wrote, and “is filled up with a lot of ‘Crackers’ who don’t know that the Civil War is over and from all indications never will!”

Another was arguably prescient:

After the war there will be riots after Riots because we are tired of the so-called white Supremacy as they call it…We just want the right to live, work and advance as normal people do. The right to fight & die as true Americans should…You can’t keep us down, try as you may.

There’s more, but you get the idea.

Of course, white GIs were men of their times. Note that whites from the South and North felt the same way, and in nearly equal numbers. They unapologetically believed in preserving America's white European character and maintaining segregation and traditional roles for women.

Those views, of course, are “racist” and “sexist,” and if openly expressed today would absolutely exclude those men from military service.

While Ruane’s piece maintains a facade of neutrality, note how it began: with a white soldier’s advocating “white supremacy,” not with the black soldier’s calling whites “crackers.” Whites, you see, are always the villains.

Besides that, though, consider this: the story continues the larger effort to diminish the dominant, heroic role white Americans’ played in winning World II, and to retcon the war to help erase white history altogether.

After all, the white soldier’s remarks Ruane featured in his lede were one of the “uncensored results of dozens of surveys the service administered to soldiers during the war.”

Message: we may have won the war, but the important thing to remember is that whites were racists!

Don’t be surprised if when and if future historians and journalists whitewash the legacy of Imperial Japan—a voraciously expansionist power that committed scores of atrocities prior to and during World War II—and portray it in a more positive light [Japan’s Prelude to Pearl Harbor, by Roger McGrath, Chronicles, December 2013].

Come to think of it, when it comes to Japan, the Japanese, and World War II, for some time now the main thing Americans are supposed to remember is not John Basilone or the Battle of Iwo Jima, but the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and the internment and/or relocation of Japanese Americans.

The story also coincides, of course, with the anti-white hate campaign that has been cranked to 11 since George Floyd died of a fentanyl overdose in May 2020. America’s Woke Ruling Class has been on a crusade to reconstruct American society wholesale. Example: Critical Race Theory, and telling whites they are worthless racists whose past is one long list of crimes.

As the U.S. becomes less white, the solidarity among Americans, the patriotic kinship they felt because they were one people, will inevitably diminish. Newly imported immigrants and their descendants will not share those tight bonds with the legacy population.

In turn, the Woke Leftist iconoclasts already rewriting our history will feel even more empowered to attack the Historic American Nation’s greatest triumphs during its super-majority white phase. Our past will be swept under the rug.

For the Left, American history began during the Civil Rights Revolution—the first comprehensive effort to wrest power away from white Americans. Furthermore, non-white leaders—again, think Martin Luther King—will continue to be placed in the pantheon of multicultural demi-gods.

As a non-traditional immigrant, I disagree. White Americans should stand tall and be proud of their history and not let anti-white radicals guilt-trip them into hating themselves or their past. You don’t see other countries that have presided over much greater atrocities—Russia and China come to mind—flagellating themselves into oblivion as Western countries are doing.

The Left’s ultimate goal is to destroy American history through the removal of all notable white figures from the public square and mass migration—a symbolic treason waged against the American people. It’s up to us to preserve our heritage and ensure history is neither distorted nor rewritten to accommodate the multicultural sensibilities of minorities and immigrants.

The stakes are at all-time highs. While Conservatism, Inc. talks about tax cuts and founders in policy wonkery, the next decade or so will determine the fate of this nation. We’re no longer talking about America’s economic health. The real question (as VDARE.com has long argued) is whether America will survive as a nation-state, the political expression of a particular people.

One can imagine that Chinese Communist Party historians might one day be discussing the lost tribes of the Americans after the U.S. has disintegrated and ceased functioning as a coherent polity, and countries like China take its place.

We can avoid that fate. But not if the Historic American Nation doesn’t fight back.

Pedro de Alvarado is a Hispanic dissident who is well aware of the realities of race from his experience living throughout Latin America and in the States.
 
As a native of lands conquered by brave Spaniards but later subverted by centuries of multiracial trickery and despotic governance, Pedro offers clear warnings to Americans about the perils of multiracialism.