Preserving the White Majority in the United States: My 10-Point Plan
Spencer J. QuinnSince Donald Trump was re-elected in November, many things that were rarely said in the mainstream are now being floated in public and taken seriously. Great examples include mass deportations, the US buying Greenland, Facebook ending its fact-checking algorithms, the phasing out of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion programs, flipping New Jersey red, and restricting immigration from India. Three months ago, who in the mainstream was discussing, let along debating, such topics? Whatever faults Trump has—and he has many—being wholly part of the Washington uniparty elite is not one of them. And that is a good thing. This reminds me of the Khrushchev Thaw period following the death of Josef Stalin in 1953. For a time, ordinary people and Soviet elite alike were let out on a longer leash, and could engage in discourse that had previously been frowned upon or forbidden. Yes, it was more of a Thermidorian reaction than anything real, but it still opened the door for at least some changes and improvements to the Soviet Union.
Of course, it didn’t last. Mostly likely Trump’s thaw won’t either (they never do, do they?). This is why white advocates should take advantage of this period of greater openness while we can. In other words, it’s time to push the envelope, even if that means getting the enveloped shoved back into our faces by a president who might identify more as orange than white.
My suggestion, beyond what David Zsutty has given us in his excellent three-part series “What White Nationalists Want From the Trump Administration,” is to propose a bill in Congress which would, on paper at least, protect the US white majority in perpetuity through selective immigration bans, mass deportations, and pro-natalist policies. Outlandish, I know. A white US minority is the very thing the Left craves and the mainstream Right is too afraid to talk about—a political third rail indeed. However, there are upsides to attempting to sell such legislation to US congressmen during the second Trump term—aside from it actually succeeding, of course.
For one, whites these days are waking up to anti-whiteism, and so a proposed bill to protect the dwindling white majority at least won’t be unpopular among whites in red areas of the country. Such a proposition in 2025 would certainly not come out of left field, and would make sense to many. Trump has recently spoken against anti-white racism, and so have conservative mainstream pundits such as Charlie Kirk, Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens, Laura Loomer, Michelle Malkin, Matt Walsh, and Mark Dice. The Hodge Twins as well as former MMA world champion Jake Shields recently featured longtime white advocate David Duke on their podcasts. Jared Taylor had his Twitter/X account restored and has garnered tens of thousands of followers. Patrick Bet David recently hosted Patriot Front leader Thomas Rousseau. And here’s a report from February 2024 about a Michigan lawmaker Steve Carra who led a sit in outside the Michigan House Speaker’s office to protest his state’s anti-white spending policies.
So if there ever was a good time to go public with a pro-white initiative like this one, it’s now.
Secondly, even in defeat, such a proposal will provide a surfeit of rhetorical victories for the Dissident Right and pro-white camps. Any congressman who ignores or opposes such a bill can be fairly branded as anti-white. Not only this, they can be accused of not just wanting a white minority, but actually contriving to attain one. If you are not in favor of a white majority then you are in favor of a white minority. There is no middle ground. Yes, most Democrats would reject such a bill out of hand, gladly admitting that they look forward to the day that whites dip below 50 percent in America. Joe Biden did just that back in February 2015. With today’s whites being less likely to tolerate anti-whiteism than ever before, record of such a refusal would certainly help damage a Democrat ticket during a general election.
But the main use of such a bill would be to hector, bog down, or at best replace weak-minded Republican lawmakers who would also reject the bill. How much would it cost, really, to primary a Republican congressman who refuses to consider a pro-white bill because the mainstream narrative tells him it’s racist? How hard would it be for even mainstream Republicans with a little pluck to ding an incumbent over his purported hostility towards whites? Remember, we are in the Trump Thaw at the moment. So what seemed beyond the pale of public discourse three months ago, may no longer be. With enough energetic, well-funded, aspiring politicians beating the white majority drum, establishment Republicans would have to at least give lip service before rejecting the bill. And the more people talking about it, the better—even if much of that talk is negative. And for all we know it could even work well enough to reach a vote on the House floor.

You can buy Greg Johnson’s White Identity Politics here.
Finally, there is the metapolitical change that such a bill promises to make. They say the process is the punishment, but in this case the process would also the reward. The goal here should not necessarily be to get the bill passed (although that would be great). The goal should be to introduce the bill into the long and arduous lawmaking process in order to make it its own news item. The goal should be to get people talking about it in the way the Soviet public began discussing the gulags after the publication of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich during the Khrushchev Thaw. The goal should be to get ordinary, everyday whites to begin to want or even expect a white majority in this country. They should consider it their birthright, given how the Founding Fathers were all white and the vast majority of people who have fought and died in America’s wars have also been white. And why not? Is there anything in the US Constitution preventing this country’s founding race from legislating its perpetual majority? Can that even be called racist? In the Trump 2.0 era, what really is preventing a critical mass of whites from adopting such a perspective? Nothing, I’d say. As I’ve pointed out above, all the signs are actually quite encouraging.
If you are reading this because you have white identity—even a secret one—and you’re not a researcher from the Anti-Defamation League or Southern Poverty Law Center looking to squeeze the vitality out of the entire white race, then ask yourself, why not? Why can’t whites discuss these things? Why can’t we expect such things? Are our jobs and incomes and social standings worth so much to us that we cannot at least throw a few shekels at politicians and pundits willing to buck the anti-white system and stand up for ourselves? Do we really want to live in a world in which we are outnumbered by hostile non-whites in our own hometowns? Is this the kind of world we’d wish upon our children and grandchildren?
If not, then . . . what are we doing?
Assuming that we all understand that we need to do something, is there a better idea than crafting some sort of incipient law and presenting it to prospective lawmakers who are willing to promote it while running for office? Now, I am not an attorney, and have little influence irrespective of that. But maybe somebody reading this does have influence and can make a difference? If so, then I offer a rough 10-point plan as a starting point. And before I get outraged comments about how my plan is some cucked Magna Carta, please remember that this is not a White Nationalist wish list, but a proposal for a real-world document to effect real-world changes in the here and now that even non-whites in America today could abide. It will basically be a promise from whites to non-whites to share the United States with them in good faith as long as the current racial proportions remain the same. It will be an effort to halt the white demographic decline, not to turn back the clock or start a race war. Thus, there will be compromises in it which many white advocates (myself included) will find odious. Please don’t let these get in the way of seeing the overall value of the plan.
Such a plan can go two ways: it can work or it can fail. In the former case, great. We won’t be back to 1960, but it won’t be 2020 either. Let’s split the difference and call it 1990, not exactly a terrible year in the life of white people. In the latter case however—which is much more likely—the heightened racial awareness of whites will necessarily increase friction with American non-whites, and will lead to one of two things: red state secession, which is the first step towards a white ethnostate, or (God help us) Civil War 2.0. Again, in the former case, great. And in the latter, we would at least have a fighting chance. This means that of the three possible outcomes of a bill like this, two and a half are positive. Not bad, right?
Anyway, here are my 10 points, and if someone thinks they can do better and still be realistic, I’m all ears:
BILL TO ENSURE THE PERPETUAL WHITE MAJORITY IN THE UNITED STATES
- Require bi-yearly censuses.
- Define white by “one-half not black” rule (at least one white parent, and no fully-black parent). For the sake of this bill, “whites” would include people of white European descent, Jews originating in Europe, and Caucasians from Central Asia.
- Employ self-identification to determine race, and agreed-upon genetic markers to determine race in case of appeals.
- Establish African Americans and Indigenous Americans as “demographically exempt” populations. (This means that their populations can fluctuate naturally and are not counted when calculating the proportion of whites to the general population. This would be a good thing for both populations and should be promoted as such.)
- Require that the white majority remain no lower than 80% of the US population minus the exempt populations. (Using rough estimates taken from Wikipedia, the United States currently has 48 million blacks and 7 million Indigenous Americans, making 55 million demographically exempt citizens. Subtract this from the 340 million total population to get a denominator of 285 million. Divide the 205 million whites in America by that to get around 72 percent. If such a bill were to be signed into law, the main focus of government would be to push that number up to 80 percent as soon as possible.)
- Require that, among non-exempt non-whites, no more than 10 percent of the US population be of Mexican, Central American, or South American descent. All immigration from these places will stop if this proportion grows above this percentage.
- Require that, among non-exempt non-whites, no more than 10 percent of the US population be of Asian or Middle Eastern descent. All immigration from these places will stop if this proportion grows above this percentage.
- Require that pro-white immigration and pro-white natalist policies be put in place until whites reach 80 percent of the total non-exempt US population.
- Require that all illegal immigrants as well as legal immigrants with a history of violent or serious crimes be deported.
- Ban all immigration from places of origin of racially exempt populations (i.e., Indigenous peoples from the Americas or blacks from Sub-Saharan Africa).
Given how the Trump Thaw has already allowed whites more leeway to discuss their own racial interests (and Trump hasn’t even taken office yet), I think my 10-point plan might push the envelope far enough but not too far in order to get white people to act their own racial interests as well.
Preserving%20the%20White%20Majority%20in%20the%20United%20States%3A%20My%2010-Point%20Plan%0A
Share
33 comments
I like the practical, non-dogmatic approach. What is most important is that they take a side. This creates many benefits, including re-introducing shame as those against this can even be shamed by their own children. It also has a leverage effect if we combine it with bringing cases of attempted and ongoing genocide against Europe, America, Canada and Australia. All of the things they are doing with White erasure, iconoclasm, demonization and villification are clearly demonstrable as a coordinated and deliberate act of cultural genocide – by the UN’s own definition. We should introduce this bill and also introduce bills before the UN documenting our cultural genocide and colonization and bring those accusation/suits along with a list of the names.
There is also leverage as we could also add clauses like those in Israel’s constitution, demographic laws, and most of its major party’s platforms – declaring Israel as the country of the Jewish people and Jewish people alone. This has tremendous shaming and hypocrite leverage. All of the White politicians would have to answer why they support Israel’s eternal statehood and Jewish peoplehood, but they oppose our own. It would also force Zionists to have to answer in explicit terms.
Ideally as the legislation comes before Congress some of our guys could testify in the chamber.
I can’t draft this legislation but I would be an ardent organizer of a bunch of gadflies badgering every legislator I have and even some not in my districts of record.
P.S. The sit-in idea is great. JFK is being renovated with no White person eligible for any contract. We should do similar actions protesting this crime against us in NY.
Thanks for this AM. I think we should move on this this year. Whites must demand as a group that they remain in the majority. Anything less than that is anti-White racism.
I will post follow ups later this month and next.
We could use X to make oligarchs take a stand. Do you support this legislation @elonmusk? Would you donate to lobby for it? A real hoot will be the Zionists like Karp … … I bet we could find legislation that was lobbied for by oligarchs that claims eternal statehood for Israel and/or other peoples. Why not your own people we can then ask on X.
This is a great idea the more I think of it. We should do the same with the UN cultural genocide movement. I have few connections and no legal background. I will see if I can scare anyone up who does and make connections. Great thinking SQ.
The JFK fiasco is something we should sick Stephen Miller on. The oligarchs are shutting down DIE, probably under threat, but we need some legal precedent. We should press him or get our own legal team to class action the NY/JFK no white contractors fiasco. Now is the time for a full court press.
Thank you, AM. I do believe that if enough of us demand it, the elites will have no choice but to at least listen. But there has to be a groundswell.
We as a people have to realize that being in the minority will never be an acceptable option.
The legislative approach should be supplemented by an attempt to direct whites toward creating critical parts of what I call a “countersuperorganism” to outcompete the parasitic superorganism of the anti-white American regime: the more successful you are at that, the more real leverage you’ll have over the political classes. I wrote about it in general terms here:
https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2025/01/03/identities-twash-and-the-true-purpose-of-propaganda-on-the-nature-of-the-parasitic-superorganism-that-is-the-american-regime-and-how-to-overcome-it/
If you find it interesting enough to want to hear my ideas for how to create specific parts of a countsuporg, I could email you.
Awesome idea. Yes, email me.
“Require that all illegal immigrants as well as legal immigrants with a history of violent or serious crimes be deported.”
ALL ILLEGALS must be remigrated. There cannot be no compromise on this. Why? They’re illegal, they shouldn’t even be here. Do we want to be a serious people or a joke?
Yes: “Require that all illegal immigrants as well as legal immigrants with a history of violent or serious crimes be deported.”
Yes: “Require that all illegal immigrants as well as legal immigrants with a history of violent or serious crimes be deported.”
My apologies as I misread your sentence.
“Is this the kind of world we’d wish upon our children and grandchildren?”
It takes a special kind of stupid becoming a minority in ones’ own homeland & it takes evilness making ones’ children a minority.
We don’t have to live like this.
“Restoring White Homelands” video:
https://odysee.com/@countercurrents:6/Restoring-White-Homelands:1
Survival of Europeans is non-negotiable, &, nor are our homelands. Failure not an option.
“Nothing is ever irreversible, except the death of a people by genocide or miscegenation.”
Dominique Venner.
XIV VERBA
Spencer J Quinn wrote:
“…I think my 10-point plan might push the envelope far enough but too far in order to get white people to act their own racial interests as well.”
Should this read “…might push the envelope far enough but not too far…”?
My impression is that this is a useful proposal. It is right in the range that we need to aim for now. It pushes the identity issue up to – but not over – the edge. It would make people think quantitatively (debating actual numbers), and thereby begin to make qualitative rebuttal (But we are all exactly the same under the skin!) appear hopelessly regressive.
We are witnessing a metapolitical rout of the Left. They’ve lost their intellectual footings. Apparently, they’ve heard the rumor that men cannot have babies. The horror! The horror!
Push hard now to gain as much ground as possible before they regroup. Because when household finances get even shakier, they will.
The ONLYrealistic measures: WHITES must develop self/preserving CONCOUSNESS. They must have many more babies…to guarantee STATE white majority rule…and BUILD LOCAL CITY/COUNTY/STATE WHITE NATIONALIST POWER…MAGA??
Thanks for the typo catch. Yes, the metapolitical routing of the Left as you put it inspired me to go on the offensive like this. Striking when the iron is hot and so on.
Only individuals of 100% European ancestry are White. The one drop rule applies. That is TRULY is the hill you’ve got to be prepared to die on, otherwise all else is for naughty. You should already know that, I shouldn’t have to tell you.
I think you might be too far-thinking. This proposal is a tactical method to start the gradual process of getting us back to where we need to be. It’s like we’re on the 5 yard line on third down, and you want to throw hail Marys towards the end zone, while I suggest we stick to the short pass and a low risk running game up the middle.
White people lost world war 2, which is why we are on the 5 yard line to begin with. We can’t forget that.
This is exactly correct Spencer.
“White people lost world war 2..” Have you published any articles based on this premise? If so I’d dearly love to read them.
It absolutely must start with “Hispanics/Latinos”with the exception of a very small minority white percentage of them, which is about <10%. This group is the fastest growing by birth and import. They are more spread out across the U.S. and have a territorial claim & grievance against us. For some reason, people in pro-white circles seem to be veering around the mention of Mexicans, and instead want talk about any other group. Occasionally mentioning Guatemalans, Hondurans or Venezuelans, but Mexicans far outnumber those combined. If we deported every single black right now, we’d remain every bit as f*cked as before. To become a Mestizo nation, with a population which ranges from swarthy Spaniard (Sonora), to almost black (Oaxaca), would be a complete descent in third world hell.
I got to read this last night. We’re always talking about how important it is to think/act like leftists apropos of our goals (i.e., long-term; creating wedges; being like “ratchets” that move the agenda only in one’s own direction, etc.) and this proposal is just that.
My first thought was, oh boy, bring on the all-or-nothings, the NTJs (“Name The Jew!”s) who won’t see what you’re after here, who’ll skim down to the numbered list (past the reasoning behind the list), see something short of RAHOWA, and balk at it all. But so far, so good, in the comments section.
I believe it shows serious strategic thinking; a real Overton-Window shifter.
Thanks James. I hope it does help shift the Overton window. We will need some dedicated people with some money to implement this. I can definitely help supply alittle of the latter.
White nationalists still don’t know who whites are. Benjamin Franklin specified that whites are Britons, and that Europeans outside Briton are “swarthy.” The white population is less than 20 percent of the population, and closer to 10 percent. Caucasians include Somalis, Indians, and North Africans. If Jews are white, then the world needs to declare war on whites to free themselves of Jews. Is this white genius at work?
Please understand that this proposal is not a white nationalist document. It’s more of a racially aware normie document. The pinkest of pink pills, so to speak. It won’t take us where we need to be, but it might get us started so we will eventually get there…at the speed of history. Hopefully a little faster.
This is a great way to get people to agree to a very moderate version of what is required.
For more information on this, I recommend Gregs essays, speech and audio streams on the Uppity White Folks Manifesto.
I’ve often thought that one of the easiest ways to wake up some Europeans is to state that we deserve to be 70% of the population in our own countries, and bait the Left/marxists into outrage. That outrage is quite redpilling for some of our brothers and sisters.
Whereas if you asked for 100%, you would still get outrage, but it would feel unreasonable to a lot of normie Europeans.
I’m not American, and I think this is a great idea, but if it counts for anything, I want to say that I agree with Captain Chaps. The definition of a White person is not disputed by any significant group (that I am aware of). Redefining White people is an unnecessary concession that would quickly result in anybody with light skin attempting to pass as White. You could end up with something akin to the transgender madness, where we are expected to believe that an obvious Negro is White. White identity is still regarded, at least superficially, as a negative identity, but a benefit of this is that we are not fighting to defend our ethnicity from those of mixed-race origins.
Sorry, Captain Chaos.
“You could end up with something akin to the transgender madness, where we are expected to believe that an obvious Negro is White.”
Pretty sure the one-half not black rule would prevent this. Also, like I said in the article, if there are shortcomings to the plan, I’m all ears.
I think your plan is a great idea. It seems totally plausible – I can very much imagine it being discussed on the Joe Rogan show in 6 to 12 months or so. I also understand the tactical nature of the plan and that the goal is to shift the Overton Window, not to achieve total victory in one step. I just think that there is no need to dilute the definition of White, for the reasons I gave previously. If a definition must be made, it should be much more stringent than ‘one-half not black.’ Regarding Jews, they should want to have their own, special ‘White Adjacent’ category, or something similar, so as to protect our distinction from those who say we look the same.
There would probably be pushback on the definition, but that would open up a public debate and give ordinary Whites a chance to assert themselves, such as on X like they did following the H1B scandal. I can see lots of memes saying things to the effect of, ‘nobody wanted to be White when we were being excluded from the hiring process’. Except they are funny, of course.
I respect your point. I just think it is too late in the day to take the purity stance and have real world results within say 10 years. That is the time frame I foresee. After that, it may not matter what we do short of war. And I would dearly like to avoid a war.
Thus, the compromise I selected.
That is a very short timescale! Whatever happens, I know that White Americans will not go gentle into that good night.
As for disputed definitions, there is a narrative out there saying that Black people exist, because of their shared exploitation, and presumably all other non-White races exist too, but White people don’t exist, and that was only an identity that Europeans made up during the Renaissance so that we could go exploit everyone. Of course, we know that’s just the usual (((wormy word games))). The “confusion” about whether or not we exist goes away the moment they want to blame us for something.
So that one was disingenuous. Another potential hazard would be by loosening the definition, such as Brazilian rules. They don’t have the “one drop rule”, so mostly White qualifies as White. If that were to become common, then that would promote the genetic mixup we’re trying to avoid.
In the name of practicality, perhaps we could have a small degree of wiggle room in defining who is White. For example, if someone is 1/8 American Indian, that’s generally not a deal-breaker. Future genetic engineering technology (which we already pretty much have) could select which of each pair of chromosomes from each parent gets passed onto the next generation, which could purify lineages as well as prevent genetic disease and mutant mattoids. For now, I’d say that if someone is White by a reasonable genetic standard, looks White, and acts White, that works for me. As for acting White, it should go without saying, but one obvious deal-breaker is a history of posting demoralization propaganda that begins with “Fellow white people…”
These kinds of proposals are what comes when you try to put the cart before the horse before you’ve even invented the wheel. All ‘political’ definitions of ‘White’ fall apart because White Nationalists do not have the power to impose these definitions. If we did, we wouldn’t really need to define ‘White’ in a way that is – essentially – just a version of the ‘one drop rule’ but where ‘white’ is defined by ‘one drop white’ rather than somethin more…substantial.
This fascination with definition and ‘rules’ is a weakness in White Nationalism imported by WN’s unfortunate relationship to ‘the Right’.
The recent incident with Jared Taylor should be a cautionary example of how inadequate White Nationalists are at taking the White Side of Things when even the slightest pressure is applied.
‘White’ is a biocultural reality. Our enemies exploit the fact that White Nationalists are about two thousand years behind our most relentless racial enemies in creating the affective infrastructure for White racial solidarity at the autonomic (or instinctive) level (Good = What is good for Whites).
Until White Nationalists achieve – and promote – this kind of autonomic response to anti-White efforts to destroy White self-confidence and erase White territorial control, we shouldn’t be trying to make ‘rules’ about who is ‘White’ and who is not for society as a whole. That’s a very big project for which I do not see we’re adequately prepared.
Insofar as policy is concerned, attacking ‘immigration’ is simply nibbling around the edges. The core problem is entire ‘minority civil rights’ regime that does not apply to a White minority. There are 11 states where Whites are a minority right now (and at least 6 more will be added to that list by the next Census). In none of these states are ‘Whites’ defined as a ‘minority’ for the purposes of legal protection. Why not? This contradiction is the one that our legal beagles should be hammering at in 2025, not immigration quotas. Let MAGA deal with that.
White Nationalism needs to get into the nitty-gritty court-room lawfare/metapolitics attacking ‘minority civil rights do not apply to a white minority’. Attacks along these lines can be used to undermine the entire anti-White civil rights regime or force MAGA enthusiast to realize that ‘civil rights’ is deeply anti-White.
“White Nationalism needs to get into the nitty-gritty…” We Europeans aka Whites are about 200 million, shocking we have zero political power. Yes, Trump got elected due to us, however, he does not advocate for our survival, he has no problem reducing us to a minority. Clock is ticking & maga better become a power block or forever lose our homeland.
“Jared Taylor had his Twitter/X account restored…”
Kind of. He just gave up on trying to get it restored and created a new one – a violation of the rules – daring Twitter to ban him again.
If you have a Subscriber access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.