People seem way too worried about Facebook and not worried enough about fox news.
On the other hand, mass shooting events while interesting/tragic/headline dominating are very rare. I would expect the death caused by empowering any part of the American government to police speech to be much higher than the extra mass shootings that come from tucker.
Indeed, the NZ mass shooter was not inspired by Tucker, as far as I know, since he was in the NZ media space.
I've read a number of these essays and they're always lacking in understanding reality. I'm not a troll. I, unfortunately, have nowhere else to state my views because I've been banned off social media, bub. And not for being mean or a troll. For pointing out the truth. And THAT is the real problem here, bud. Telling the truth is no longer permissible elsewhere. Thankfully there are still some platforms (though rapidly declining) that permit it.
If I was trolling, I'm pretty sure that I wouldn't be giving you long winded replies. But I digress
Ooo now do how left wing media has been going on about the replacement of white Americans for years. How about when the current president spouted this very notion and said it was a great thing.
I'll wait. But here's a link to help you a little, mmmkay?
BTW I am in no way endorsing this viewpoint (I don't think it matters what race the people of a country are, sin still rules in their hearts without God). I just don't think we're being very fair here and to try to pin this on Tucker only tells one side of the story.
As my post makes clear, the question isn’t whether people on the left commit violent acts in the name of their politics. They do (but nowhere near the degree that the right does). The question is whether the left engages in the kind of public discourse that leads to stochastic terrorism.
Well I guess you better keep censoring people on the right for saying things that counter what the elites want (more immigration).
Oh wait! That's already happening.
Honestly, does anyone ever consider the consequences for the policies and actions that they bring about?
Let's take censoring dissenting opinions as an example. And this may seem unrelated, but free speech is incredibly important for a reason.
For two years, if you questioned the covid narrative, you were banned off social media, possibly even had your job taken away from you. So naturally, what happens? Well, since people won't allow you to speak, you have to resort to more extreme means of expressing yourself. Case in point: the Freedom Convoy in Canada. And heck, that wasn't even that extreme, but the media and the government felt the need that they had to "shut it down" because they had "held the country hostage)" (all while ignoring the fact that the government held the people hostage for two years).
So, I ask, what is one to do when you can't express yourself with free speech? I think this demonstrates how incredibly important that policy is. And yet, every time something tragic like this happens, the government and media doubles down even further to stifle speech even more. And then another shooting happens, then they go and do it again. It's a vicious cycle that's only going to keep getting worse.
America is in decline and it's just going to keep getting worse no matter how many immigrants they bring into the country.
Randy: Your way of viewing the world is fundamentally different from mine (I simply don't ascribe much importance to racial identities which have changed over time and will continue to do so in the future. Hence I don't find the demographic replacement or displacement of any group at all alarming or threatening). However, so long as you keep expressing yourself the way you have -- respectfully without resorting to vitriol or profanity -- you can speak your mind on this forum.
I'm not particularly keen on the racial aspects either, because I believe that sin is the ultimate problem and once a country abandons God, all bets are off.
But here's the problem, diversity is only important to the establishment on a very surface level. It's diversity only if you agree with our views on diversity, for example, which is ultimately just to look at race as the be-all-end-all. And THAT'S the problem here.
What veil? I'm not trying to hide behind anything, man. Not interested.
I just think it's incredibly unfair to suggest that Tucker is somehow responsible for this, but BLM (for example) bears no responsibility for Waukesha. Or a better example might be holding the city of Portland hostage for months or having constant roots in the streets that were "mostly peaceful" (allegedly). Give me a break.
No. The word “replace” connotes intentionality and purpose. The white population is declining both absolutely (for the first time ever in the 2020 census) and relatively. Birth rates and immigration, of course, are factors. But that has been true since the Founding (the relative decline, at least). But that doesn’t mean that whites are being “replaced.” It’s not a semantic difference.
Are white people in America being displaced in the very country that they founded?
If a bunch of white folks started moving on droves to, say, Nigeria, I'm pretty sure people would start saying "looks like we're being replaced/displaced by white folks". Like honestly, dude, it's happening. The Democrats are cheering it on (also many Republicans). But if you say it, it's becoming tantamount to promoting "terrorism". Ah what a time to be alive.
Nice straw man there. It is possible to have a discussion over immigration policy or white demographic change without engaging in the kind of behaviors that I identify in the post. The problem isn’t that Tucker Carlson talks about immigration or the demographic change occurring. It’s the way he does it.
Ah shikha, I'm afraid you aren't setting the forest for the trees (a problem that seems all too common among people who don't like populism).
I'll just ask one question and answer if you will (though on not going to hold my breath).
Are white people, simply on a numbers basis, effectively being replaced in America? I could go even further and suggest this is happening all across the west (for a number of different reasons) but let's just keep it up America. So I'll repeat the question.
Are white people, merely on a numbers basis, effectively being replaced in America?
The obvious problem with this is that the people in the Buffalo grocery store weren't immigrants. It could be that, even if the shooter was influenced by ambient anti-immigrant beliefs, he chose his target because he is mentally ill.
Here is what his manifesto said about black people: "We must crush immigration and deport those invaders already living on our soil.” “It would have eased me if I knew all the blacks I would be killing were criminals or future criminals, but then I realized all black people are replacers just by existing in White countries.” “There is no non-white living on White lands that is innocent.”
As the editor notes, I'm not linking to the manifesto. But I am in possession of it and have read it. It is clear that Gendron views Black Americans as equivalent to immigrants in his frame of Great Replacement Theory. It just so happened that the closest target set to him was a Black community.
Tucker Carlsson, a right-wing collectivist with dangerous minds
Diversity is not opposite to unity. Diversity is opposite to uniformity. It is like in Star Wars with Republic vs the Empire
People seem way too worried about Facebook and not worried enough about fox news.
On the other hand, mass shooting events while interesting/tragic/headline dominating are very rare. I would expect the death caused by empowering any part of the American government to police speech to be much higher than the extra mass shootings that come from tucker.
Indeed, the NZ mass shooter was not inspired by Tucker, as far as I know, since he was in the NZ media space.
Love all the troll comments from right wingers who obviously haven't read any of the essays.
I've read a number of these essays and they're always lacking in understanding reality. I'm not a troll. I, unfortunately, have nowhere else to state my views because I've been banned off social media, bub. And not for being mean or a troll. For pointing out the truth. And THAT is the real problem here, bud. Telling the truth is no longer permissible elsewhere. Thankfully there are still some platforms (though rapidly declining) that permit it.
If I was trolling, I'm pretty sure that I wouldn't be giving you long winded replies. But I digress
Ooo now do how left wing media has been going on about the replacement of white Americans for years. How about when the current president spouted this very notion and said it was a great thing.
I'll wait. But here's a link to help you a little, mmmkay?
BTW I am in no way endorsing this viewpoint (I don't think it matters what race the people of a country are, sin still rules in their hearts without God). I just don't think we're being very fair here and to try to pin this on Tucker only tells one side of the story.
https://anncoulter.com/2022/05/18/here-are-the-nutcases-who-believe-in-replacementx/
Buffalo shooter repeated right wing Trump and Tucker lines verbatim.
One more thing, Jim. Two can play this game.
The Waukesha attacker repeated left wing Black Lives Matter and Critical Race Theory lines verbatim.
But go on how this only ever happens on the right.
As my post makes clear, the question isn’t whether people on the left commit violent acts in the name of their politics. They do (but nowhere near the degree that the right does). The question is whether the left engages in the kind of public discourse that leads to stochastic terrorism.
Well I guess you better keep censoring people on the right for saying things that counter what the elites want (more immigration).
Oh wait! That's already happening.
Honestly, does anyone ever consider the consequences for the policies and actions that they bring about?
Let's take censoring dissenting opinions as an example. And this may seem unrelated, but free speech is incredibly important for a reason.
For two years, if you questioned the covid narrative, you were banned off social media, possibly even had your job taken away from you. So naturally, what happens? Well, since people won't allow you to speak, you have to resort to more extreme means of expressing yourself. Case in point: the Freedom Convoy in Canada. And heck, that wasn't even that extreme, but the media and the government felt the need that they had to "shut it down" because they had "held the country hostage)" (all while ignoring the fact that the government held the people hostage for two years).
So, I ask, what is one to do when you can't express yourself with free speech? I think this demonstrates how incredibly important that policy is. And yet, every time something tragic like this happens, the government and media doubles down even further to stifle speech even more. And then another shooting happens, then they go and do it again. It's a vicious cycle that's only going to keep getting worse.
America is in decline and it's just going to keep getting worse no matter how many immigrants they bring into the country.
Randy: Your way of viewing the world is fundamentally different from mine (I simply don't ascribe much importance to racial identities which have changed over time and will continue to do so in the future. Hence I don't find the demographic replacement or displacement of any group at all alarming or threatening). However, so long as you keep expressing yourself the way you have -- respectfully without resorting to vitriol or profanity -- you can speak your mind on this forum.
Thank you.
I'm not particularly keen on the racial aspects either, because I believe that sin is the ultimate problem and once a country abandons God, all bets are off.
But here's the problem, diversity is only important to the establishment on a very surface level. It's diversity only if you agree with our views on diversity, for example, which is ultimately just to look at race as the be-all-end-all. And THAT'S the problem here.
“…No matter how many immigrants they bring into the country.” Thanks for dropping your veil.
What veil? I'm not trying to hide behind anything, man. Not interested.
I just think it's incredibly unfair to suggest that Tucker is somehow responsible for this, but BLM (for example) bears no responsibility for Waukesha. Or a better example might be holding the city of Portland hostage for months or having constant roots in the streets that were "mostly peaceful" (allegedly). Give me a break.
Are white people effectively being replaced on a numerical basis?
No. The word “replace” connotes intentionality and purpose. The white population is declining both absolutely (for the first time ever in the 2020 census) and relatively. Birth rates and immigration, of course, are factors. But that has been true since the Founding (the relative decline, at least). But that doesn’t mean that whites are being “replaced.” It’s not a semantic difference.
Maybe a better word would be "displaced" then.
Are white people in America being displaced in the very country that they founded?
If a bunch of white folks started moving on droves to, say, Nigeria, I'm pretty sure people would start saying "looks like we're being replaced/displaced by white folks". Like honestly, dude, it's happening. The Democrats are cheering it on (also many Republicans). But if you say it, it's becoming tantamount to promoting "terrorism". Ah what a time to be alive.
Nice straw man there. It is possible to have a discussion over immigration policy or white demographic change without engaging in the kind of behaviors that I identify in the post. The problem isn’t that Tucker Carlson talks about immigration or the demographic change occurring. It’s the way he does it.
Actually, Ramesh Ponnuru, a National Review writer who is no friend of immigration or the left, responded to the caricature that Ann presents of the Democratic position even before she wrote it: https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2022-05-18/buffalo-massacre-great-replacement-theory-is-a-grand-delusion?sref=XcONO5zf
Ah shikha, I'm afraid you aren't setting the forest for the trees (a problem that seems all too common among people who don't like populism).
I'll just ask one question and answer if you will (though on not going to hold my breath).
Are white people, simply on a numbers basis, effectively being replaced in America? I could go even further and suggest this is happening all across the west (for a number of different reasons) but let's just keep it up America. So I'll repeat the question.
Are white people, merely on a numbers basis, effectively being replaced in America?
See my other response to this question.
The obvious problem with this is that the people in the Buffalo grocery store weren't immigrants. It could be that, even if the shooter was influenced by ambient anti-immigrant beliefs, he chose his target because he is mentally ill.
And in a certain way all mass killers are mentally ill. But that does not mean they are not influenced by ideas that they hear around them.
Here is what his manifesto said about black people: "We must crush immigration and deport those invaders already living on our soil.” “It would have eased me if I knew all the blacks I would be killing were criminals or future criminals, but then I realized all black people are replacers just by existing in White countries.” “There is no non-white living on White lands that is innocent.”
Thank you for the additional information. I haven't read the shooter's manifesto yet and I'm only cursorily familiar with the Replacement Theory.
As the editor notes, I'm not linking to the manifesto. But I am in possession of it and have read it. It is clear that Gendron views Black Americans as equivalent to immigrants in his frame of Great Replacement Theory. It just so happened that the closest target set to him was a Black community.