E Pluribus. Unum

[nationalist]

Originally posted by molly bloom


As for dexters statistics regarding the ethnic complexity of Great Britain:

'English 81.5%, Scottish 9.6%, Irish 2.4%, Welsh 1.9%, Ulster 1.8%, West Indian, Indian, Pakistani, and other 2.8%
Wow! 2.8% of the population is non White! great! truly diverse. '

Dexters seems to think you can't be English and black. Or Welsh and black. Or Scottish and black.

Molly, you can't be English and Black. Or at least you can't be ethnically English and be black. The English, along with Welsh, Irish, Scottish, etc. are different Nationalities. To belong to a nationality, you have to share the same race, along with language, and culture. (This fact is where classical Nationalsim derives its idea, that every nation should have its own state.) For example, there are no white Japanese. You can be a citizen of England regardless of skin color. But to be ethnically English ( which I assume is what these figure represent) you have to be white. By the way, I think that it is hillarious to see arguments about evil American Imperialism! Maybe you should check out a European history book from the library and read from 1492. That is where you'll find the worst instances of oppressive Imperalism. By the way, the BELGIANS ( of all people!) were probably the creulist Imperialists. If you don't believe me read a book on thie history of the Congo, or read Conrad's classic Heart of Darkness. AS for the segregation bull****, you do not understand how America is today at all. My guess is that you visited tourist traps, which are in no way representative of America at all. Live in America for a year, especially in Ohio, Virginia, Wisconsin, or anyre that is not New York, LA, San Fransisco, etc.. I guarantee that you'll be a flag waiving redneck ( thanks Dexter. Most Americans don't take redneck as an insult btw) just like the rest of us. That is where you'll learn what the U.S. is really like. Citizens of the heartland are not bad people, despite foreign belief. ( I think my innate goodness shows in the fact that I didn't make a single Australian joke in this post )

[Dr. Nick]

Originally posted by nationalist


Yeah, lets also watch clips of French or Germans rioting in the streets because they don't want their nation to be absorbed into the an faceless entity! Or how about watching a South American country picked at random slip back into an authoritarian regime because they just can't quite get the hang or representative government?? Or maybe we can just look at the constant warring and genocide that runs rampant throughout the southern hemisphere because the people don't know how to govern themselves? Or, my personal favorite, lets watch a weak country like Spain, backed by an ungrateful EU, try to tell the Americans what we can or cannot do with criminals! Europeans are so quick to forget that without American intervention what is now the EU would be either Fascist, Communist, or (without trillions of dollars of U.S. investment starting with the Marshall plan) a bankrupt, powerless, war torn continant! God its fun bashing America! I only wish that I could live in a country as great as Argentina! Seriously though, I think that the world should step back and ask reflect on just how much the world depends on the U.S. This may not be a proper forum to discuss matters such as this, but I am tired of reading the anti-American filth spread through this site. Especially from Canada! When Quebec seceeds, the remaining Provinces will be begging to become states sso they don't have to pay for their socialist health care system without the tax dollars from their 2 biggest cities. You Canuks should start learning the Star Spangled Banner! Enough ranting...

It is made evident that nationalist wouldn't recognise a piece of sarcasm even if it hit him over the head.

[Marquis de Sodaq]

Originally posted by molly bloom
Exactly how are links to a Filipino and Seminole view of American imperialism irrelevant? ...
The Filipino site points out that only America deems the resistance to American hegemony the 'Philippine Insurrection', and says that America was'helping' the Philippines achieve independence.

Of course the american propoganda portrays itself as doing good. And of couse it's hooey. They were "helping" them transfer dependence from Spain to the US. I don't say your links and topics are irrelevant per se, but to the discussion. They provide absolutely nothing to separate the US from any other imperial power in history. The topic centered around the US getting lashed at by others for being bad or wrong in deed. For every example you bring up, an equal misdeed can be said of any other major power. In other words, it shows that singling out the US for criticism is just a matter of preference. If you don't like the US, fine. But to try to justify that dislike with anecdotes that might equally apply to your own land or heritage is silly.

Originally posted by molly bloom
The Seminoles too...ever wonder why they inhabitant barren parts of Oklahoma and swamps in Florida?

Believe me, I understand this far better than you. Just because I'm proud to be an american doesn't mean I'm white. (I fall into that lovely "mixed blood" category.) I could rant til I'm blue about the injustices suffered by all indians, from 1492 to the present day. Life goes on - the past is remembered, but I for one won't let it ruin my future.

Originally posted by molly bloom
It's all very well saying America was founded on these shining principles, but my point is, that the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were just pieces of paper, ...

You made your point, and I almost agree with it. The DofI is not a racist, imperialist document. It's idealism and circumstance. The constitution contains the problematic ideas/language you refer to. But even it has been altered over the years and is now a far more encompassing and fair piece of paper.

Originally posted by molly bloom
...I couldn't figure out where all the black citizens were. Having grown up in multicultural multiethnic neighbourhoods, it had never occurred to me that a city could have so few black inhabitants.

Welcome to Canada, the great white north.

Originally posted by molly bloom
...the statistics ... don't address the issues of ghettoization. How many First Nations bands live on the reservation, how many Inuit in remote nearly all Inuit communities, how many African Americans are concentrated in certain areas?

I would bet my arm that the Inuit and Indians are quite happy to live apart from the whites. The rez is a crappy place to live, no doubt, but someof them are actually amenable places to traditional ways and self-government. As for the blacks, they started out in ghettos after they moved north following the civil war. They were kept there until only a generation or two ago. Now they struggle to move out to suburbia, just as the whites did a few decades ago. Integrated neighborhoods are spreading out from the traditional cores of black population, but it's a slow process.
One assumption people make about mixing ethnic groups is that it is good. The whole reason people gather with "their own kind" is for community. We all learn from others, but home is with those like you. Interaction with those from other communities is what is good, it isn't necessary for them to disperse among each other geographically. That can help, but isn't the only way.

Originally posted by molly bloom
...Where I last lived in East London mixed race couples were a norm, not a rarity,

Same here in Minneapolis, one of the whitest US metropolises. I think Vancouver probably just lacks the number of minorities for this to even be a possibility - someting Dexter pointed out himself.

Originally posted by molly bloom
...British culture today is a potent mix of influences ... France's modern culture is also formed from diverse ethnic groups, North African, West African, Caribbean...

And do you pretend to think US culture is not heavily influenced - for generations longer than Britain and France, by the way - by blacks/others? Ever heard of Jazz? Maya Angelou? Blues or Rock and Roll? Alex Haley? Spike Lee? Even Eric Clapton and the Rolling Stones claim to be heavily influenced by american blacks. C'mon, what a joke to imply that euro societies are more multicultural! I've lived in europe, too (Netherlands). What I saw were societies only recently starting to mix. They gain the benefit of US racial/social history to skip much of the learning process. They gain from modern US cultural saturation (ok, not a benefit, but definitely an influence), too. Sure, they go thru it all on their own terms, but gain tremendously from US progress and mistakes. That is, they go into the mixing with far more understanding of what is really going on because of what New World societies have done wrong.

Originally posted by molly bloom
As for the oh so pointed references to 'Aborigines'....well as a recently landed immigrant, I confess to feeling no guilt over that issue. .... I believe America used the Monroe Doctrine as a carte blanche for interfering in Central and South American and Caribbean politics, and Manifest Destiny to justify the dispossession of Native Americans. [b]Any real difference? [b]

No, and that was my entire point. You brought up the US misdeeds (you are right about the two policies' true purpose), I simply pointed out that the Aussies did an equally bad work. I'm glad you don't feel guilt about the Aborigine issue. Guilt doesn't serve people well - they need to acknowledge the wrong, correct what they can, and move on by growing from the experience. If you and your ancestors had nothing to do with it, good. But you can still use what you know to better understand those who did suffer.

[Marquis de Sodaq]

Originally posted by El Awrence
It is made evident that nationalist wouldn't recognise a piece of sarcasm even if it hit him over the head.

Si, but some of us did recognize it!

[nationalist]

Originally posted by El Awrence


It is made evident that nationalist wouldn't recognise a piece of sarcasm even if it hit him over the head.

Sorry, El. I was just under the impression that sarcasm was supposed to be amusing . I just confused your sarcasm with whining about situations and social problems that really don't concern you. My mistake. Some Americans more are sensitive to and resentful of world opinion in these days. I think that is justified. Now, if you all would excuse me, I am going to go out and exploit some minorities and opress a few 3rd world countrys with a few of my evil imperialist American friends . (That was sarcasm)

[Dr. Nick]

sarcasm ---->

Well, I still hate Americans and the US. But I don't tell them in their face. Wait, oops, I just did.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Marquis de Sodaq

They provide absolutely nothing to separate the US from any other imperial power in history. The topic centered around the US getting lashed at by others for being bad or wrong in deed.

And do you pretend to think US culture is not heavily influenced - for generations longer than Britain and France, by the way - by blacks/others? Ever heard of Jazz? Maya Angelou? Blues or Rock and Roll? Alex Haley? Spike Lee? Even Eric Clapton and the Rolling Stones claim to be heavily influenced by american blacks. C'mon, what a joke to imply that euro societies are more multicultural! I've lived in europe, too (Netherlands). What I saw were societies only recently starting to mix.

You should check out my post where I clearly defended the right of the Americans to be included as a distinct civilization in the game because of the unique aspect, of amongst other cultural strands, Jazz music and Jazz culture. Dexters 'hallmark hall of fame' history of America carefully glossed over all the things I pointed out; the racial mixing of the old world was just down to the legacy of empire, instead of direct invitations to different ethnicities to come and settle in those countries. Something of a surprise to me, when I look back on, for instance, Whitechapel, where the Huguenot churches and workshops were turned into synagogues for refugees from Polish and Russian pogroms and are now mosques for Bengali immigrants and their 1st and 2nd generation British descendants.
I haven't implied European societies are more multicultural. Dexters harped on about how homogenous (read mighty white) the old world countries are, in contrast, say with a really racially diverse state like, oh, Idaho- 91% white. My point is, from having lived in Europe and travelled extensively there, that this simply is not the case.

'Molly, you can't be English and Black. Or at least you can't be ethnically English and be black. The English, along with Welsh, Irish, Scottish, etc. are different Nationalities. '

Yes indeed they are. Let's pick a famous non-white English person, shall we? Ever watched 'Red Dwarf', with the comedian Craig Charles? How about the music of the Propellerheads, with vocals by that non-white Welsh diva, Shirley Bassey?

'Shirley Veronica Bassey was born on January 8, 1937, the youngest of seven children. She grew up in Tiger Bay, Cardiff, Wales, the daughter of a ship's fireman, Henry Bassey, and his wife Eliza Jane. '

Nationality has little to do with racial origins for my black friends and me. 'Ain't no black in the Union Jack' is the racists' adage, and one that hasn't applied for a very long time.

https://www.blackpresence.co.uk/

https://www.cwrl.utexas.edu/~bump/E388M2/students/meraz/bbpage.html

You might want to check out some of that first site to see how long and enduring the black presence in Britain has been; it goes back long before the Windrush, and descendants of, for instance, the Chinese community of Limehouse or Liverpool (oldest in Europe), or the Somali community in Wales, or the Arab community in the North-East identify as English, or Welsh, or Londoners or Scousers.

If dexters comments had focused on class or religion they might have been more relevant- a Green/Orange divide still exists in Glasgow and Liverpool, and class has always been a more potent test of prejudice in Great Britain.

'My guess is that you visited tourist traps, which are in no way representative of America at all. Live in America for a year, especially in Ohio, Virginia, Wisconsin...'

What, tourist traps like Snohomish, or Taft, or Twisp, or 'Bavarian' Leavenworth in the Cascades?

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Marquis de Sodaq
Welcome to Canada, the great white north.

Hey! We removed those ads...

[dexters]

Originally posted by molly bloom

Dexters 'hallmark hall of fame' history of America carefully glossed over all the things I pointed out; the racial mixing of the old world was just down to the legacy of empire, instead of direct invitations to different ethnicities to come and settle in those countries. Something of a surprise to me, when I look back on, for instance, Whitechapel, where the Huguenot churches and workshops were turned into synagogues for refugees from Polish and Russian pogroms and are now mosques for Bengali immigrants and their 1st and 2nd generation British descendants.
I haven't implied European societies are more multicultural. Dexters harped on about how homogenous (read mighty white) the old world countries are, in contrast, say with a really racially diverse state like, oh, Idaho- 91% white. My point is, from having lived in Europe and travelled extensively there, that this simply is not the case.

For starters the very first post of my thread griped about the incessant, and what I see as highly biased and unfair America bashing that is coming from corners of the world that are "homogeneous" in nature and have little or no grasp of what America, the idealism that is America, is all about.

I included a link to a television ad which I thought captures that idealism.

I was not making any kind of moral judgement, until the America bashers came in and make a series of sarcastic comments and you came in to take the discussion into a some sourt of a court house where we sit around and judge who is a better country.

As for me not being to the UK, if you qualify a visit to London as a broad view of the UK, then truly your perspective is so stilted its not worth my time considering. Perhaps you qualify it as fair to use New York as the measuring stick of American populance, but America is a large country, demographics shifts drastically from region to region. The UK may have a few cosmopolitan cities, as are most major cities in any country these days, but that does not mean the country is more cosmopolitan than the United States. The numbers show the error in this assumption. But it's all moot. I'm growing tired of this pointless bickering.

let us go play Civ 3 or something.

[nationalist]

Originally posted by molly bloom

the Chinese community of Limehouse or Liverpool (oldest in Europe), or the Somali community in Wales, or the Arab community in the North-East identify as English, or Welsh, or Londoners or Scousers.

Molly, my point is that nationalitiy does not have anything to do with what country you live in. You help prove my point when you go on about the Arabs, Chinese, Somalis, etc. They are Arabs in England, Chinese in England, Somalis in England. They are English people, citizens of England, but they are Arab, Chinese, or Somali in nationality. If they stay in their groups and don't assimilate, then they can not be "English." If they were truly English, you woudn't say that they were "Chinese in England" they would simply be "English." As of now, these people are citizens of the state of England. However, they are not members of the English nation anymore than they are of the Russian nation. They are Arabs, Chinese, Somalis, etc. who happen to live in England A state is a legal entity, and is inclusive. Anyone can be a part of a state. A nation is not a legal entity and is exclusive. Not everyone can be part of a nation. People erroneously use the terms state and nation as interchangeable ideas, but they are not. A state composed of one nation is a nation-state. Japan is a nation state. The U.S. is not.
Perhaps to better illustrate my point would be to describe what would happen if an Englishman moved to Germany. The Englishman would still be English, even if he achieved German citizenship. His children would still be English, and would continue to be English. This would continue until the English traits were completely gone from them, when they fully absorbed German culture and refered to themselves as Germans, not "English in Germany." This is why the "Arabs in England" are not of the English nation, even though they are English citizens. Some people would argue that they could never be members of the English nation, because ethnicity is a factor in most definitions of "nation". They would argue that Welsh, English, and Germans are racially different. According to this argument there could be no black English, even though there could be Black citizens of the state of England. This idea is relatively contoversial, but it is a fundamental of classical nationalism.

(BTW, did you take the ski America tour or something? Aren't all those places you mentioned ski resorts? I could be wrong though. Also, what is Twisp? I know of the Wisp, which is a ski resort in Maryland, but I haven't heard of Twisp. Just curious.)

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by nationalist


Molly, my point is that nationalitiy does not have anything to do with what country you live in. You help prove my point when you go on about the Arabs, Chinese, Somalis, etc. They are Arabs in England, Chinese in England, Somalis in England. They are English people, citizens of England, but they are Arab, Chinese, or Somali in nationality.

You're confusing nationality and ethnicity again. As for assimilation, I can assure you that the descendants of the Somali community aren't nomadic herders in Wales, and that the North-East's descendants of the Arab community do not live in tents or go sailing in dhows. Unless I suspect they go on holiday to the Yemen to visit relatives, a country many have never been to...
My point was to reference the multiplicity of racial origins of English (although most people would use British these days) citizens.

Dexters' still unsourced statistics you note, don't mention ethnicity except at the end...they are about nationality.

'English 81.5%, Scottish 9.6%, Irish 2.4%, Welsh 1.9%, Ulster 1.8%, West Indian, Indian, Pakistani, and other 2.8%
Wow! 2.8% of the population is non White! great! truly diverse. '

It's Northern Ireland, by the way, not just Ulster. The three ancient states of the United Kingdom are listed first, with no mention of skin-pigmentation, you'll notice, and then the more recent creation, the six counties of Northern Ireland. Let me give you an example:

http://indigo.ie/~findinfo

Check out the citizenship requirements for Eire- you need only have a grandmother or grandfather who was born in Ireland to qualify for Irish citizenship- remember non-white Phil Lynott of Thin Lizzy, or perhaps more up-to-date, Samantha Mumba ?
Similarly, Craig Charles, a Scouser, is English, and Shirley Bassey is Welsh. Do you understand how this fits in with dexters' somewhat misleading statistics? Welsh and black, English and black, Scottish and black- the terms are not mutually exclusive.

Dexters :
'I was not making any kind of moral judgement, until the America bashers came in and make a series of sarcastic comments and you came in to take the discussion into a some sourt of a court house where we sit around and judge who is a better country. '

See, I have problems with dexters' claim to not be making a moral judgment when I compare it with this:

'...something our friends who live in the old world with their little homogenous societies of all asians, all whities, all blackies will never grasp.
In their misery/envy mixed with that old world snobbiness, they create such polls as asking us to vote on whether America deserves to be in Civ III. '

Umm, yes, we're so envious we'd want to go and live in a really racially diverse state like Idaho- 91% white, and that's from the official state census, which actually says, white, not European origin, or non-Asian, but white.

The idea apparently is that America filled with idealism, invited all these races to come and live in America. Which comes as something of a surprise to me, when I recall the Indian Wars (like it was their fault), the Mexican Wars, the Spanish American War, war in Vietnam and by proxy in Central America...exclude all those possible points of origin for varying groups of people and it starts to build a picture of a differing complexion.

Of course poor old new world countries like the Netherlands and Great Britain and France had to rely on nasty old imperialist wars for their multicultural identities. Which given, for example, my reference to Whitechapel, Huguenots followed by Jewish refugees from the pogroms in Russia/Poland/Lithuania then Bengalis, is frankly ridiculous. I could also have instanced the centuries old refugee Greek community in Greek Street, Soho, or the Sephardi Jews invited to England by Cromwell, or...but you get my point?

'As for me not being to the UK, if you qualify a visit to London as a broad view of the UK, then truly your perspective is so stilted its not worth my time considering. '

You'll notice I mentioned I lived and worked in the Midlands, the North, and had travelled extensively throughout Great Britain and Ireland and Europe. You, evidently, have not, and therefore felt you had carte blanche to assume that various European countries were all white- your term, not mine.
I could also have mentioned Bradford, or Birmingham, home of Balti cuisine, or Wolverhampton, or Cardiff, or Swansea, or Newcastle, or Glasgow, or Edinburgh, or Portsmouth, or Plymouth, or Sheffield, or Leeds, or Bristol, or Leicester, or Liverpool, or Blackburn, or Huddersfield, or Hull, or....

But then you probably wouldn't have been to any of those places either.

'but that does not mean the country is more cosmopolitan than the United States'

Funny dexters, but no-one is claiming it is. What I'm pointing out is that your spurious claim that somehow these old world countries are all-white, all-black, is incorrect.

[dexters]

Originally posted by molly bloom
Funny dexters, but no-one is claiming it is. What I'm pointing out is that your spurious claim that somehow these old world countries are all-white, all-black, is incorrect.

To address some of your rebuttals, I never made any claim that the "old world" was entirely homogenous. I mentioned specifically select Western European countries that a ****** will recognize is a very white, where most of these countries have white populations in the high 90 percent range. Even your "best case" UK only has a visible minority population of 2.5%. And quite frankly, I have statistics to back me up. Whereas your rebuttals are based on your own experiences? Experiences are advantageous in many areas, but not in the area of substituting hard statistical analysis. It is our biases that often color our judgement on which group is more numerous as we selectively remember what we want to remember.

You know, you can probably gather a bunch of communist lunatics to march down mainstreat usa and proclaim you have the backing the people behind your anti-capitlist group, and it may feel like it, but it does not mean the demographic statistics will agree with the claim.

And the crux of my complaint, and I suppose I could have said it more diplomatically, is that a lot of the America bashing, and the people who actively support "removing the Americans from Civ III" are from European countries that have very little diversity and is thus in no position to appropriate American Civilization into some kind of a non existent superstate that somehow exists because it is convenient to.

German , Italian, Chinese, Jewish, Swedish, Dutch, Japanese, African and a whole host of immigrants who have landed on North American soil consider themselves North Americans, and in no way emotionally tied to their motherlands. Considering upwards of 90% of North America's 300 million strong population and the 600 million strong population in all of the Americas came from somewhere else on this planet, that is a fundamentally different thing than the migratory populations that happens naturally on a continent like Eurasia that have moved into countries like Afghanistan or the frontier provinces of China over eons. In many cases, these people and their land were simply thrown into countries when their borders were drawn.

America is people, coming together to build a country. Its people did not emerge from the mist of time, there isn't a tribe somewhere we call the Americans, The people of America are the people of the world and ironically, despite having no tribal root, these diverse group of people can call themselves Americans. And that by its very definition is the mark of a distinct civilization, and a great one at that.

[nationalist]

Molly,

Your conclusions are correct when using your definitions. I'm just nitpicking about the definitions that you are using. The classic definition of a "nation" includes ethnicity when refering to nationality. In the modern spin on the definition that you use, ethnicity is not a factor. If you don't believe me, just check out a government textbook and look up the definition of a nation. It includes ethnicity as required to belong to a nation, along with common language and culture. Germans felt that they were racially different than French. Many people don't agree with that definition today. Now, most don't count common ethnicity as a requisite of being a member of a nation. However, some still do. Depending on the definition used, ethnic Chinese can never be English, as much as ethnic English can never be Chinese. This would also mean that a Scot could never be English, and vice-versa. I do understand the difference between nationality and ethnicity. Ethnicity is race. Nationality is national identity. Using your definition of nationality a member of any ethnic group can be assimilated into a nation. Using the classic definition they can't. Also, using the classic definition, citizenship has nothing to do with nationality. Citizens of Hannover were as German as Citizens of Berlin. Using your definition, citizenship is a decisive factor in national identy, because you consider the nation and the state as interchangable terms. Classical nationalists did not think that this was so.

If dexter's source used your definition of nationality, then there can most definatly be black English. If they used the classic definition, then they couldn't be. I just assumed that since the figures were showing racial percentages, then they were considering English, Welsh, etc. as ethnic groups, therefore using the classic definition. I could be wrong in that assumption. If I'm not, then they aren't counting Blacks as English in that survey.

In my opinion all of this is just a side note. I don't think that a country shows how great it is by how ethnically diverse it is and, to tell you the truth, I couldn't care less how diverse England is. Wasn't Norway picked by the U.N. as the greatest country in the world last year by the U.N.? Its citizens are almost completely Scandinavian in ethnicity. Who cares? I think that the point to all of this arguing is that it is great if you think that your country is great. However, some people see a large anti-American bias on these forums and are sick of it and want to have their voices heard. dexters is Canadian and resents the America bashing! I don't care if you think that America is generic with a worthless (or evil!?!) culture, that we are a bunch of Klansmen burning crosses in the lawns of "colored folk", or that any kind of invention/advancement/ thought that has come from America was stolen from Europe. I jusy care if it seems like the only people who are voicing their opinions are those who feel this way, and therefore try to help represent the side who recognizes the truth: The U.S. is an important country, with a distinct culture and a unique perspective on the world. Molly, at least you admit that we have a valuable and unique culturewhich is more than what some others are willing to admit. But, regardless of what is written on these forums,life will go on, and Americans will be celebrating their unique, valuable culture, inventing new tecnologies and creating new philosophies despite the grumblings and gripings of a few foreign dorks who use some of their spare time to bash the U.S. on a video game forum. (Meanwhile, some of us American dorks will use their spare time to defend their country.)

[KrazyHorse]

German , Italian, Chinese, Jewish, Swedish, Dutch, Considering upwards of 90% of North America's 300 million strong population and the 600 million strong population in all of the Americas

I don't think I can really trust your figures, seeing as how the total population of the Americas is upwards of 850 million, and North America's population is around 450 million.

[dexters]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


I don't think I can really trust your figures, seeing as how the total population of the Americas is upwards of 850 million, and North America's population is around 450 million.

Welll... North America has been traditionally classified as Canada / US and Mexico, but my 300 million figure is infact accurate. 270 USA (approx) + 30 million Canadians = 300 million give or take a few million.

Mexico's population is 101 million, but in recent years, it has been classified more as a central American country than a North American country.

As for all of America's I only roughly estimated the total population of 600 million, if it is higher than I guess I'm wrong. , You can go to CIA's very reliable world factbook and add it up yourself. But I'm not so anal as to spend time adding it up.

Since posting website links seems fashionable, I'll post one of my own.
CIA WORLD Factbook

the numbers with regards to ethnic demographic numbers also comes from the same source.

Regardless of all this hair-splitting, my point still stands