The evil of Replacement Theory

[EasternVol]

Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.

But if you've got a limp or a cough, back you go!

 

[luthervol]

But they don't lead there and haven't. Whether you admit it (or even recognize your bias) or not you are linking demographics to individual values. Despite the steady margin of changing demographics the political outcomes have not followed. It's likely that after the midterms the GOP will hold advantages at all levels of state and Federal government except of the POTUS.

If you look at the post-war history of the Senate it used to be highly dominated by Dems but as the demographics have changed so has the balance of the Senate but in the opposite of the predicted direction. (Senate held by Ds from 1955-1981, 1987 - 1995, then started swapping back and forth)

You have to go a little deeper. The 2 party system will always split at around 50 / 50. The changing demographics is what causes the 50/50 dividing line to always move left.

How many times have you seen in the PF alone - the dem party of 30 years ago is no more, I use to be a dem but the party left me, the party has moved to far left, Kennedy would be a repub if he were alive today. things of that nature.

The repubs will move as far left as necessary to attract 50% and remain viable .....but no further.
The dems will move as far left as they can, but only to the point where they remain viable - appeal to 50%
Repubs want to be as conservative as possible but still win.
Dems want to be as liberal as possible but still win.
The shift of the midpoint is where your focus should be. And that shift is largely caused by changing demographics.

 

[Vol8188]

You have to go a little deeper. The 2 party system will always split at around 50 / 50. The changing demographics is what causes the 50/50 dividing line to always move left.

How many times have you seen in the PF alone - the dem party of 30 years ago is no more, I use to be a dem but the party left me, the party has moved to far left, Kennedy would be a repub if he were alive today. things of that nature.

The repubs will move as far left as necessary to attract 50% and remain viable .....but no further.
The dems will move as far left as they can, but only to the point where they remain viable - appeal to 50%
Repubs want to be as conservative as possible but still win.
Dems want to be as liberal as possible but still win.
The shift of the midpoint is where your focus should be. And that shift is largely caused by changing demographics.

I don’t completely disagree with this. But it doesn’t change the fact that many on the left see shifting demographics as their saving grace

 

[volinbham]

You have to go a little deeper. The 2 party system will always split at around 50 / 50. The changing demographics is what causes the 50/50 dividing line to always move left.

How many times have you seen in the PF alone - the dem party of 30 years ago is no more, I use to be a dem but the party left me, the party has moved to far left, Kennedy would be a repub if he were alive today. things of that nature.

The repubs will move as far left as necessary to attract 50% and remain viable .....but no further.
The dems will move as far left as they can, but only to the point where they remain viable - appeal to 50%
Repubs want to be as conservative as possible but still win.
Dems want to be as liberal as possible but still win.
The shift of the midpoint is where your focus should be. And that shift is largely caused by changing demographics.

But it has not and does not split 50/50. For example the D advantage in the Senate was often over 60% during their long reign in power. Conversely, the states are over 60% controlled (legislatively) by Rs and R governors hold 56% of states (has been higher).

Besides, the point was viewing demographic trends as supporting political parties. The data shows that the demographic shift has not changed the party divide and in fact flies in the face (increasing shift and increasing R party seats won).

 

[luthervol]

But it has not and does not split 50/50. For example the D advantage in the Senate was often over 60% during their long reign in power. Conversely, the states are over 60% controlled (legislatively) by Rs and R governors hold 56% of states (has been higher).

Besides, the point was viewing demographic trends as supporting political parties. The data shows that the demographic shift has not changed the party divide and in fact flies in the face (increasing shift and increasing R party seats won).

It's pretty close to 50 / 50. When it gets far off from that, it's a sign that at least one of the two parties has failed to make the correct adjustment, but they eventually will.

 

[OrangeTsar]

Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.

t the Statue of Liberty, where LEGAL Immigrants arrived for regulated ingress through Ellis Island

 

[DC_Vol]

Only 35% approve of the job Biden has done on immigration with 60% disapproving. To follow the logic of this thread the majority of the country is racist and buys into RT.

It's classic demonization of political opponents and it's pundits. It's poison for the country but for some reason the Dems (in this case) see it as a winning strategy so they take a fringe situation and assert it is the core of the GOP.

Pretty heinous route to power but that's where we are.

Not surprising at all that it was brought to the table here at VN by LG, a true master baiter.

 

[lawgator1]

After the NY Subway shooting or the Dallas BLM shooting did you blame left wing rhetoric and racial divisions?

Or is it only bad when you perceive it from the right? I’m not seeing this racial messaging you’re accusing Fox News of or Tucker for that matter

Any sort of promotion of race-based violence is abhorrent and counterproductive in the extreme. I can't stand Sharpton. Or militant BLM. They are just as bad as white supremacists.

 

[lawgator1]

Not surprising at all that it was brought to the table here at VN by LG, a true master baiter.

False.

There are plenty of legitimate objections to immigration policy in the US. It's just that race is not one of them.

 

[Vol8188]

Any sort of promotion of race-based violence is abhorrent and counterproductive in the extreme. I can't stand Sharpton. Or militant BLM. They are just as bad as white supremacists.

On that I agree. But the media as a whole does not and such things get down played. When left wing violence occurs, it's gone from the news in a day. When right wing violence occurs we are told a national conversation regarding racism and right wing extremism must take place and we are provided outright lies that mass shooters are disproportionately white.

 

[Vol8188]

False.

There are plenty of legitimate objections to immigration policy in the US. It's just that race is not one of them.

Yet race is a clear reason for promoting immigration policy right?

 

[DC_Vol]

False.

There are plenty of legitimate objections to immigration policy in the US. It's just that race is not one of them.

What is false? That you started the thread? Or that you are a master baiter?

 

[85SugarVol]

Oh i can easily summarize what I believe CRT to be so you can attack to your heart‘s content
America is founded on the basis of baked in and systemic racism. Therefore, whites have inherent privilege based on their vey fact of their whiteness. Thus efforts at color blindness and race neutral policies are insufficient to overcome these unavoidable biases and structural advantages for whites. Therefore deliberate and targeted anti racist policies are necessary to provide equitable outcomes across races. This entails whites acknowledging and making amends for their white privilege, even if they re unaware of their Aggressions, be they Macro or micro. Society thus consists of two groups, oppressors no the oppressed. Only the oppressor group can be guilty of racism due to their inherent position of power
Now if you would do me the courtesy of attempting a summary of your understanding of replacement theory, i should be most obliged.

I was not arguing your point

 

[hog88]

The demographics are obviously changing. You would have to be brain dead to not realize that.

The repubs were faced with the dilemma of how to use a negative change to their advantage...
Bingo.....replacement theory.....it's all some grand conspiracy to get whitey.
A bunch of Q type idiots took it hook, line, and sinker. Unfortunately some to a murderous extreme.

Yeah the demographics have been changing and the “replacement theory” was championed and celebrated by LG.

So it looks like another racist theory started by liberals.

 

[OrangeTsar]

I was not arguing your point

Ah, sorry I misunderstood

 

[hog88]

Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.

Put your money where your mouth is and sponsor/employ some of them.

 

[OrangeTsar]

Any sort of promotion of race-based violence is abhorrent and counterproductive in the extreme. I can't stand Sharpton. Or militant BLM. They are just as bad as white supremacists.

Yet BLM gets huge donations from multiple corporations, free corporate statements of support, NFL and NBA tributes and special uniforms, political endorsements, flags flown at government buildings, and congressional representatives taking the knee in support. I wonder why that is? Why would happen if that sort of fawning attention was paid to white supremacy? The left would (rightly) lose their minds. But if I criticize BLM, I am branded a hate filled racist bigot

 

[lawgator1]

On that I agree. But the media as a whole does not and such things get down played. When left wing violence occurs, it's gone from the news in a day. When right wing violence occurs we are told a national conversation regarding racism and right wing extremism must take place and we are provided outright lies that mass shooters are disproportionately white.

That's probably a legitimate criticism. I think you are correct.

 

[luthervol]

Yeah the demographics have been changing and the “replacement theory” was championed and celebrated by LG.

So it looks like another racist theory started by liberals.

He did not. You guys seem to be very confused.
Recognizing the demographic changes that are taking place and that those changes seem to favor dems.
IS IN NO WAY THE SAME AS REPLACEMENT THEORY.

Replacement theory claims that there is a conspiracy headed by leftists global elites to bring about the demise of the white race and replace it with people of color.

Not at all what LG was referencing.

 

[lawgator1]

Yet BLM gets huge donations from multiple corporations, free corporate statements of support, NFL and NBA tributes and special uniforms, political endorsements, flags flown at government buildings, and congressional representatives taking the knee in support. I wonder why that is? Why would happen if that sort of fawning attention was paid to white supremacy? The left would (rightly) lose their minds. But if I criticize BLM, I am branded a hate filled racist bigot

Well, the difference is that BLM has many, many layers of intensity. There are plenty of people who wear BLM shirts and what not simply to call attention to the fact that racism is still a major problem in this country. And that it the end of their involvement. There are on the other hand extremists within BLM that advocate violence. That is by no means acceptable just because its on behalf of BLM. And there are many layers in between.

When it comes to white supremacists I'm not talking about the ones with a confederate flag on their bumpers (though I shake my head at their perspective). I'm talking about the ones that promote or encourage or even just tolerate the mindset of the Buffalo shooter.

Ideally, BLM would disavow all violence and all members of their movement that identify with it. Force them into the narrow crevice left for them so we know who they are. And likewise right wingers would denounce violence and reject connections with people on their extreme.

 

[DC_Vol]

He did not. You guys seem to be very confused.
Recognizing the demographic changes that are taking place and that those changes seem to favor dems.
IS IN NO WAY THE SAME AS REPLACEMENT THEORY.

Replacement theory claims that there is a conspiracy headed by leftists global elites to bring about the demise of the white race and replace it with people of color.

Not at all what LG was referencing.

I’ve never heard this theory before LG posted his link. Has it been discussed here?

 

[hog88]

But they don't lead there and haven't. Whether you admit it (or even recognize your bias) or not you are linking demographics to individual values. Despite the steady margin of changing demographics the political outcomes have not followed. It's likely that after the midterms the GOP will hold advantages at all levels of state and Federal government except of the POTUS.

If you look at the post-war history of the Senate it used to be highly dominated by Dems but as the demographics have changed so has the balance of the Senate but in the opposite of the predicted direction. (Senate held by Ds from 1955-1981, 1987 - 1995, then started swapping back and forth)

Dems (Luther and LG) think skin color determines political leanings.

 

[BowlBrother85]

I don’t completely disagree with this. But it doesn’t change the fact that many on the left see shifting demographics as their saving grace

I don't hear as much of that from the left, as I hear that shifting demographics are a threat from the alt-right.

I'm sure you remember the "Unite the Right" rally in Charlottesville, Virginia in August of 2017, and the "Jews Will Not Replace Us!" chant that ensued from the Tiki torch marchers.

What to know about the civil trial over Charlottesville's deadly "Unite the Right" rally

The Long, Ugly Antisemitic History of "Jews Will Not Replace Us" | November | 2021 | The Jewish Experience | Brandeis University

The Persistence of Hate: What the 2017 Unite the Right Rally Revealed about Contemporary Antisemitism

Why the Charlottesville Marchers Were Obsessed With Jews

 

[luthervol]

I’ve never heard this theory before LG posted his link. Has it been discussed here?

I heard it again a couple of days ago in reference to the shooter. But looking into it, it seems that Fox, especially Tucker, and other more mainstream conservative outlets have started promoting the theory....it was previously more of a Q, 4chan, right-wing nut thing,

 

[Vol8188]

I don't hear as much of that from the left, as I hear that shifting demographics are a threat from the alt-right.

I'm sure you remember the "Unite the Right" rally in Charlottesville, Virginia in August of 2017, and the "Jews Will Not Replace Us!" chant that ensued from the Tiki torch marchers.

What to know about the civil trial over Charlottesville's deadly "Unite the Right" rally

The Long, Ugly Antisemitic History of "Jews Will Not Replace Us" | November | 2021 | The Jewish Experience | Brandeis University

The Persistence of Hate: What the 2017 Unite the Right Rally Revealed about Contemporary Antisemitism

Why the Charlottesville Marchers Were Obsessed With Jews

I've posted multiple links regarding the left talking about shifting demographics and how it ensures their future victories. It's even been mentioned specifically by left wing members of this board before.

How many people total in that "united right" were holding torches and chanting about Jews? 20 maybe if you count the fat ones twice? The idea that such things are wide spread sentiment is purely insane.

The view that left wing supremacy will be created by demographic shifts however is insanely mainstream and even promoted by MSNBC (see previously posted link, or I can post again if you wish).