And there’s the problem. Thank you.
This is precisely what is being missed. The lumping. The attempt at some “plurality”.
When you look at the racial demographics of the US, which race do you believe is going to surpass “white”?
This is TV Man stirring up the fire and creating false expectations.
I don’t. Why would you believe I do?
Hegemony, Hegemony, the dominance of one group over another , often supported by legitimating norms and ideas. … The associated term hegemon is used to identify the actor, group, class, or state that exercises hegemonic power or that is responsible for the dissemination of hegemonic ideas.
Britannica
Who decides?
I heard by 2025 at least several times a decade or so ago. Like every other prediction, we can never quite seem to catch up to them. 
Must there be dominance of one group over another?
There is a difference between saying the US is a majority white nation and should be a majority white nation.
A difference between not caring who is majority, and wanting to protect majority whiteness.
Ah. I was wondering where you went.
[quote=“WuWei, post:12, topic:240264, full:true”]
You asked what criteria to use to determine who is supreme.
I don’t care for the use of “dominance” in this context, but yes.
Competing goals demands it. Somebody has to decide.
But I think the mistake is one of grouping by race.
By race, who is going to surpass “white”, the current decider?
Why should any race be supreme?
Of course it is different. Forget what TV Man says, he’s wrong.
You do care who the majority is, especially in a “democracy”. You have to, as they are the deciders.
You don’t have to care what color their skin is.
That doesn’t seem to be remarkably different than those left commentators who are all excited about the US turning minority white at some time in the coming few decades. In fact, it is likely a response to the gloating about that.
How many times have I seen Democrats bragging about how Texas would turn purple and then blue because whites would be a minority (which Anglo whites already are in Texas).
It would be nice if race were just ignored, but if the left is going to push it, it is not remarkable it should become an issue.
Somebody has to decide.
Sure. Supreme was already in use.
what about those who support illegal immigration precisely because most illegals are not white and they think they’ll get political bonus points for being “pro anything but white”? all of you libs like to complain about “whiteness” while you practice disgusting race based identity politics.
What criteria do you want to use?
Why should one race be supreme?
It’s not at all different.
Are you ok?
I’m not following you - can you elaborate?
Why does one race need to be supreme?
