this post was submitted on 16 Sep 2024
43 points (100.0% liked)

politics

18892 readers
3542 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Donald Trump made clear on the Philadelphia debate stage this week, as he has throughout his three presidential campaigns, the basis of his run for office. Trump is running on the platform that non-white immigration is an existential threat to the nation. This time around, Trump has made his primary message, the so-called Great Replacement Theory (GRT), more vivid than ever. It is therefore of existential importance in understanding the stakes of this election to have clearly in mind what has happened in the past when GRT has been the central driving narrative both of individuals and of states.

According to the Great Replacement Theory, the nation’s greatness, its traditions and its practitioners, are existentially imperiled by an influx of foreign races, ethnicities or religions. The foreign elements are sometimes described in the narrative of GRT, as vermin or diseases.

GRT was central to the official Nazi motivation for the genocide of the Jews of Europe. Hitler blamed the loss of World War I on Jewish betrayal of Germany. But this betrayal, for Hitler, was intimately connected to the Great Replacement Theory, via the introduction of Black soldiers in the French army subsequently occupying the Rhineland, the so-called “Black Horror on the Rhine.” In Mein Kampf, Hitler writes:

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Kaboom@reddthat.com 1 points 3 days ago (5 children)

I mean, I didn't read the article, but anyone can go look at the demographics over time and see that white people are having less babies, and becoming less of a majority every census. It's not a theory, it's statistical fact.

[–] barsquid@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

How much of that is because the same racists focused on "replacement" decided that they will judge children using the same "one drop" bullshit they have always used so they can exclude more people from "whiteness?"

[–] Glide@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

The theory isn't the statistic. The statistic is true. The theory is that there is a concentrated effort to replace white culture, values and people. In reality, white people have just been well off long enough that our culture has shifted away from having a ton of children.

Plus, the entire premise is predicated on the idea that having fewer white people, relative to other ethnic groups, is a bad thing. It's not, but the people who give this theory the time of day are racist, so they see it as a problem. It is not.

[–] barsquid@lemmy.world -1 points 3 days ago

I've seen racists online whining about media showing mixed race couples as part of their conspiracy theories. But it requires a bunch of racist assumptions to say that children there are not carrying on their parents' culture and traditions.

[–] todd_bonzalez@lemm.ee 0 points 3 days ago

That doesn't mean you're being replaced. It means demographics are changing, like they always do.

If you feel threatened by that, you do you, but I don't give a shit.

[–] Gerudo@lemm.ee 0 points 3 days ago (1 children)

The issue is, do you see that as a problem? Yes, our demographic is changing, no one is denying it. To the vast majority of people, it's not a problem though.

[–] Kaboom@reddthat.com 0 points 3 days ago (1 children)

The issue isn't one of race. It's of defeating unions by importing cheap abusable labor. The propoganda here is making it out to be racist, when it's a class issue.

[–] Gerudo@lemm.ee 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The only ones out here trying to defeat unions are the Rs.

[–] Kaboom@reddthat.com 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Are you sure about that? Or are they trying to break them in different ways?

[–] Gerudo@lemm.ee 1 points 2 days ago

Same difference?

[–] Nougat@fedia.io 0 points 3 days ago (1 children)

And this only matters to people who think that "whiteness" is somehow better than "non-whiteness."

[–] NABDad@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

Or people who know how minorities are treated and are therefore afraid to become one.