What happens when Great Replacement Theory wins an election
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:
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.
Except no one is being “replaced”. We’re all still here. And if I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt you’re merely forgetting all that goes with GRT. The supposed intentionality, the inherent value judgment, the conspiracies, the implication that it’s somehow a “problem”… the less charitable interpretation is that you’re intentionally glossing over it and pretending naivety.
Yeah, the issue is calling it "replacement" instead of a demographic shift. The replacement part makes it feel like a bad thing. It's just a natural shift that is no longer as artificially repressed by those in power as it used to be.
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.
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.
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.
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.
They're head is jammed WAY up their own ass. They post from reddthat.com which doesn't support down voting so they don't get their feelings hurt posting conservative opinions all over Lemmy. I bet they have no clue that nearly every post of theirs is universally hated if it expressed a political opinion.
Yeah I read the rest of their response and their response to another poster calling replace theory "a fact" and realized how willfully ignorant they are. I don't even need to know where they normally post.
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?"