If you believe on The Great Replacement Theory, what are your arguments?

[Dassier]

Wasnt sure where to post it, but here it goes.
I wasnt aware on how widespread the great replacement theory was until very recently. I find the whole idea very worrying, so i'd like to know how the people that actually believe it actually do.
I myself am in a weird position in relation to this theory. I am a white latino, and not like the people in my country that believe they're white because theyre not black (and are incredibly racist in consequence). I am actually just a white latino. So in this case, if i moved to, say, germany, would i be part of the great replacement? I am different from a regular white, after all. I get toasty in the sun instead of burning, my genetic origins are all over the place and i am in no way the "Ideal Aryan". Let me know.

(Please dont get too spicy im just curious)

 

[Peacenik]

It's just xenophobia rearing it's ugly head among those who have issues. There is beauty and greatness in diversity but the immature want someone to blame.

 

[Grand Mal]

Wasnt sure where to post it, but here it goes.
I wasnt aware on how widespread the great replacement theory was until very recently. I find the whole idea very worrying, so i'd like to know how the people that actually believe it actually do.
I myself am in a weird position in relation to this theory. I am a white latino, and not like the people in my country that believe they're white because theyre not black (and are incredibly racist in consequence). I am actually just a white latino. So in this case, if i moved to, say, germany, would i be part of the great replacement? I am different from a regular white, after all. I get toasty in the sun instead of burning, my genetic origins are all over the place and i am in no way the "Ideal Aryan". Let me know.

(Please dont get too spicy im just curious)

Anyone who worries about 'aryan' whites being replaced in Europe needs to talk to Mexicans in Cabo, Acapulco, PV, etc. about gringos buying up the rental properties and paying more for a week AirBnB than Mexicans can afford for two months rent.

 

[SNOWFLAKE]

Great White Replacement Theory is not a theory, it's happening right before our eyes. Thankfully Donald Trump is rounding up lots and lots of black n brown people and shippin' 'em out and bringing in white South Afrikaners to correct the imbalance.

 

[dmpi]

Great White Replacement Theory is not a theory, it's happening right before our eyes. Thankfully Donald Trump is rounding up lots and lots of black n brown people and shippin' 'em out and bringing in white South Afrikaners to correct the imbalance.

Getting rid of people that sneak in isn't replacing anything.

 

[joluoto]

The theory is something like this "them Jews are secretly smuggling in Muslims and Latino gangbangers and Niggers to replace all White people, because they are evil". That's about it. Terrible theory by terrible people. And there is absolutely no truth in it.

 

[dmpi]

OP is lacking in that he did not define his view of what the "The Great Replacement Theory" is.

 

[Individual]

What are we needing/wanting to replace?

 

[Gozaburo]

Wasnt sure where to post it, but here it goes.
I wasnt aware on how widespread the great replacement theory was until very recently. I find the whole idea very worrying, so i'd like to know how the people that actually believe it actually do.
I myself am in a weird position in relation to this theory. I am a white latino, and not like the people in my country that believe they're white because theyre not black (and are incredibly racist in consequence). I am actually just a white latino. So in this case, if i moved to, say, germany, would i be part of the great replacement? I am different from a regular white, after all. I get toasty in the sun instead of burning, my genetic origins are all over the place and i am in no way the "Ideal Aryan". Let me know.

(Please dont get too spicy im just curious)

It's a conspiracy theory tangentially related to a real phenomenon.

It's true that most immigration (as a % of population) is directed from the global south to wealthy countries in the West, but these types of migration patterns have happened throughout history, typically via conquest or via weather/climate patterns.

'The Great Replacement' posits that this current pattern is an intentional byproduct of global liberal capitalism instead of a natural, potentially unforeseen consequence. The argument is that, unlike migratory movements of the past, this one is done covertly by lulling Western nations into pacifism via material wealth and grand diversity narratives.

I tend to disagree that these migratory patterns are a consequence of some grand conspiracy, but I do understand the cautious nature of some, as it's pretty obvious what these migratory patterns have led to in the past, which is the total revolution, if not destruction, of native cultures. I tend to take a rather neutral position in that I believe cultural hegemony belongs to those with the will to power to take it and will it upon a nation. If what came before is destroyed by global liberalism, then what came before doesn't have the right to wield power.

 

[SNOWFLAKE]

Getting rid of people that sneak in isn't replacing anything.

bringing in white South Afrikaners to correct the imbalance.

 

[SNOWFLAKE]

OP is lacking in that he did not define his view of what the "The Great Replacement Theory" is.

Ok, fair enough, what is YOUR definition?

 

[dmpi]

Ok, fair enough, what is YOUR definition?

I don't even know what it is. I would have to goggle it and formulate my own definition. I would rather read his definition and provide a response to that.

 

[Dassier]

I don't even know what it is. I would have to goggle it and formulate my own definition. I would rather read his definition and provide a response to that.

The great replacement theory, to my knowledge, is the belief that the migration and demographics over the last decades have been caused by liberal governments permitting mass inmigration into the global north/west, from the global south/east, and that this has been intentional as to "genocide" white people and replace them with non-white. I personally am paramountly opposed to this, and while i do recognize that demographics have not been favouring white folks as of late, it is by no means something intentional or even inherently negative. I, of course, am of the belief white people have been reproducing less not because of the spoooooky feminism and gender stuff ooooo- but because they often are more educated and aware of the consecuences of a child and how to avoid unwanted pregnancies. I dont think anyone (sane) thinks thats negative. What is negative, is the fact many of the people inmigrating to the mentioned countries are less educated and prepared to avoid pregnancies and less aware as to the consequences of children. This is not negative because "Oooooo white people are being replaced oooooO" but because it overall lowers their standard of living and their opportunities in life, as well as their life expectancy and that of those children.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

OP is lacking in that he did not define his view of what the "The Great Replacement Theory" is.

It’s clear that OP is referring to the great replacement theory as it is intended to be understood.

 

[dmpi]

The great replacement theory, to my knowledge, is the belief that the migration and demographics over the last decades have been caused by liberal governments permitting mass inmigration into the global north/west, from the global south/east, and that this has been intentional as to "genocide" white people and replace them with non-white. I personally am paramountly opposed to this, and while i do recognize that demographics have not been favouring white folks as of late, it is by no means something intentional or even inherently negative. I, of course, am of the belief white people have been reproducing less not because of the spoooooky feminism and gender stuff ooooo- but because they often are more educated and aware of the consecuences of a child and how to avoid unwanted pregnancies. I dont think anyone (sane) thinks thats negative. What is negative, is the fact many of the people inmigrating to the mentioned countries are less educated and prepared to avoid pregnancies and less aware as to the consequences of children. This is not negative because "Oooooo white people are being replaced oooooO" but because it overall lowers their standard of living and their opportunities in life, as well as their life expectancy and that of those children.

The great replacement theory is international in scope. So I will assume your post refers to the context of the USA. America is a democratic society where everyone's vote counts. That's why numbers are important. Also important is the fact that people tend to vote along racial and cultural lines. I think you will find a linkage between immigrants and voting. Recent Immigrants tend to vote Democrat because that party is less restrictive and more conducive to 'free-open' immigration. Even though illegals cannot legally vote they still support and add to an ethnic community. The more the merrier. My view is that the Democrats uses immigration as a political strategy to win election. But the downside is that it can easily get out of control and we experienced under Biden. Birthrates is a cultural phenomena, with American immigration laws, if you're born in America you're automatically a citizen. Some cultures have a lot of kids. That adds to the 'replacement'. So to sum it up I would say, yes it is happening and yes, its a conspiracy.

 

[element94]

What are we needing/wanting to replace?

Confederate cretins?

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

It's a conspiracy theory tangentially related to a real phenomenon.

It's true that most immigration (as a % of population) is directed from the global south to wealthy countries in the West, but these types of migration patterns have happened throughout history, typically via conquest or via weather/climate patterns.

'The Great Replacement' posits that this current pattern is an intentional byproduct of global liberal capitalism instead of a natural, potentially unforeseen consequence. The argument is that, unlike migratory movements of the past, this one is done covertly by lulling Western nations into pacifism via material wealth and grand diversity narratives.

I tend to disagree that these migratory patterns are a consequence of some grand conspiracy, but I do understand the cautious nature of some, as it's pretty obvious what these migratory patterns have led to in the past, which is the total revolution, if not destruction, of native cultures. I tend to take a rather neutral position in that I believe cultural hegemony belongs to those with the will to power to take it and will it upon a nation. If what came before is destroyed by global liberalism, then what came before doesn't have the right to wield power.

Current immigration to North America US primarily from non European countries.

Prior to 1980 immigration to Canada was still mostly from Europe, and went in different waves, Ukrainians in the 1920s, Germans 1930s Italians in the 1950s, eastern Europeans in the 80s and 90s.

Then in the 2000s Chinese, South Asians and Philippinos.

It is not replacement, but a simple fact in that Europeans don't want to immigrate to North America in large numbers anymore

 

[Michael Cole]

It's a conspiracy theory tangentially related to a real phenomenon.

It's true that most immigration (as a % of population) is directed from the global south to wealthy countries in the West, but these types of migration patterns have happened throughout history, typically via conquest or via weather/climate patterns.

'The Great Replacement' posits that this current pattern is an intentional byproduct of global liberal capitalism instead of a natural, potentially unforeseen consequence. The argument is that, unlike migratory movements of the past, this one is done covertly by lulling Western nations into pacifism via material wealth and grand diversity narratives.

I tend to disagree that these migratory patterns are a consequence of some grand conspiracy, but I do understand the cautious nature of some, as it's pretty obvious what these migratory patterns have led to in the past, which is the total revolution, if not destruction, of native cultures. I tend to take a rather neutral position in that I believe cultural hegemony belongs to those with the will to power to take it and will it upon a nation. If what came before is destroyed by global liberalism, then what came before doesn't have the right to wield power.

Migration to the US has always been predicated on achieving the American dream, arriving on our shores with only a nickel in your pocket.

Poor immigrants fueled the industrialization of the US. They arrived ready to work, took jobs natives didn't want to do, and within a generation or two, became the quintessential American family.

Some, like Irish and Italians, weren't considered white. The Founding of this country is specifically Anglo. I remember Jeff Sessions telling Justice Sotomayor that she needed to Anglicize the pronunciation of her name, so this sentiment is still strong with some.

If Europe were still poor, as are the nations to our south, we'd still be seeing "white" migration from its shores. The cycle of liberal economics requires growth, which involves low-level labor at minimal pay. This is achieved naturally as long as there exist disparities in wealth between nations. The goal can indeed be equilibrium worldwide, with each country becoming what we call wealthy, or industrialized. This would seem ideal, but in such a world, there would be no impoverished migrant class to fuel growth. The world economy would be vastly different.

Americans were once hateful toward those brownish people who spoke a funny language. Italians. Funny thing about Italians; they resist assimilation. I knew families back in Chicago that were third generation and still spoke Italian in the home. Hispanics assimilate faster than any other have. These fears about cultural change are misguided. Hispanic kids grow up to be Raiders fans. And they speak English.

 

[Gozaburo]

Then in the 2000s Chinese, South Asians and Philippinos.

It is not replacement, but a simple fact in that Europeans don't want to immigrate to North America in large numbers anymore

I think either way this is eventually going to lead to the hegemonic status of European culture being called into question. The WASP - in any real sense - is all but extinct at this point. Whether or not that is a good things seems to be a matter of taste.

Some, like Irish and Italians, weren't considered white. The Founding of this country is specifically Anglo. I remember Jeff Sessions telling Justice Sotomayor that she needed to Anglicize the pronunciation of her name, so this sentiment is still strong with some.

Sorry, but I have to push back here because this is patently untrue. Irish and Italians weren't included in miscegenation laws and it's largely a myth that they weren't considered "white". The racial science of the 19/20th century is very esoteric to be fair, but this isn't an accurate characterization.

If Europe were still poor, as are the nations to our south, we'd still be seeing "white" migration from its shores. The cycle of liberal economics requires growth, which involves low-level labor at minimal pay. This is achieved naturally as long as there exist disparities in wealth between nations. The goal can indeed be equilibrium worldwide, with each country becoming what we call wealthy, or industrialized. This would seem ideal, but in such a world, there would be no impoverished migrant class to fuel growth. The world economy would be vastly different.

I have some thoughts on this, but perhaps out of scope in this thread. In summary I question the regressive notion that low skill labor will always be a good thing or a necessity. I think in the future we will look at these massive movements from the global south to the West much in the same way as we looked at slaves and provincial servants under Rome - a half measure that ultimately halted engineering, technical progress, and innovation.

Americans were once hateful toward those brownish people who spoke a funny language. Italians. Funny thing about Italians; they resist assimilation. I knew families back in Chicago that were third generation and still spoke Italian in the home. Hispanics assimilate faster than any other have. These fears about cultural change are misguided. Hispanic kids grow up to be Raiders fans. And they speak English.

To be fair, not all Italians were viewed equally. It's true that people used to make fun of Sicilians for being more North African/Berber than European, but Northern Italians are mostly Nordics and Germanics. On the question of Hispanics: this is actually a phenomenon I didn't wholly anticipate 15 - 20 years ago and clearly many liberals didn't either. It turns out that many Hispanics are Castizo-identifying devout Catholics and trend toward a more historically conservative interpretation of American culture and politics than liberal whites and blacks do.

And while I agree Hispanics assimilate fairly well in a loose sense, I do still think that there is a clear fabric of life difference between somewhere like New England (the last holdout of the WASP) and the American Southwest.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Given that the US was not conceived as a country with a certain ethnic make up, great replacement is literally impossible.

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

I think either way this is eventually going to lead to the hegemonic status of European culture being called into question. The WASP - in any real sense - is all but extinct at this point. Whether or not that is a good things seems to be a matter of taste.



Sorry, but I have to push back here because this is patently untrue. Irish and Italians weren't included in miscegenation laws and it's largely a myth that they weren't considered "white". The racial science of the 19/20th century is very esoteric to be fair, but this isn't an accurate characterization.



I have some thoughts on this, but perhaps out of scope in this thread. In summary I question the regressive notion that low skill labor will always be a good thing or a necessity. I think in the future we will look at these massive movements from the global south to the West much in the same way as we looked at slaves and provincial servants under Rome - a half measure that ultimately halted engineering, technical progress, and innovation.



To be fair, not all Italians were viewed equally. It's true that people used to make fun of Sicilians for being more North African/Berber than European, but Northern Italians are mostly Nordics and Germanics. On the question of Hispanics: this is actually a phenomenon I didn't wholly anticipate 15 - 20 years ago and clearly many liberals didn't either. It turns out that many Hispanics are Castizo-identifying devout Catholics and trend toward a more historically conservative interpretation of American culture and politics than liberal whites and blacks do.

And while I agree Hispanics assimilate fairly well in a loose sense, I do still think that there is a clear fabric of life difference between somewhere like New England (the last holdout of the WASP) and the American Southwest.

The Irish were heavily discriminated against, treated as badly as Chinese for example, but not massively enslaved like blacks. Difference being after 2 generations in the US it would be hard to tell an ethnic Irish from an ethnic English person in the US

 

[Dassier]

I think you will find a linkage between immigrants and voting.

Yes, the linkage favouring trump as of late
Quoting the liberal, right leaning Cato Institute

Trump likely won the immigrant vote. Naturalized immigrants went from favoring Biden in 2020 by 27 points to favoring Trump by one point

Safe to assume inmigration does not always favour the "left"

Recent Immigrants tend to vote Democrat because that party is less restrictive and more conducive to 'free-open' immigration.

This is a misconception. Often times the population of third-world countries is divided and even despective towards groups americans would all class as the same. There is also the fact that, if you have recently secured being naturalized into the country, often times a difficult and grueling, long-term task, you probably dont appreciate random individuals from a specific people from your country you dont like skipping the process you had to go through.

Even though illegals cannot legally vote they still support and add to an ethnic community. The more the merrier. My view is that the Democrats uses immigration as a political strategy to win election.

See above, as a latino myself i can assure you, we are just as divided if not even more than you are. Americans tend to forget their political party spectrum is slightly bigger than a one-party dictatorship. The rest of countries have relevant parties ranging from communists to fascist remnants.

Overall, in my opinion, at least, there is no reason to believe apart from a superficial understanding that inmigrants benefit the "left" at all.

 

[Gozaburo]

The Irish were heavily discriminated against, treated as badly as Chinese for example, but not massively enslaved like blacks. Difference being after 2 generations in the US it would be hard to tell an ethnic Irish from an ethnic English person in the US

I think as a country "racially" diversifies, ethnic tension becomes less important. The more non-white a country becomes, the more white inter-ethnic conflict becomes irrelevant. It's an interesting phenomenon.

I will say that I think the ethnic tension between an Englishman and an Irishman is fundamentally different from the ethnic tension between a "white" man and a "black" man, so when people say things like "Well we used to discriminate against the Irish but now no on cares!" I think there's some wisdom in that, but I also think it's missing some needed historical and geographical context.

 

[eohrnberger]

"If you believe on The Great Replacement Theory, what are your arguments?"

The Democrats can't seem to stop talking about it.

Shit, they don't try to catch them as all. Biden's, and his leftist extremist puppet masters pulling his strings, have turned the Customs and Border Protection agency into a 'Process Illegal Immigrants to release them into the country as fast as humanly possible' agency, complete with national security threats and all.

I'm just waiting for Democrats / Liberals / Progressives to start demanding voting rights for illegal immigrants.

It would be reasonable that congressional appropriations should be driven by the number of Americans citizens.

Trump Sued Over Attempt To Omit Unauthorized Immigrants From A Key Census Count​

https://www.npr.org/2020/07/24/8943...authorized-immigrants-from-a-key-census-count​

These legal challenges are from left wing organizations.
Those left wing organizations apparently want to have unauthorized immigrants count the same as US citizens when it comes to politics and governing.

Recall that congressional apportionment is based on census data and that congressional apportionment is what determines electoral college electors.

That's the Democrats / Liberals / Progressives just hurrying along their 'Replacement Theory'. Yes, THEIR 'Replacement Theory'.

Even one is one too many.
These people shouldn't even be in the country.

Thank Biden. Thanks Myorkas.

It's not like this is by accident, an unforeseeable outcome.
Biden and Myorkas have been planning to implement their 'Replacement Theory' for years, and this is it.

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

I think as a country "racially" diversifies, ethnic tension becomes less important. The more non-white a country becomes, the more white inter-ethnic conflict becomes irrelevant. It's an interesting phenomenon.

I will say that I think the ethnic tension between an Englishman and an Irishman is fundamentally different from the ethnic tension between a "white" man and a "black" man, so when people say things like "Well we used to discriminate against the Irish but now no on cares!" I think there's some wisdom in that, but I also think it's missing some needed historical and geographical context.

The context is that when walking down the street it is nearly impossible to identify an ethnic Irish person, while very easy to identify an ethnic Nigerian.

So over time it becomes difficult to continue racial biases against Irish, while easy to do so against ethnic Nigerians