Majority should not equal supremacy. Why do you think people believe that because a group is in the majority they also have supremacy?
Just want to understand that mind set.
Exactly. They act like everything other than white is lumped together as a race. It looks to me like whites will continue to be the majority for a long time. Besides, what “race” is Hispanic? There are a lot of whites who are Hispanic. At least, when it’s convenient, cough, Zimmerman.
2 Likes
Is that not the very definition of democracy?
No.
Democracy…majority rule does not mean supremacy
Do you think liberal democrats are Supreme to Republicans because they hold the majority?
Do you have any proof of your claim? Your opening post is merely an unsubstantiated pejorative assertion.
Well, the topic was split. Originally I was responding to this post in the other thread:
You also might be interested in:
That is not at all a correct characterisation of Carlson’s concern.
The majoirity that counts is political, because that majority installs governments. Democrats are losing their historical grip on the votes of legal black and latino voters. These demographics are recognising they have been lied to and To maintain their chances of winning future elections Democrats need more voters to cancel out the new Republican votes of their defectors.
Where will they get reliable Democrat voters from ? Those voters need to be poor and naive enough to believe that they are in danger from a US culture that is systemically racist toward them and that they need the protection and patronage of Democrats in power to survive on their welfare handouts.
Yes it does.
Who has hegemony in a democracy?
Democrats, or at least their leaders, seem to believe they are supreme (i.e. superior to republicans).
Why do you think people believe that because a group is in the majority in government they also have supremacy?
Basically, Carlson in that article was noting the intent of Democratic leaders in their open borders policy, and how it might increase the number of Democratic voters.
It’s hard to argue that this is not the intent of many Democrats, so the best defense is to use the tried and true “racist!”
“How dare you notice what we are doing.”
1 Like
Yes. They will use average US citizens’ objection to the illegality of importing of a foreign voting block to manipulate election outcomes, in order to paint those citizens as racists objecting to the races of the illegally imported voting block.
Calling them racists is the truth.
Allan
That simply doesn’t happen in the year 2021.
No persons are illegally imported to the United States to manipulate election results.
Only citizens can vote.
Immigrants do not vote in federal elections until they become citizens.
Allan
Replacement theory is a know racist trope. So when someone espouses it, it does suggest they are racist.
What is “turning Texas purple”?
So I’m still struggling to understand your point here. So I went back this post.
You are equating political constructs with racial groupings, and that just doesn’t make sense. And I can’t really understand why you are dong it.
The republican party is not a ‘white race’ party. Nor is the democratic party. Nor are either of them an ANY RACE party, so it’s a flawed question because our democracy doesn’t grant power to a RACE. It grants power - or hegemony - to a political party.
So again, the answer is, no race should be supreme.
Here is a thorough piece on it:
The short version of the story of Texas’s and California’s divergent fates goes something like this: Unlike in California, where Republicans embraced an anti-immigrant politics that compelled Latino residents to organize politically to defeat them, in Texas, the Republican Party was dominated until relatively recently by George W. Bush–style immigration moderates instead of Trump-style nativists. And whether because of Trumpism alienating young and college-educated white voters, or because of an influx of white liberals from other states, white voters in Texas appear to have become, on average, more moderate.
Also in the past decade, both Democrats and activist groups have made a concerted effort to shift the state’s politics to the left and help underrepresented groups turn out.
“It’s not coming from D.C. consultants swooping in, bringing people that they worked with in a national campaign, and saying, ‘We’ll fix you,’” Manzano said. “It’s people who know the state, who know their particular piece of the state and their communities.”
These efforts showed real results in the 2018 midterms, when Democrat Beto O’Rourke came within three points of unseating incumbent Republican Senator Ted Cruz. Texas’s senior senator, John Cornyn, admitted a few weeks later that “Texas is no longer a reliably red state.”
Texas’s reliable redness, however, is a product of design more than ideology. Texas Republicans have worked hard to raise economic barriers to voting, passing strict voter-ID laws, refusing to allow voters to register online, making it extremely difficult for third parties to register voters, and gerrymandering the state so effectively as to lock Democrats out of power. A study from Northern Illinois University recently found that Texas had the most restrictive voting processes in the country.
People who think they “allow” thought are exactly the types that commit mass murder in the name of ideology.
1 Like
Get it yet?
That Atlantic article is pure garbage.
And there again is the Latino lumping.
I,went back and read the article that is apparently the source of this latest outrage. He does reference to what he says others call ”replacement theory”. But what he is talking about is the intention of those who want an open border policy and their expectation of using that for political gain. They have bragged about how that will turn Texas and therefore pretty much guarantee a Democrat social left President forever.
Is Carlson noting this worse than doing it?
So instead of defending the action of what is alleged, the deflection of Carlson referencing “replacement theory” is used, as if that were the real problem.
