[Serious] Far-Right Extremism Is a Global Problem

[Irreligious Atheist]

Yes, you will have to do some research into this.  There is no if. You are certainly and demonstrably wrong, by reference to the very data which you offered to support your own misapprehension.  It is not at all that census projections are innacurate, but the the census projections, if accurate, do not support the white replacement narrative.  If they're....right....then white replacement is wrong.

Will that, however, influence your general amenability to victimization and rights abrogation arguments?

Freedoms and civil liberties are more important to me than even thousands and thousands of lives. I understand you may have different priorities though, and that's fine. I will remain a free speech absolutist who is against any hate speech laws whatsoever, against Patriot Act type laws, and against big tech censorship.

[The Grand Nudger]

What utility does being wrong about white replacement have for free speech absolutism, and how...do you imagine, you're arguing for free speech absolutism by defending terrorism?

I can't think of a better way to eliminate the desire for and pride of place that free speech has in our ideology than by hitching it to this flaming wagon. If free speech is an ally to white supremacy, then free speech is nothing of value. In mere reality, like your beliefs about white replacement, it's the enemy of free speech because free speech has value. You would not get to be educated, for example, in all of the hilarious ways that your position on white replacement was wrong, in a white ethnostate.

[The Architect Of Fate]

I will remain a free speech absolutist

Free speech absolutism is a self-defeating project.

[Irreligious Atheist]

TGN, would it be correct to say that those of European descent (not including those that were the result of mixed race parents, grandparents, and so on) will no longer be the majority by 2045 or some time around then?

Who are these people that are identifying as white that you were talking about? Latinos? Who else?

[The Grand Nudger]

Not if you consider the 80% of them with one white parent to be white. You never cleared up how you would identify a white baby. This new lifeline is equally ill advised, as europeans were all the product of non white parents in the language of an american census at one point or another. We're all a product of that, and even more mixed now then we were then. Are we not white babies?

Are you struggling to find a miscegination clause? Counting only those you consider to be sufficiently pure, whoever they are, however you'd count them? A better way to spend your time might be to research white buy in and gen-pop demographics. Scientific racism isn't science, it's just racism. There is no white race, and never has been.

Or, if you'd rather not, then you could probably figure something out by figuring out why you're still trying to mount a doomed argument on the basis of a racist interpretation of a census which has no referent in genetics now or at any other time. You should have been clear, yourself, and able to demonstrate exactly what it was you claimed when you declared it to be a reality that you felt compelled to acknowledge. You should not be asking me questions answered in the census you offered as a demonstration of white replacement. Even more to the point, I get the feeling that the answer is disappointing to you. Whites identify as whites, man. We just don't identify as white because we're from some discreet genetic pool that can be bred in or out of a population. Some whites don't like the idea of other whites identifying as white, but that's never not been true.

[Irreligious Atheist]

Not if you consider the 80% of them with one white parent to be white.  You never cleared up how you would identify a white baby.  This new lifeline is equally ill advised, as europeans were all the product of non white parents in the language of an american census at one point or another.  We're all a product of that, and even more mixed now then we were then.  Are we not white babies?

Are you struggling to find a miscegination clause?  Counting only those you consider to be sufficiently pure, whoever they are, however you'd count them?  A better way to spend your time might be to research white buy in and gen-pop demographics.  Scientific racism isn't science, it's just racism.  There is no white race, and never has been.

Or, if you'd rather not, then you could probably figure something out by figuring out why you're still trying to mount a doomed argument on the basis of a racist interpretation of a census which has no referent in genetics now or at any other time.  You should have been clear, yourself,  and able to demonstrate exactly what it was you claimed when you declared it to be a reality that you felt compelled to acknowledge.  You should not be asking me questions answered in the census you offered as a demonstration of white replacement.  Even more to the point, I get the feeling that the answer is disappointing to you.  Whites identify as whites, man.  We just don't identify as white because we're from some discreet genetic pool that can be bred in or out of a population.  Some whites don't like the idea of other whites identifying as white, but that's never not been true.

I know that race technically does not exist. Ok, I will correct my claim. Non-Latino whites of European descent  will eventually no longer be the majority. That is my claim and that's what I initially meant.

If anyone wants to self identify as white, then they can go ahead and do so, but clearly Latinos for instance that have a great deal of indigenous American ancestry are quite a bit different from non-Latino whites of European descent, especially when they can be whatever they want to be. Are they a person of colour or are they white? It's up to them. Me being someone who is Dutch, English, Welsh, and Irish, I can't just decide that I want to be a person of colour. White is all I can really be. They can just as easily be a person of colour as they can be white though, depending on how they feel, so there is a difference there between them and non-Latino whites. White is a social construct and I suppose it can mean many different things to different people, which is perfectly fine.

[The Grand Nudger]

Latinos in this country, as in the non-white latinos, share about 65% of their genome with europeans. That's before you add the white parent that 80% of the pop explosion set to tick over has. African americans, on average, about 25% european. Again, before we add a white parent. OFC, adding a white parent in the us isn't adding a whole european, they're mixed too. However you choose to parse it, the majority of american children in the united states for most of our history and for the projected future have been and will in fact be of primarily european descent, many of them more european™ than any current conceptual white.

You'll have to pick a lane. Either there is no race, or some white race is being replaced. If we took your description there as equal parts of who you are, you're about as non white as any american latino, on account of irish. Your ancestors may have bought in to whiteness, but anyone can. Anyone can buy out as well...contrary to your beliefs, and it's not based on genetics in the first place, here in the us even less so than pretty much anywhere. As I mentioned before, by a narrow definition of white which has historically excluded many whites, the us has been majority non white for centuries. By an inclusive definition of whites that still excludes some whites..we'll be majority white indefinitely, so...what gives? This is all getting silly, because no amount of facts has changed your misapprehension in any way. What utility is there for you in being wrong about the great replacement, such that you'll interpret any collection of contradictory facts as being right about a great replacement? It's a pernicious myth, that's why it features so heavily in global right wing extremism, granted, but what is it doing for you? If we could answer that, we'd have part of the answer to the rise of global right wing extremism.

Extremists aren't born, they're made, and this has been a productive way to groom them, so what's the hook? What causes a non extremist to fall for something thing like this so that they can be radicalized by the notion of an existential threat that isn't there to a white race that never existed, a white race which they may or may not be a member of themselves, based on the inclusivity or exclusivity of their own description for the race and the perception of their equally race obsessed (and race fantasizing) peers? Is there some social construct that's being replaced, as we now have it? What social construct might that be? Here, at least, we may find agreement. I'd say that there may be a social construct in danger, though by no means getting replaced, at present. Starts with a w, rhymes with flower. How is it that they've made their cause your cause? Where did you pick this stuff up, and what were you looking for when you did? Did you, by chance, consume alot of the popular anti-sjw content these past few years on the interwebs? You may have been presented with it as a rational assessment, wherein the presenter (who we have no expectation of being a white supremacist or racist) purports to apply skepticism to the notion of the great replacement .....and ends up concluding that it's true. That it's..... as you put it, not the conspiracy theory part. That it's genetics. That it's just science. That it's a fact of reality. That the census demonstrates that reality.

This is scientific racism. If you simply can't get anything else out of this convo, and even if you leave it with the persistent belief in a great replacement, know that, at least. It's either a part of the realization required to leave such beliefs behind, or a piece in a better understanding of yourself. I get that some people can't shake it. My family is full of people who can't shake it. We point to ourselves as a demonstration and hide that shame behind what we insist to be an inescapable whiteness regardless of the color of our skin and which of our parents were white.....and just how white. Honestly, it sucks. Half of my family doesn't talk to the other. Lost love between brothers and sisters, husbands and wives and their families....all of it swirling around this fiction. A good deal of it swirling around their disappointment in my having failed to perpetuate it for yet another generation. Of not finding sufficiently white partners and friends to reassert and maintain our whiteness, and our proper whiteness, which was always an asserted whiteness in the first place. My current wife is barely (or not quite..depending on who you ask) white enough - which is fucking ludicrous.... There's some concern, you see..that her overwhelming polishness might bring out our latent undesirability - which we've gone to great lengths to distance ourselves from - don't even get me started on my estranged child and ex.

You tell me that you can't be anything other than white, but the definition of white you'd have to be employing to believe in great replacement is so narrow that you could categorically not -be- white. You just have light skin. So what, lot's of light skinned people are non white by that narrow definition, right along with countless europeans. My whole family has light skin. Would you breed into my family believing that you were producing white children on account of that skin, our our hair, or that we have names like cletus? You'd be disappointed. You'd end up with blue eyed blondes...with sickle cell. Dark skinned latinas with red hair and freckles. Chiseled jaws and thin noses on black faces. All of these ridiculous superstitions about appearance and race. My grandmother was the first american in her moms family, irish immigrants... Cute GI going home, 40's - and she would go on to marry a misceginated white supremacist who relocated his family to the american south - and we're three generations removed from that now with all of the usual genetic back and forth, soon to be four-...in our local population. I'm less white than the average american latino, if it's a measure of n. european dna - but obviously much more white than any of them if you're questioning a given latinos whiteness. I've transported my little bundles of great replacement up to the heart of appalachia, where the conspiracy theory ha some purchase, and where we'll continue that grand american tradition of melting. When you see that goofy face up there, know that that..is the face of the great replacement, which you see in the census. More families and more children will be the product of exactly the kinds of churning that produced me, and more deeply mixed™ than anyone in my family, to boot...but at what point do any of my descendants or their descendants stop being, well...our descendants? We find ourselves back to the initial question. What is being replaced? Are we going to get kicked out of the club? Will you get to stay in it? That seems unfair. What if it turns out that a given white person simply doesn't fit the narrow criteria of whiteness required for great replacement? What if they have no desire to be included in it? Are they prisoners, the great replacement crowd gets to assert their whiteness and count them as fellow members of that fictional race regardless of any genetic reality or personal identification? What if a person doesn't fit, but wishes to be white, are they now locked out of the white buy in that you and I both benefitted from?

Is your identify as white actually involuntary, and is your whiteness the narrow and ignorant whiteness required of great replacement? Let me put it another way. In the white ethnostate, when you're standing in line to get your genetic assessment, how confident are you in your life and security? Valhalla to the left, internment camps to the right. You a betting man?

[Irreligious Atheist]

Latinos in this country, as in the non-white latinos, share about 65% of their genome with europeans.  That's before you add the white parent that 80% of the pop explosion set to tick over has.  

You'll have to pick a lane.  Either there is no race, or some white race is being replaced.  If we took your description there as equal parts of who you are, you're about as non white as any american latino, on account of irish.  Your ancestors may have bought in to whiteness, but anyone can, and it's not based on genetics in the first place, here in the us less so than pretty much anywhere else on acount of our history - so...what gives? This is all getting silly, because no amount of facts has changed your misapprehension in any way.  Is there some social construct that's being replaced?  What utility is there for you in being wrong about the great replacement, such that you'll interpret any collection of contradictory facts as being right about a great replacement? It's a pernicious myth, that's why it features so heavily in global right wing extremism, granted, but what is it doing for you?  If we could answer that, we'd have part of the answer to the rise of global right wing extremism.

Your parents may have bought in to whiteness, but anyone can, and it's not based on genetics in the first place - so...what gives?

I said it's fine if they want to identify as white.

I don't have to pick a lane. Gender is a social construct too, but that doesn't mean we're going to stop having conversations about gender. I think we're in agreement that non-Latino "white" Europeans are going to get to the point where they are no longer a majority. That is what the great replacement idea is about. I'm sorry that society has trained me to think of non-Latino "white" Europeans mainly when white people are brought up, and that I didn't immediately think of Latinos. I did correct my earlier claim and admitted my error. I changed "white" to "non-Latino whites of European descent". Their population per capita will shrink as the Latino population grows. And I said I'm in favour of immigration because it's necessary.

[The Grand Nudger]

You do have to pick a lane, to assert that the census demonstrates a great replacement. If you've abandoned that belief, then good. Doesn't seem like you have. Being white is not a genetic survey. A large number of current whites are already descended from a great many other places than n. europe.

By the narrow criteria of whiteness, there is no great replacement ongoing. We've been majority nonwhite for centuries.

By an inclusive criteria of whiteness which still fails to validate some claims to whiteness (namely, black and hispanic claims to whiteness), we will be majority white indefinitely.

I 'm not interested in your position on the necessity of immigration, and it's not material to your being wrong an stubbornly wrong about a great replacement. You could be right on the necessity of immigration and be wrong about the great replacement. In fact, you could be compelled to believe in the necessity of immigration because you believe that the white race is declining. Heaven forfend william picks the tomatos, he doesn't even have enough white babies to keep the weeds pulled. Send More Manuel!

You'd be disappointed, though. Just like our genetics, our cultural differences wash away quickly. Birth rates, for example, don't appear to be an issue of super fecund and super virile brown and black dna. The children of immigrants tend to be more like us, and less like their parents (to their parents great sadness or elation, depending) with each passing gen. They choose to have fewer children for all of the same reasons that The Whites™ choose to have fewer children. You aren't going to get enough browns to cover the excess labor required through immigration at current levels. Not in the US, at least. It would have to be an impressively high rate to cover for the pop explosions who then Become White™, as literally every other immigrant explosion in this country has, presenting the initial necessity again but with larger requirements.

I hope that this, all of this, goes some way to explaining why and how the politics of white supremacy, and the underlying proposition of white genocide, by any name isn't wrong as a matter of fact because it's deemed to be disgusting - the kind of thing that we would need free speech to protect - but disgusting because it's profoundly and dangerously wrong as a matter of fact. There is no such thing a consequence free speech. Even if we did write it into law, our speech would continue to have consequences. We can't legislate that out, it's beyond our ability. We could agree on free speech absolutism but..as you began this convo, there will still be a reality that we have to acknowledge. Some of us will use that speech to spread monstrous lies. Some of us will believe those lies. Some of us will incite others to violence. Each of those lives are on our hands, having failed to respect the responsibility of our free speech, having failed to use our free speech to break others out of this cycle of misery, and then failing to prevent our love of free speech from getting some other person...who may not have been so keen on that free speech, killed.

The point of disrupting a violent organization with an extremist ideology, is to prevent deaths that we are responsible to make every attempt for. It won't stop those ideas getting out and we know that. That's hearts and minds shit, good luck. Depriving extremists of resources prevents them from hurting the people they have hurt, will hurt, and plan to hurt. It deprives them of the resources required to make compelling media presentations that convince others of things which are manifestly untrue but still useful to white supremacy. It does not stop them from saying hateful things. Another reality, at least until such a time as we're all fitted for shock collars and our rooms are all bugged. There is no rights abrogation here - we hear them. We see them. They're speaking. They're getting the word out. The point where they start to make money doing that, is where even the most absolute free speech ends. Because, you see..they're being allowed to speak...freely.

This is how, for example...books in the us can be published which divulge state secrets - but the writer and publisher forfeit some or all of the proceeds. They freely spoke. Participation in our economy, however........is another matter. You can't freely speak your way into selling tuna with no tuna in it. Your product either does or does not meet regulations. By all means, keep calling it tuna, you'll keep getting fined for calling it tuna. You either did or did not divulge state secrets. You can continue to freely speak, and freely speak in court, and freely speak in your appeals to the court. And freely speak to the press. On and on, ad infinitum. Freely profiting, is a different issue.

[Irreligious Atheist]

You won the argument. I changed my original claim. Take that as a success. If I end up thinking more like you, it will take me more than a couple of days to get there.

I appreciate what you have posted and the time you put into it. I've been reading and posting on different atheist forums for the last 15 years, and over and over I've heard people say that the Republican party is on its' deathbed because of changing demographics/ immigration. This is part of the reason why a good deal of whites want limited immigration. Of course many of them would rather have some kind of party that's even more right wing, but the Repubs are the best option they have at the moment. Sure, I do watch plenty of conservative media like Louder with Crowder and content like that, because I agree with some of what they are saying and I find them to be good entertainers who make me laugh, but I also watch people on the opposite end of the spectrum like Vaush and progressive news channels. There's nothing wrong with getting a good laugh out of conservative figures like Crowder. There are some pretty hilarious conservatives. Alex Jones gets the Joe Rogan podcast more views than anyone else for a reason. I also find OJ Simpson to be very entertaining to watch for a good laugh. That doesn't mean I think it's A OK to murder white women and cut their heads off.

I understand that far-right extremism is an issue and I agree that threads like this should be made and this issue should be talked about, but I do think it's overblown a bit. There has always been far-right extremism, but now everyone is panicking about it when they weren't really doing that before. They should be at the top of the terror threat list. Black identitarians are near the top of the list and commit acts of violence at Jewish temples over and over again, and no one's freaking out over that though, or even talking about it. I just think we need to fear these things at the level that they actually exist at. Sure, the former POTUS got 74 million votes, and that's a bit nuts, but all Republican politicians are fucked up. Many took the position that Pence would have been even worse. 79 terrorist killings by white supremacist terrorists in 8 years and a joke of a 'coup attempt' where not one shot was fired by Magastan, and people cry out for mass censorship, an end to free speech, hate speech laws, new terrorism legislation, etc. People bring up how white supremacist ideology needs to be suppressed, but no one is worried about black identitarianism and they call it racist when the FBI labels black identitarianism as one of the top terrorism threats.

I never even really thought of myself as white or identified as white until a few years back. I just thought of myself as a human being. My friends in school were mostly Muslims. I had a Korean best friend. My idols were almost all black. I worshiped Michael Jackson, Tupac, Michael Jordan, Allen Iverson, Kobe Bryant, etc. It's only when the media started to push racial division and started demonizing white people, obsessing over race, and making it so bigoted language against whites was the last acceptable form of racism that I took a look at things and said, what the hell. White people being shit on non-stop is what made me start identifying more as white. I know we're not going to agree that the media pushes propaganda to divide the races, but it couldn't be more clearer to me. The powers that be want us to hate each other so we take our focus off of the fucked up shit they do. They want us fighting amongst ourselves so we see each other as the enemy, rather than see them as the enemy.

As far as free speech goes, I don't see the expression of white supremacist ideology or groups like the Proud Boys being nearly as big of a threat as you see them. The real threat to me is government and the establishment. They want more and more power and are never satisfied, so they continue to take away our civil liberties piece by piece, year after year. Without fail, there's always a new excuse to take more rights away from us or some new boogeyman. Muslims, Russians, whitey, and it goes on and on. My argument is not just about a slippery slope. We are far past that. American citizens have been blown up from the skies without trial. Journalists imprisoned. Not only conservative, but liberals and progressives are victims of a great deal of censorship online. In the UK, police have stopped people from standing outside holding signs that criticize Islam. The police stop Christians from preaching on the sidewalk at gay pride parades here in Canada. People have been fined large sums of money here in Canada for making offensive jokes at comedy shows. Police are showing up at people's homes in the UK because they misgendered someone on twitter. This is all insanity, and it's only going to get worse. I see this as a far bigger threat than the Proud Boys, black identitarians, or some other similar groups.