Although the writer of this article certainly has an interesting (and quicky rejected throughout the common academic milieu) point of view, he tends to emphasize a racial conservativism (which he finds easily equatable with civilization conservativism) that shadows the rest of his argument. He sees conservativism as the need to conserve the Anglo civilization of our forbearers. This soon translates into a need for increased immigration control (which he tries to equate with most other problems, the most obvious - terrorism - being thrown out to keep up tempo) and other qualities that are often not considered as part of the mainstream conservative movement (which he readily admits and moves him to their admonishment).
His main strings that are never really tied but are simply laid next to each other are those regarding "liberalism" and "economism". These are the internal anti-West movements rotting the core of our civilization. However, he really wants to use the words "postmodernism" and "naturalism", which start to reveal the subtleties of his argument much better. His one interesting point that I need to look at further is that these reinforce each other in regards to modern culture/media...though I tend toward the idea that they simply have not been pitted against each other (after all, conservativism is a much easier and more available target).
Another interesting byproduct is that we get to see what an American white male would say when pushed into a racial position (one that is more often ignored).
"Immigration, overwhelmingly nonwhite, is the main driver of our population growth. About 1.5 million immigrants arrive annually, and immigrant women bear 750,000 babies annually. Immigrants and their descendants accounted for 47 percent of population growth in 1970-1990, and, according to Steven Camarota, Director of Research of the Center for Immigration Studies, for 69 percent of growth in 1990-2000 and 2000-2002. If this continues, whites will become a minority—and, in today's bilious antiwhite climate, a persecuted minority. Moreover, since environmental ruin and resource depletion are mostly population-driven, immigration is the main culprit in sprawl, the energy crisis, groundwater depletion, and so on."*
This type of an argument, completely valid when race rules, becomes the new rule. After all, who wants to be a white American male today (besides a white American female?)? People want the advantages of being American, but no one in their right mind would trade their own culture away for that of modern white America. It reminds us of why we all (white, black, American, Asian, etc...) must be careful that our sense of self (and thus our civilizations) is not based on skin color/race/ethnicity but on principle. We must not be ruled by fear. For if so, globalization quickly turns into turf wars that will destroy it and all those involved.
*Steven A. Camarota, "Immigrants in the United States—2000: A Snapshot of America's Foreign-Born Population," Center for Immigration Studies Backgrounder, January 2001, pp. 1-5;