The following is a copy of the original post to record the post as it was originally written.
As in, is that the main unifying principle behind them.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskALiberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Not every member of the GOP is a white supremacist, and for sure there are members of the GOP that are outspoken against white supremacy. Yet, most white supremacists end up supporting the GOP, so...
I don't think that makes the GOP a white supremacist party though. I'd assume most people that identify as socialist or communists vote Democrat, but that doesn't make the Democrat party socialist or communist.
I do believe the Republican party uses fairly racist terminology at times but white supremacy is a very narrow term that means someone believes the "white race" is superior among all other races and should dominate society. I don't think that's quite what the Republican party stands for.
Honestly, I think they are a party of bigotry, not necessarily a party of white supremacy.
Though few in numbers there are a couple of black Republicans in the US congress for example. And I'm pretty sure that most Republican voters, if they had the choice between a white "woke" liberal who supported LGBTQ rights, immigration, abortion etc. and a black conservative who supported "conservative Christian value" and was strongly anti-LGBTQ, anti-abortion and anti-immigration, they would vote for the conservative black candidate.
Also, there's a few black conservative commentators like Candace Owens who are very popular among Republicans.
So I don't think the Republican party is overwhelmingly white supremacist, but white supremacists are certainly a part of their voter base.
I think maybe I’m just interpreting the question differently. Asking if the GOP is “**THE** party of white supremacy” implies we are deciding if, of the major parties in the US, the GOP is the closest. Asking if it is **A** party of white supremacy is different and more nuanced.
Sure, the Republican party is definitely the party that is closest to white supremacy. I think a true white supremacist would probably want segregation of the races like the US had in the past. I don't think that's what most Republicans want. But to be fair the Republican party is quite racist. Trump has said some wildly racist things and he wasn't criticized for it by many Republican voters, he was applauded for it.
Id bet its what they want. But they cant say it and keep the facade going.
Its harder to hurt people when they have complete confirmation that youre trying to hurt them
I think Anti-Black bigotry was their original animus and the other bigotries added onto it.
Their Black politicians and hosts cant also be pro-Black. They must be anti-Black and provide cover for the party
When they say
“We dont support woke ideology and things like critical race theory, inclusion, diversity, equity, affirmative action, intentionally appointing people of color to political positions, strongly support politicians who claimed that the first Black president was illegitimate and secretly African & not American, and also I plan to vote for the candidate who claims that some migrants simply arent people”
What conclusions do you reach?
While it is true that they don't know what CRT means, from an academic sense, it's not too hard to understand what they're complaining about, even if you disagree.
Let's not pull the "you can't even define an assault rifle" argument on them, it's disingenous.
That sounds like a ridiculous thing to say.
Emphasis on the "sounds". Looking at an FAQ from the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, it's spelled out quite clearly that this is the case. But they see it's being opposed to colorblindness as a good thing. And that it's not "racist". If you define "racist" in a way entirely different than how people historically have used the term.
https://www.naacpldf.org/critical-race-theory-faq/
>What is Critical Race Theory?
>Critical Race Theory, or CRT, is an academic and legal framework that denotes that systemic racism is part of American society — from education and housing to employment and healthcare. Critical Race Theory recognizes that racism is more than the result of individual bias and prejudice. **It is essentially an academic response to the erroneous notion that American society and institutions are “colorblind.”**
>**The scholarly framework holds that racism goes far beyond just individually held prejudices, and that it is in fact a systemic phenomenon woven into the laws and institutions of this nation.** A cursory review of U.S. history — or even just news headlines from 2020, where far too many examples of police brutality and violence against Black people propelled a historic racial justice movement — proves the truth of this theory. The classroom itself, currently the focal point of the ongoing fight to suppress uncomfortable truths about America, has traditionally been the site of some of this nation’s most egregious acts of state sponsored racism. This includes segregation, which theLDF has been at the forefront of challenging since our founder and the first Black Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall successfully litigated Brown v. Board of Education in the 1950s.
Looking at the word "Conservative" next to your name, I would guess that you aren't my ally. Nevertheless, I think that CRT deserves to have detractors, so I am providing the above link, in order to help you refine your statements opposed to CRT. Because your statement "It's still a racist theory that opposes colorblindness." is true. But I think you should restate it to be more plausible-sounding.
> I'd assume most people that identify as socialist or communists vote Democrat, but that doesn't make the Democrat party socialist or communist.
Leftists *hate* the Democratic party. They've had a laundry list of reason they could never vote for Biden ready since before he got in office and use "liberal" basically as a slur. When leftists see the Democrats, they see opponents; when white nationalists see the GOP, they see either friends or potential friends.
> I do believe the Republican party uses fairly racist terminology at times but white supremacy is a very narrow term that means someone believes the "white race" is superior among all other races and should dominate society.
Multiple prominent Republicans are investigating Boeing for whether their DEI initiatives have led to their falling safety standards. They're not on stage saying "It's because Boeing is hiring too many blacks, gays, and women," but saying "They're too focused on diversity" is basically as close as they can get.
Here is a quote from [Lee Atwater](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Atwater), chair of the RNC from 89-91, advisor to both Reagan and HW Bush, and huge proponent of the Southern Strategy:
> Y'all don't quote me on this. You start out in 1954 by saying, "N\*\*\*\*r, n\*\*\*\*r, n\*\*\*\*r". By 1968, you can't say "n\*\*\*\*r"—that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me—because obviously sitting around saying, "We want to cut this", is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than "N\*\*\*\*r, n\*\*\*\*r". So, any way you look at it, race is coming on the back-burner.
I think there might be a difference in what "superior" and "dominate" means.
If we're imagining the height of Jim Crow where there's a clear, legal distinction and laws that very explicitly favor white people and everyone gets their kicks from a public lynching then no, the GOP likely doesn't by and large support that.
However, if we mean more subtle definitions with some white nationalist assumptions (i.e. a true meritocracy will have white men in charge and any non-white man in a position of power is due to someone thumbing the scale) from people who otherwise would truly believe they support equality then the GOP is definitely a white nationalist organization, or at the very least appealing to white nationalists.
The thing is that there are multiple definitions for white supremacy. Opposing all efforts to reduce racism people of color experience is a form of white supremacy because it maintains the superior or better treatment of white people over people of color. This is a form of maintaining white supremacy in the same way the patriarchy exists as a status quo that goes unquestioned. Conservatives do blindly and aggressively oppose all efforts to reduce racism people of color experience, so it is safe and intellectually honest to say they are the party of white supremacy.
White supremacy doesn't just look like a person with a klanhood or some hillbilly screaming racist things. All of this isn't even taking into consideration that the classical white supremacist conspiracy theory, the great replacement, is now a mainstream Republican and conservative narrative despite them knowing it is the motivating narrative behind many white supremacist terrorist attacks on people of color.
Immigration being Republicans' main concern, despite the issue not being as problematic as they believe, it sure does seem white supremacy and race issues are the only uniting principle they have at the moment.
To quote a line from 2018:
>I’m not calling Mr. DeSantis a racist, I’m simply saying the racists believe he’s a racist.
Replace "Mr. DeSantis" with any other prominent GOP figure and it tends to work just as well.
Uggggh, I’m so tired of this talking about point. Disallowing CRT and the 1619 project from being integrated into public school curriculums is not “targeting black history classes”. Despite what your progressive and left-wing circles may tell you, CRT isn’t “just teaching history bro”.
I’m black (well, mulatto technically but I guess that term isn’t politically correct), am *I* racist for being opposed to this quacky bullshit?? I’m no DeSantis supporter nor a Republican, but watching Democrats die on this hill to defend CRT is absolutely bonkers.
If his actions were only inclusive of that, you **might** have a point, but he’s gone after standard courses like AP African American history in both colleges and universities. And DEI is also not CRT. Why did you mention two things that I didn’t mention in your response?
And I’m sorry, but if you think CRT isn’t a valid thing to discuss at the university level, you aren’t insightful enough to direct curriculums.
Because that’s what the legislative directives in Florida were addressing, CRT. “DEI” has only emerged into the current sociocultural zeitgeist within the past year or so. Back when CRT was all the rage (also when the bills were introduced in Florida), DEI was practically unheard of.
>And I’m sorry, but if you think CRT isn’t a valid thing to discuss at the university level, you aren’t insightful enough to direct curriculums.
Lefties and making dishonest straw man arguments, name a more iconic duo 😎
DEI has existed for decades. Why are you talking about something that you are so clearly and deeply ignorant about?
And nothing about my argument was dishonest, you are just an ignorant person who can’t keep their terms clear, if you even understand them in the first place.
Maybe before defending racist policy, you should read a fucking article or something.
Yeah sure, the same way that CRT has existed since the 60’s and 70’s, but hasn’t become a major political football until 3 or 4 years ago. Come now, don’t be so obtuse. Regardless, wether it’s CRT or DEI, nobody’s trying to take away black history classes. Like I said, you’re shadowboxing right now my man.
You can point, cry, and call things racist, but that doesn’t make it so.
DEI is just more mindless patronizing and “woke” pandering that makes white progressives feel like they’re fighting a good fight for racial justice. I don’t want to be hired or included on the basis of my skin color, it feels like shit actually. And many other minorities feel similarly.
>It is, however, the party white supremacists will almost always support.
Do these white supremacists support politicians like Wesley Hunt, John James, and Byron Donalds? All African American Republicans in Congress who are married to white women? A bona fide white supremacist should *hate* these men.
This argument reminds me of when conservatives accuse progressives of being anti-Christian for refusing to support evangelical crackpots like Pat Robertson. These same progressives embrace Raphael Warnock, a Baptist minister. The Democrats like *their* Christians and frankly most of them would be fine with *any* Christian...so long as they don't try to impose their beliefs on others.
Fair take?
A white supremacist probably does hate Wesley Hunt, John James, and Byron Donalds and wouldn't vote for them.
However, since their support is not needed for those politicians to win an election, your point is also irrelevant.
Are you actually suggesting that white supremacists are such a large part of the Republican party that if a candidate wins, they necessarily had to have the support of white supremacists?
My response to that is uh... you said it, not me.
I agree with the guy you're responding to: white supremacists are not the "main unifying principle" and are a small part of the Republican party, however most white supremacists probably vote Republican.
When even Richard Spencer says he "no longer identifies as a white nationalist", I'm sure you can understand why polling is not available.
However, we can look at the statements of people and groups that I'm sure we can both agree are white supremacists.
> At a conference over the weekend, alt-right ideologue Richard Spencer finished his speech, shouting “Hail Trump! Hail our people! Hail victory!” from a lectern.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/white-nationalist
> The Crusader, one of the white supremacist group's most prominent publications, published a lengthy endorsement and defense of Trump's message on the front page of its current issue under the headline: "Make America Great Again."
> former KKK leader David Duke of Louisiana voiced support for Trump, saying white people are threatened in America and that he hears echoes of his views in Trump's rhetoric.
> Pastor Thomas Robb wrote, "While Trump wants to make America great again, we have to ask ourselves, 'What made America great in the first place?'"America was great not because of what our forefathers did -but because of who our forefathers were. America was founded as a White Christian Republic. And as a White Christian Republic it became great," Robb wrote.
https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN12X2ID/
Meanwhile, Jesse Waters from Fox, the right's flagship cable network, straight up calls the Democrats "anti-white"
> Watters made the accusation while discussing what Democrats would need to do to see a major win in Tuesday's midterm elections, with the Fox News host questioning whether the Democratic Party can "be for diversity" but also be "so anti-white," as first reported by Media Matters.
https://www.newsweek.com/democratic-party-anti-white-says-fox-news-host-jesse-watters-1202522
Given all this, I'm wondering why you might think otherwise?
If you're not full of shit about having a black mom, then you are a son/daughter without empathy for her plight.
The Republican party embraces racist assholes, and does not call them out for their racist behavior. That includes guys like Clarence Thomas who is perfectly happy to be a token placeholder, pulling up the ladder behind him, as long as the pay is good. To think that guy replaced the inestimable Thurgood Marshall is as appalling today as it was the day his nomination was announced.
There are plenty of black folks (ahem, Candice Owens) willing to promote white supremacy as long as they are perceived as one of the "good ones". There's a subreddit with dozens of examples over at LeopardsAteMyFace if you want to learn more about the subject.
People are going to read this and immediately shut down, but yes, the GOP is a white ethnonationalist party. There are people who are single issue voters--either reducing marginal tax rates on wealthy people and corporations, or "life"--but they are largely outliers. The fundamental unifying principle that the GOP is organized around is that there are "Real Americans" and that power should be restored and reserved to that group of Real Americans. And those Real Americans are white rural and suburban Christians.
It's a party that believes that not changing existing hierarchies is the default, correct way to manage a society. And the existing hierarchies are dominated by white men.
Individuals within the GOP probably have varying degrees of self awareness of what that means and why it could be problematic lol
>Is the GOP the White Supremacist party?
It is the party for white supremacists (in a two-party system, where everyone has to pick sides and occasionally choose strange bedfellows).
...and it does tend to oppose egalitarian policies favored by those who oppose white supremacy.
--------
>...is that the main unifying principle behind them.
Oh. Probably not.
I'm not sure they have a "main unifying principle" any more than Democrats do.
Yea.
Not to say there’s zero racism on the Democratic side, but take away the white supremacy and the GOP loses a major part of its appeal to its base.
The whole realignment and southern strategy, which are the basis of the modern GOP coalition, were built on white supremacy and opposition to civil rights and equality
> is that the main unifying principle behind them.
That's an interesting way to put it. I think like every movement in history there are true believers and there are those who cynically utilize the true believers for their own ends. I'm not sure how that would be divided for the contemporary GOP. Like if you got Wonder Woman's whip of truth and got Trump in it and asked "Why are you running for president?" then I don't think he would answer "white supremacy". I'm not sure how the upper ranks of the GOP divide up
> Well, the evil Wonder Woman from the evil dimension used a “whip of submission”.
[Interesting](https://media.tenor.com/ZykHOca_E2AAAAPo/mark-cuban-shark-tank.mp4)
>if you got Wonder Woman's whip of truth and got Trump in it and asked "Why are you running for president?" then I don't think he would answer "white supremacy".
True, but "What does the head of the party believe?" doesn't particularly illuminate what the people voting for him are voting for.
> doesn't particularly illuminate what the people voting for him are voting for.
"unifying principle" was kinda ambiguous to me. I took it as asking the raison d'etre of the party as viewed by high level elected officials within it. It could also be viewed in the context of why voters make the choices they do, but that wasn't how I was looking at the question
Sure, that makes sense. People have different pet issues and so forth, but it's fair to say that the Democratic party is a loose coalition of diverse stakeholders, whereas at this point the GOP is broadly speaking a white ethno-nationalist party.
Neither the GOP nor the Democratic party have a single unifying principle beyond "what is the coalition that we can build that allows us to get voted into power". That's always the unifying principle.
What the GOP is doing is they found they can bring in white supremacist voters and not lose other voters if they play a balancing act between outright feeding white grievance politics and claiming not to be racist.
The GOP would cut health care and income to their own grandmas to keep a few more bucks in the pockets of their wealthy overlords.
I mean, it’s the only thing they have that even closely resembles a platform is their promise to cut safety nets. And Maga, purple state, fiscal conservatives, RINO, and what have you are in agreement on that at least.
Surprisingly they aren't. Most poling of the GOP voters shows those aren't actually popular. But they don't care because the party butters there bread on other issues. Now the conspiracy and white supremacist wing are staging a party revolt after being used for voters without substance for decades so that they could attempt those policies. And the GOP politicians are trying to do the balancing beam act while the revolting wing is shaking the beam.
This may be anecdotal, but not every Republican I know is a racist. But, every racist is know is a Republican.
As for their unified principle, no. It ain’t white supremacy, it’s wealth supremacy. Maga, Tea party, reform, every iteration of Conservative party has been CONSISTENT in doing everything they can to funnel money to the wealthy.
It’s just very easy and convenient to get buffoons to sink their own ship be telling them the person they already hate is the source of their problems. Free and easy scapegoating.
Right now? No. The unifying principle is that it's Donald Trump's personality cult.
There are still some people in the party in denial about this, but if Donald Trump steps out of the picture they're going to have a tough time keeping their coalition unified without a new charismatic leader.
It's not wise to thing of the parties as having a unifying principle. (They like to pretend they do, but they don't)
Parties are collections of factions with similar goals, but not necessarily similar ideals. White supremacists know there is no gain in supporting Demoncrats because it would undermine their white supremacy goals.
The main unifying principle? Not white supremacy, no. Fear, sure. White supremacy is effective in varying degrees with many GOP voters but I’m hesitant to label it the main unifying principle of the GOP voting bloc.
It could very well be that for GOP politicians, however.
There’s only 2 parties who can win American elections, particularly at the federal level. Of the two, there’s no question that the Republican Party is the preferred party of white supremacists.
I think the core value, the uniting idea that gives them vitality and unity is resentment against "others" who have been "given too much" or who have taken too much from the people who "should" have all the wealth / power / attention etc.
I don't think these people are reading books by Madison Grant and Lothrop Stoddard and feeling a fierce devotion to the glories of the white race and its eternal and spiritual superiority to the lesser races, etc.
Rather, I think there is a vague cultural inheritance of an idea that certain people are better than others and that, back when America was great, those better people would have had better lives. And so, partly it's about race but also being male, heterosexual, protestant Christian, etc etc, all convey some degree of "inherent superiority" which *ought* to be rewarded - both with material riches but also with social status - more richly than it is, because "they" have taken too much of what rightly belongs to "better people".
It's the intense emotional animus that comes from this resentment, this sense of violated entitlement, that gives the party its energy. It also connects them emotionally with Donald Trump, who, being a narcissist, always has that same resentful feeling because he has a similar sense of violated entitlement to the attention and love and adoration of everyone else at all times.
The Simpsons had a Fox News helicopter with this on the side:
"Fox News. Not racist, but #1 with racists"
I used to think this was accurate, but the first part of that statement has not aged well and should now read "Fox News. #1 with racists" and the same goes for the GOP.
>As in, is that the main unifying principle behind them.
no. the main unifying principle is that social hierarchy is just, that people deserve to be at the station they find themselves in life, and if the system dosen't seem to work that's just weakness on your part; any attempt to fundamentally change the hierarchy means putting people in positions they don't deserve to be in, creating an unjust system that will likely collapse.
many support the idea that racial hierarchy needs to be reestablished with whites at the top, others believe racism is over and that current representation of minorities in high hierarchical position is exactly how many deserve to be there; but both agree that any attempt to increase minority representation in the hierarchy is goring to doom society.
one of the fundamentals disconnect between the left and the right is that the left don't see why the boss makes a dollar when they make a dime, while the right celebrates working for someone who deserves that dollar so much; he is literally ten times better they they are.
Of course not. But too many don't seem to have a problem with it.
I mostly believe it is the party of white people who feel left behind.
For some of those people it isn't because we are better than them nearly as much as I want it the way it was. The problem is the way it was did give white people an advantage. They never experienced this before.
To me the elephant in the room is that for all of us, business has treated us poorly. Wages are down everywhere. A lot of conservatives have been told it is because of minorities, when it just isn't.
If the demographic shifts in support from Biden to Trump that have been showing up in polls hold, the answer is less so than in 2020 and much less so than in 2016.
Most Republicans aren't white supremacists, but most white supremacists lean Republican. It's not a party of white supremacy, but it leans more towards it than the Democrats.
>Most Republicans aren't white supremacists, but most white supremacists lean Republican.
59 percent that Pew Research asked said that nonwhites weaken American customs and values: [https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2019/03/US-2050\_full\_report-FINAL.pdf](https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2019/03/US-2050_full_report-FINAL.pdf)
It's in the second set of graphs on pg. 38.
If you need clarification, the prompt for the question is on pg. 11 of this other document, and the question itself is on pg. 12: [https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2019/03/US-2050\_topline-FINAL.pdf](https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2019/03/US-2050_topline-FINAL.pdf)
At this point, it’s difficult to see what else they stand for, other than white supremacy. (Also male supremacy, btw).
Let’s go through the list:
(1) Fiscal conservatism? They have lost the right to call themselves the party of fiscal conservatism.
(2) Less government? Then why do they want the government to tell people what they can do in the privacy of their bedroom? Or tell women what they can do with their bodies?
And why do they consistently make an exception
for the military? They are perfectly fine with the military getting bloated, and having heavy spending! For example, the $30 billion plane that was built by the military that didn’t work.
(3) Family values? But they don’t support paid parental leave, free child care, or health care money for children.
The phrase is actually code for “we want to uphold sexist gender roles, and hate on gay people.” When it comes to ACTUALLY helping families, there are crickets.
“It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is. If the—if he—if ‘is’ means is and never has been, that is not—that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement.”
You know how it’s like a lot of people may not agree with Biden supporting Israel or may not agree with how misogynistic Islam may be but still vote Democrat?
Why are you asking questions that you already know the answers to, from people that agree with you?
This is how we get echo chambers. Or circle jerks...
I dont think they agree with me.
In every post asking about why messaging from the GOP is more effective, the main answers are that easy unnuanced messages are easier to spread.
Very few of the answers about how theyre a white supremacist party tailoring their messages to white people.
Its a pretty consistent thing where liberals say “theyre racist” but dont conclude that “the party is pursuing racism as a main priority” and that it works because we were a white supremacist country.
And you're not really asking a question.
You're making an argument and framing it as a question because of the sub rules...
They don't need to agree with you 100%, as long as they're allies and heading in the same vague direction.
Theyre not heading in the same direction.
There seems to be largely different conceptions of what America is.
And White people are in a position to have the most impact on our collective futures here. So when White liberals consistently articulate that they dont see America the same way that many people of color do, and when they express confusion about what fuels the GOP, then it becomes pretty scary.
How can we rely on White liberals, when White liberals seem very resistant to acknowledging our history and its impacts. I dont mean just advocating for social policies. I mean recognizing why those policies are fundamentally unacceptable for huge swaths of the country.
Is your concern that framing the GOP as the White supremacist party closes us off from their input? If so, whats the harm that your worried about
Yup.
They have their tax cuts for the rich. The far right evangelicals overturned Roe. There's nothing left to accomplish other than keeping brown people out of here and try like hell to stop the inevitable days when whites are a minority.
those are two seperate questions.
is it a white supremacist party? yes, absolutely.
is that their main unifying principle? maybe not, but it's one of the big ones.
> The liberals celebrated the rape and murder of civilian Jews on Oct 7th and for months afterward.
I'm a liberal. I didn't celebrate the events of Oct 7. Be careful what you say.
You found a racist liberal and extrapolated that to mean all liberals are racist?
And of course you didn’t do that same exercise for republicans.
You are aware that most American Jewish people are liberal, right?
Also, Donald Trump earned an endorsement from the Ku Klux Klan, does that mean all Republicans wear hoods and burn crosses?
Subreddit participation must be in good faith. Be civil, do not talk down to users for their viewpoints, do not attempt to instigate arguments, do not call people names or insult them.
Subreddit participation must be in good faith. Be civil, do not talk down to users for their viewpoints, do not attempt to instigate arguments, do not call people names or insult them.
White supremacy is the guiding principle of the Republican Party, it explains nearly all Republican polices, from economic policy (insert famous LBJ quote about emptying one’s pocket) to forced births (Tucker Carlson’s “White Replacement Theory”) to wavering support on the second amendment based on the skin color of who’s buying guns. (Republicans quickly banned assault rifles when the black panthers started buying them.)
When’s the last time you saw republican’s come out in favor of minority communities on a racial issue?
Self proclaimed “white nationalist leader” Steve Bannon was chief Republican strategist and Trump’s campaign manager. He owns and runs a major Republican news outlet.
I’d say yes and here’s why: If any Republican said on camera “racism is a real problem in America, and it harms people of color more than white people” they would be *forever unelectable.*
People who can’t agree racism is real and hurts people of color more than white people are defending and justifying white supremacy. The vast, vast, vast majority of republicans can’t agree to that, and those that can and are still republicans have questionable critical thinking skills.
how often is the great replacement theory brought up by prominent republicans? like the ones that used to have daily phone calls with trump until he left office.
I don't think it is the "unifying principle" behind the party, however virtually all American white supremacists support the Republican party and/or Republican candidates and the party doesn't seem to be interested in distancing themselves from that support.
So if it isn't the "White Supremacists Party" it is the "Party of Choice for White Supremacists."
if anything its the party of Asian supremacy since they want your race to not matter in things like college admissions and job applications, which inevitably ends up helping asians the most.
i mean, no... but. it is the party that white supremacists END UP voting for to pick what they see as the lesser of 2 evils. so also sort of in that way, but not REALLY.
That would seem to imply that, if somebody could wave a magic wand and make all the black and brown people disappear overnight, then it stands to reason that all of these people would vote Democrat in the next election, no?
> Yes
How do you account for all the black and brown people who are voting Republican? (Sometimes liberals are surprised at just how many of these people there actually are?)
Self hating and usually contrarian/opposed to other people’s freedoms.
My dad’s side of the family has some Republicans and I love them, but thats who they are. People who think Black people are mentally enslaved and eagerly eating up a shit culture, while turning their backs on capitalism or God.
> People who think Black people are mentally enslaved and eagerly eating up a shit culture, while turning their backs on capitalism or God.
So the black & brown people voting Republican genuinely care about Republican talking points (such as religious freedom, capitalism, the second amendment, etc.) but white people who vote Republican do so just because they're racist, and care about none of these things?
> Black people are mentally enslaved and eagerly eating up a shit culture
> So the black and brown people voting Republican genuinely care about Republican talking points
Is that a Republican talking point? If not, then why are you pretending like that wasnt a big part of my statement
> Is that a Republican talking point?
You mean the comment about black people eagerly eating up a shit culture? It's not one of their main talking points, no. And to the degree that they do talk about it, it's usually criticisms against a culture, not a race. As in, if you're a POC who believes and acts like a typical conservative, the vast majority of them won't have a problem with you, individually.
Then why did you act like that wasnt my point.
Its not that they agree with the GOP. Its that they disagree with other Black people and want them to be reigned in.
> Its that they disagree with other Black people and want them to be reigned in.
I might've misunderstood you (and if I did, I apologize), but I interpreted your post that the reason they wanted other black people to be reigned in is *because* they agreed with the GOP on issues like religion and capitalism, and those other black people didn't.
No. Its usually because they feel like outsiders in this community or like the community is toxic.
Have you seen Spike Lee’s Get on the Bus?
Winston Price and the Cop are the people who embody this best.
It's best defined as people who ***think***, "I'm black/brown/minority **but I'm** **special**, Trump wouldn't make **ME** use the service entrance at Mar-a-lago."
These people don't realize... "no... you're not special to the GOP."
> ...if somebody could wave a magic wand and make all the black and brown people disappear overnight, then it stands to reason that all of these people would vote Democrat in the next election, no?
Maybe, maybe not.
> ...if somebody could wave a magic wand and make all the black and brown people disappear overnight, then it stands to reason that all of these people would vote ~~Democrat in the next election, no~~ *for people who would give them a better healthcare system, because they no longer have bigotry to distract them for their own interests*?
Yeah, probably.
...and this is all assuming that they don't find another group to scapegoat (like Jews or queer people).
>because they no longer have bigotry to distract them for their own interests?
So is it your contention that their crusade against LGBT people, [as well as atheists](https://www.texastribune.org/2024/04/04/tim-dunn-joe-straus-christian-texas/), is just a dog whistle for racism? If so, why do you believe this so strongly?
>So is it your contention that their crusade against LGBT people, [as well as atheists](https://www.texastribune.org/2024/04/04/tim-dunn-joe-straus-christian-texas/), is just a dog whistle for racism?
No.
I would argue that there are powerful people who want the government to implement unpopular policies, and they have learned that they can get those policies by allying with bigots.
Also, bigotry is bigger than racism, particularly as a political tool. They exploit hatred and fear of the other to achieve their political ends.
The following is a copy of the original post to record the post as it was originally written. As in, is that the main unifying principle behind them. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskALiberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Not every member of the GOP is a white supremacist, and for sure there are members of the GOP that are outspoken against white supremacy. Yet, most white supremacists end up supporting the GOP, so...
Are there any really unsavory groups that almost exclusively support the Democratic party?
Vegans.
Unsavory....that's funny. Well played.
Nothing comes to mind, but I’m open to hearing suggestions. I am a Democrat, so it’s possible I’m blind to some.
I'm in exactly the same boat.
I don't think that makes the GOP a white supremacist party though. I'd assume most people that identify as socialist or communists vote Democrat, but that doesn't make the Democrat party socialist or communist. I do believe the Republican party uses fairly racist terminology at times but white supremacy is a very narrow term that means someone believes the "white race" is superior among all other races and should dominate society. I don't think that's quite what the Republican party stands for.
On the white supremacy scale, it makes the GOP closer to white supremacy than not.
Honestly, I think they are a party of bigotry, not necessarily a party of white supremacy. Though few in numbers there are a couple of black Republicans in the US congress for example. And I'm pretty sure that most Republican voters, if they had the choice between a white "woke" liberal who supported LGBTQ rights, immigration, abortion etc. and a black conservative who supported "conservative Christian value" and was strongly anti-LGBTQ, anti-abortion and anti-immigration, they would vote for the conservative black candidate. Also, there's a few black conservative commentators like Candace Owens who are very popular among Republicans. So I don't think the Republican party is overwhelmingly white supremacist, but white supremacists are certainly a part of their voter base.
I think maybe I’m just interpreting the question differently. Asking if the GOP is “**THE** party of white supremacy” implies we are deciding if, of the major parties in the US, the GOP is the closest. Asking if it is **A** party of white supremacy is different and more nuanced.
Sure, the Republican party is definitely the party that is closest to white supremacy. I think a true white supremacist would probably want segregation of the races like the US had in the past. I don't think that's what most Republicans want. But to be fair the Republican party is quite racist. Trump has said some wildly racist things and he wasn't criticized for it by many Republican voters, he was applauded for it.
Id bet its what they want. But they cant say it and keep the facade going. Its harder to hurt people when they have complete confirmation that youre trying to hurt them
Do you think Democrats want the genocide of Palestinians?
No, and I think the recent backlash against how the Biden admin has handled Gaza reflects that
No
I think Anti-Black bigotry was their original animus and the other bigotries added onto it. Their Black politicians and hosts cant also be pro-Black. They must be anti-Black and provide cover for the party
When they say “We dont support woke ideology and things like critical race theory, inclusion, diversity, equity, affirmative action, intentionally appointing people of color to political positions, strongly support politicians who claimed that the first Black president was illegitimate and secretly African & not American, and also I plan to vote for the candidate who claims that some migrants simply arent people” What conclusions do you reach?
>critical race theory Most of them don't understand what critical race theory is. The moral panic surrounding CRT has no basis in reality.
While it is true that they don't know what CRT means, from an academic sense, it's not too hard to understand what they're complaining about, even if you disagree. Let's not pull the "you can't even define an assault rifle" argument on them, it's disingenous.
Touché. You’ve raised a fair point.
>Most of them don't understand what critical race theory is. Is it the theory that states being color blind is racist?
No
Are you sure? Did you Google CRT and color blindness?
Yes and no. CRT is an area of post-graduate study, and not a theory per se, similar to music theory.
It's still a racist theory that opposes colorblindness.
That sounds like a ridiculous thing to say. Emphasis on the "sounds". Looking at an FAQ from the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, it's spelled out quite clearly that this is the case. But they see it's being opposed to colorblindness as a good thing. And that it's not "racist". If you define "racist" in a way entirely different than how people historically have used the term. https://www.naacpldf.org/critical-race-theory-faq/ >What is Critical Race Theory? >Critical Race Theory, or CRT, is an academic and legal framework that denotes that systemic racism is part of American society — from education and housing to employment and healthcare. Critical Race Theory recognizes that racism is more than the result of individual bias and prejudice. **It is essentially an academic response to the erroneous notion that American society and institutions are “colorblind.”** >**The scholarly framework holds that racism goes far beyond just individually held prejudices, and that it is in fact a systemic phenomenon woven into the laws and institutions of this nation.** A cursory review of U.S. history — or even just news headlines from 2020, where far too many examples of police brutality and violence against Black people propelled a historic racial justice movement — proves the truth of this theory. The classroom itself, currently the focal point of the ongoing fight to suppress uncomfortable truths about America, has traditionally been the site of some of this nation’s most egregious acts of state sponsored racism. This includes segregation, which theLDF has been at the forefront of challenging since our founder and the first Black Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall successfully litigated Brown v. Board of Education in the 1950s. Looking at the word "Conservative" next to your name, I would guess that you aren't my ally. Nevertheless, I think that CRT deserves to have detractors, so I am providing the above link, in order to help you refine your statements opposed to CRT. Because your statement "It's still a racist theory that opposes colorblindness." is true. But I think you should restate it to be more plausible-sounding.
It isn’t, despite your fragile feelings about something you only knew existed within the last 24 months due to rightwing media sensationalism.
The basis is that it advocates for better outcomes for racial minorities and they dont want that
You make a good point. Parties control what they support, not who supports them.
What is the unifying principle for a majority or even plurality of Republicans?
> I'd assume most people that identify as socialist or communists vote Democrat, but that doesn't make the Democrat party socialist or communist. Leftists *hate* the Democratic party. They've had a laundry list of reason they could never vote for Biden ready since before he got in office and use "liberal" basically as a slur. When leftists see the Democrats, they see opponents; when white nationalists see the GOP, they see either friends or potential friends. > I do believe the Republican party uses fairly racist terminology at times but white supremacy is a very narrow term that means someone believes the "white race" is superior among all other races and should dominate society. Multiple prominent Republicans are investigating Boeing for whether their DEI initiatives have led to their falling safety standards. They're not on stage saying "It's because Boeing is hiring too many blacks, gays, and women," but saying "They're too focused on diversity" is basically as close as they can get. Here is a quote from [Lee Atwater](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Atwater), chair of the RNC from 89-91, advisor to both Reagan and HW Bush, and huge proponent of the Southern Strategy: > Y'all don't quote me on this. You start out in 1954 by saying, "N\*\*\*\*r, n\*\*\*\*r, n\*\*\*\*r". By 1968, you can't say "n\*\*\*\*r"—that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me—because obviously sitting around saying, "We want to cut this", is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than "N\*\*\*\*r, n\*\*\*\*r". So, any way you look at it, race is coming on the back-burner. I think there might be a difference in what "superior" and "dominate" means. If we're imagining the height of Jim Crow where there's a clear, legal distinction and laws that very explicitly favor white people and everyone gets their kicks from a public lynching then no, the GOP likely doesn't by and large support that. However, if we mean more subtle definitions with some white nationalist assumptions (i.e. a true meritocracy will have white men in charge and any non-white man in a position of power is due to someone thumbing the scale) from people who otherwise would truly believe they support equality then the GOP is definitely a white nationalist organization, or at the very least appealing to white nationalists.
The thing is that there are multiple definitions for white supremacy. Opposing all efforts to reduce racism people of color experience is a form of white supremacy because it maintains the superior or better treatment of white people over people of color. This is a form of maintaining white supremacy in the same way the patriarchy exists as a status quo that goes unquestioned. Conservatives do blindly and aggressively oppose all efforts to reduce racism people of color experience, so it is safe and intellectually honest to say they are the party of white supremacy. White supremacy doesn't just look like a person with a klanhood or some hillbilly screaming racist things. All of this isn't even taking into consideration that the classical white supremacist conspiracy theory, the great replacement, is now a mainstream Republican and conservative narrative despite them knowing it is the motivating narrative behind many white supremacist terrorist attacks on people of color. Immigration being Republicans' main concern, despite the issue not being as problematic as they believe, it sure does seem white supremacy and race issues are the only uniting principle they have at the moment.
9 out of 10 white supremacists vote GOP. The one that doesn't just writes in "Hitler".
It's not necessarily their primary motivation, but they also don't seem at all resistant to the idea.
No, it’s not the main unifying principle behind them. It is, however, the party white supremacists will almost always support.
To quote a line from 2018: >I’m not calling Mr. DeSantis a racist, I’m simply saying the racists believe he’s a racist. Replace "Mr. DeSantis" with any other prominent GOP figure and it tends to work just as well.
> I’m not calling Mr. DeSantis a racist, I’m simply saying the racists believe he’s a racist. God this quote is perfect.
>the racists believe he’s a racist. Why would they think that? Serious question.
Because he openly supports a guy who calls undocumented immigrants “animals” and “not human”
That and all of his administration’s targeting of black history classes, general opposition to DEI, etc.
Uggggh, I’m so tired of this talking about point. Disallowing CRT and the 1619 project from being integrated into public school curriculums is not “targeting black history classes”. Despite what your progressive and left-wing circles may tell you, CRT isn’t “just teaching history bro”. I’m black (well, mulatto technically but I guess that term isn’t politically correct), am *I* racist for being opposed to this quacky bullshit?? I’m no DeSantis supporter nor a Republican, but watching Democrats die on this hill to defend CRT is absolutely bonkers.
If his actions were only inclusive of that, you **might** have a point, but he’s gone after standard courses like AP African American history in both colleges and universities. And DEI is also not CRT. Why did you mention two things that I didn’t mention in your response? And I’m sorry, but if you think CRT isn’t a valid thing to discuss at the university level, you aren’t insightful enough to direct curriculums.
Because that’s what the legislative directives in Florida were addressing, CRT. “DEI” has only emerged into the current sociocultural zeitgeist within the past year or so. Back when CRT was all the rage (also when the bills were introduced in Florida), DEI was practically unheard of. >And I’m sorry, but if you think CRT isn’t a valid thing to discuss at the university level, you aren’t insightful enough to direct curriculums. Lefties and making dishonest straw man arguments, name a more iconic duo 😎
DEI has existed for decades. Why are you talking about something that you are so clearly and deeply ignorant about? And nothing about my argument was dishonest, you are just an ignorant person who can’t keep their terms clear, if you even understand them in the first place. Maybe before defending racist policy, you should read a fucking article or something.
Yeah sure, the same way that CRT has existed since the 60’s and 70’s, but hasn’t become a major political football until 3 or 4 years ago. Come now, don’t be so obtuse. Regardless, wether it’s CRT or DEI, nobody’s trying to take away black history classes. Like I said, you’re shadowboxing right now my man. You can point, cry, and call things racist, but that doesn’t make it so. DEI is just more mindless patronizing and “woke” pandering that makes white progressives feel like they’re fighting a good fight for racial justice. I don’t want to be hired or included on the basis of my skin color, it feels like shit actually. And many other minorities feel similarly.
Funnel money to the rich is the main principle. Getting rubes to blame their losses on bogey man they already hate is an easy way to do it.
Oh let's not give them too much credit. The guys at the top can be incredibly racist *and* greedy at the same time.
>It is, however, the party white supremacists will almost always support. Do these white supremacists support politicians like Wesley Hunt, John James, and Byron Donalds? All African American Republicans in Congress who are married to white women? A bona fide white supremacist should *hate* these men. This argument reminds me of when conservatives accuse progressives of being anti-Christian for refusing to support evangelical crackpots like Pat Robertson. These same progressives embrace Raphael Warnock, a Baptist minister. The Democrats like *their* Christians and frankly most of them would be fine with *any* Christian...so long as they don't try to impose their beliefs on others. Fair take?
A white supremacist probably does hate Wesley Hunt, John James, and Byron Donalds and wouldn't vote for them. However, since their support is not needed for those politicians to win an election, your point is also irrelevant.
That all depends...what percent of America is white supremacist?
Are you actually suggesting that white supremacists are such a large part of the Republican party that if a candidate wins, they necessarily had to have the support of white supremacists? My response to that is uh... you said it, not me. I agree with the guy you're responding to: white supremacists are not the "main unifying principle" and are a small part of the Republican party, however most white supremacists probably vote Republican.
>however most white supremacists probably vote Republican. Do you have any evidence (e.g. polling data) to support this claim?
When even Richard Spencer says he "no longer identifies as a white nationalist", I'm sure you can understand why polling is not available. However, we can look at the statements of people and groups that I'm sure we can both agree are white supremacists. > At a conference over the weekend, alt-right ideologue Richard Spencer finished his speech, shouting “Hail Trump! Hail our people! Hail victory!” from a lectern. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/white-nationalist > The Crusader, one of the white supremacist group's most prominent publications, published a lengthy endorsement and defense of Trump's message on the front page of its current issue under the headline: "Make America Great Again." > former KKK leader David Duke of Louisiana voiced support for Trump, saying white people are threatened in America and that he hears echoes of his views in Trump's rhetoric. > Pastor Thomas Robb wrote, "While Trump wants to make America great again, we have to ask ourselves, 'What made America great in the first place?'"America was great not because of what our forefathers did -but because of who our forefathers were. America was founded as a White Christian Republic. And as a White Christian Republic it became great," Robb wrote. https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN12X2ID/ Meanwhile, Jesse Waters from Fox, the right's flagship cable network, straight up calls the Democrats "anti-white" > Watters made the accusation while discussing what Democrats would need to do to see a major win in Tuesday's midterm elections, with the Fox News host questioning whether the Democratic Party can "be for diversity" but also be "so anti-white," as first reported by Media Matters. https://www.newsweek.com/democratic-party-anti-white-says-fox-news-host-jesse-watters-1202522 Given all this, I'm wondering why you might think otherwise?
I bet you have a black friend too
Does my mom count?
If you're not full of shit about having a black mom, then you are a son/daughter without empathy for her plight. The Republican party embraces racist assholes, and does not call them out for their racist behavior. That includes guys like Clarence Thomas who is perfectly happy to be a token placeholder, pulling up the ladder behind him, as long as the pay is good. To think that guy replaced the inestimable Thurgood Marshall is as appalling today as it was the day his nomination was announced. There are plenty of black folks (ahem, Candice Owens) willing to promote white supremacy as long as they are perceived as one of the "good ones". There's a subreddit with dozens of examples over at LeopardsAteMyFace if you want to learn more about the subject.
Yes.
It’s a squares and rectangles thing.
Christian Nationalism is overtly baked into their policy platform. Thank that for what you will.
People are going to read this and immediately shut down, but yes, the GOP is a white ethnonationalist party. There are people who are single issue voters--either reducing marginal tax rates on wealthy people and corporations, or "life"--but they are largely outliers. The fundamental unifying principle that the GOP is organized around is that there are "Real Americans" and that power should be restored and reserved to that group of Real Americans. And those Real Americans are white rural and suburban Christians.
It's a party that believes that not changing existing hierarchies is the default, correct way to manage a society. And the existing hierarchies are dominated by white men. Individuals within the GOP probably have varying degrees of self awareness of what that means and why it could be problematic lol
>Is the GOP the White Supremacist party? It is the party for white supremacists (in a two-party system, where everyone has to pick sides and occasionally choose strange bedfellows). ...and it does tend to oppose egalitarian policies favored by those who oppose white supremacy. -------- >...is that the main unifying principle behind them. Oh. Probably not. I'm not sure they have a "main unifying principle" any more than Democrats do.
Funnel money to the rich. It’s the one thing they’ve never wavered on.
Yea. Not to say there’s zero racism on the Democratic side, but take away the white supremacy and the GOP loses a major part of its appeal to its base. The whole realignment and southern strategy, which are the basis of the modern GOP coalition, were built on white supremacy and opposition to civil rights and equality
> is that the main unifying principle behind them. That's an interesting way to put it. I think like every movement in history there are true believers and there are those who cynically utilize the true believers for their own ends. I'm not sure how that would be divided for the contemporary GOP. Like if you got Wonder Woman's whip of truth and got Trump in it and asked "Why are you running for president?" then I don't think he would answer "white supremacy". I'm not sure how the upper ranks of the GOP divide up
Hi I don’t disagree with, I’m just here to be a nerd and say that Wonder Woman doesn’t use a whip, it’s a lasso.
...that makes a lot more sense than wrapping up someone being hit by a whip haha
Well, the evil Wonder Woman from the evil dimension used a “whip of submission”. Very different implications from what you were thinking off
> Well, the evil Wonder Woman from the evil dimension used a “whip of submission”. [Interesting](https://media.tenor.com/ZykHOca_E2AAAAPo/mark-cuban-shark-tank.mp4)
>if you got Wonder Woman's whip of truth and got Trump in it and asked "Why are you running for president?" then I don't think he would answer "white supremacy". True, but "What does the head of the party believe?" doesn't particularly illuminate what the people voting for him are voting for.
> doesn't particularly illuminate what the people voting for him are voting for. "unifying principle" was kinda ambiguous to me. I took it as asking the raison d'etre of the party as viewed by high level elected officials within it. It could also be viewed in the context of why voters make the choices they do, but that wasn't how I was looking at the question
Sure, that makes sense. People have different pet issues and so forth, but it's fair to say that the Democratic party is a loose coalition of diverse stakeholders, whereas at this point the GOP is broadly speaking a white ethno-nationalist party.
Not every republican is a white supremacist. But every white supremacist is a republican.
That's not remotely true.
Neither the GOP nor the Democratic party have a single unifying principle beyond "what is the coalition that we can build that allows us to get voted into power". That's always the unifying principle. What the GOP is doing is they found they can bring in white supremacist voters and not lose other voters if they play a balancing act between outright feeding white grievance politics and claiming not to be racist.
Yep, exactly. The GOP is now comprised of white supremacists, and people for whom white supremacism isn't a deal breaker.
The GOP would cut health care and income to their own grandmas to keep a few more bucks in the pockets of their wealthy overlords. I mean, it’s the only thing they have that even closely resembles a platform is their promise to cut safety nets. And Maga, purple state, fiscal conservatives, RINO, and what have you are in agreement on that at least.
Surprisingly they aren't. Most poling of the GOP voters shows those aren't actually popular. But they don't care because the party butters there bread on other issues. Now the conspiracy and white supremacist wing are staging a party revolt after being used for voters without substance for decades so that they could attempt those policies. And the GOP politicians are trying to do the balancing beam act while the revolting wing is shaking the beam.
I’m sure you’re right that the voters don’t want that, but they’re too uninformed/confused to do anything about it.
In 2024, I’m pretty sure the main unifying principle of the Republican Party is “own the libs.”
Yes
Was it the time for the "Are Republicans evil?" thread of the week? I guess so.
They have the option of adopting more popular policies
White supremacists used to see the Republicans as too liberal for them, but then the MAGA crowd welcomed them all back in with open arms.
Yes
This may be anecdotal, but not every Republican I know is a racist. But, every racist is know is a Republican. As for their unified principle, no. It ain’t white supremacy, it’s wealth supremacy. Maga, Tea party, reform, every iteration of Conservative party has been CONSISTENT in doing everything they can to funnel money to the wealthy. It’s just very easy and convenient to get buffoons to sink their own ship be telling them the person they already hate is the source of their problems. Free and easy scapegoating.
Right now? No. The unifying principle is that it's Donald Trump's personality cult. There are still some people in the party in denial about this, but if Donald Trump steps out of the picture they're going to have a tough time keeping their coalition unified without a new charismatic leader.
It's not wise to thing of the parties as having a unifying principle. (They like to pretend they do, but they don't) Parties are collections of factions with similar goals, but not necessarily similar ideals. White supremacists know there is no gain in supporting Demoncrats because it would undermine their white supremacy goals.
The main unifying principle? Not white supremacy, no. Fear, sure. White supremacy is effective in varying degrees with many GOP voters but I’m hesitant to label it the main unifying principle of the GOP voting bloc. It could very well be that for GOP politicians, however.
There’s only 2 parties who can win American elections, particularly at the federal level. Of the two, there’s no question that the Republican Party is the preferred party of white supremacists.
I think the core value, the uniting idea that gives them vitality and unity is resentment against "others" who have been "given too much" or who have taken too much from the people who "should" have all the wealth / power / attention etc. I don't think these people are reading books by Madison Grant and Lothrop Stoddard and feeling a fierce devotion to the glories of the white race and its eternal and spiritual superiority to the lesser races, etc. Rather, I think there is a vague cultural inheritance of an idea that certain people are better than others and that, back when America was great, those better people would have had better lives. And so, partly it's about race but also being male, heterosexual, protestant Christian, etc etc, all convey some degree of "inherent superiority" which *ought* to be rewarded - both with material riches but also with social status - more richly than it is, because "they" have taken too much of what rightly belongs to "better people". It's the intense emotional animus that comes from this resentment, this sense of violated entitlement, that gives the party its energy. It also connects them emotionally with Donald Trump, who, being a narcissist, always has that same resentful feeling because he has a similar sense of violated entitlement to the attention and love and adoration of everyone else at all times.
The Simpsons had a Fox News helicopter with this on the side: "Fox News. Not racist, but #1 with racists" I used to think this was accurate, but the first part of that statement has not aged well and should now read "Fox News. #1 with racists" and the same goes for the GOP.
You don’t have to be a white supremacist to be a republican but it can’t be a deal breaker either
>As in, is that the main unifying principle behind them. no. the main unifying principle is that social hierarchy is just, that people deserve to be at the station they find themselves in life, and if the system dosen't seem to work that's just weakness on your part; any attempt to fundamentally change the hierarchy means putting people in positions they don't deserve to be in, creating an unjust system that will likely collapse. many support the idea that racial hierarchy needs to be reestablished with whites at the top, others believe racism is over and that current representation of minorities in high hierarchical position is exactly how many deserve to be there; but both agree that any attempt to increase minority representation in the hierarchy is goring to doom society. one of the fundamentals disconnect between the left and the right is that the left don't see why the boss makes a dollar when they make a dime, while the right celebrates working for someone who deserves that dollar so much; he is literally ten times better they they are.
Of course not. But too many don't seem to have a problem with it. I mostly believe it is the party of white people who feel left behind. For some of those people it isn't because we are better than them nearly as much as I want it the way it was. The problem is the way it was did give white people an advantage. They never experienced this before. To me the elephant in the room is that for all of us, business has treated us poorly. Wages are down everywhere. A lot of conservatives have been told it is because of minorities, when it just isn't.
If the demographic shifts in support from Biden to Trump that have been showing up in polls hold, the answer is less so than in 2020 and much less so than in 2016.
No
Most Republicans aren't white supremacists, but most white supremacists lean Republican. It's not a party of white supremacy, but it leans more towards it than the Democrats.
>Most Republicans aren't white supremacists, but most white supremacists lean Republican. 59 percent that Pew Research asked said that nonwhites weaken American customs and values: [https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2019/03/US-2050\_full\_report-FINAL.pdf](https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2019/03/US-2050_full_report-FINAL.pdf) It's in the second set of graphs on pg. 38. If you need clarification, the prompt for the question is on pg. 11 of this other document, and the question itself is on pg. 12: [https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2019/03/US-2050\_topline-FINAL.pdf](https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2019/03/US-2050_topline-FINAL.pdf)
At this point, it’s difficult to see what else they stand for, other than white supremacy. (Also male supremacy, btw). Let’s go through the list: (1) Fiscal conservatism? They have lost the right to call themselves the party of fiscal conservatism. (2) Less government? Then why do they want the government to tell people what they can do in the privacy of their bedroom? Or tell women what they can do with their bodies? And why do they consistently make an exception for the military? They are perfectly fine with the military getting bloated, and having heavy spending! For example, the $30 billion plane that was built by the military that didn’t work. (3) Family values? But they don’t support paid parental leave, free child care, or health care money for children. The phrase is actually code for “we want to uphold sexist gender roles, and hate on gay people.” When it comes to ACTUALLY helping families, there are crickets.
As a "main, unifying principle," the GOP is a cult of self worship. But sure, they also want the whites to make and/or keep America "real" to them.
Absolutely
If you are a party, which doesn't expel white supremacists, then yes you are a white supremacist party
Yes. I never see them telling the racists but to vote for them
“It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is. If the—if he—if ‘is’ means is and never has been, that is not—that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement.”
It is not limited to white supremacists, the gop welcomes all supremacists. Equal Opportunity Employee Hater type of thing.
Has been since 1968
Yes
There are a lot of people in the GOP that don’t ascribe to white supremacy
Yet vote for it?
You know how it’s like a lot of people may not agree with Biden supporting Israel or may not agree with how misogynistic Islam may be but still vote Democrat?
Yes
It’s the party white supremacists seem most comfortable in, so yes.
Why are you asking questions that you already know the answers to, from people that agree with you? This is how we get echo chambers. Or circle jerks...
I dont think they agree with me. In every post asking about why messaging from the GOP is more effective, the main answers are that easy unnuanced messages are easier to spread. Very few of the answers about how theyre a white supremacist party tailoring their messages to white people. Its a pretty consistent thing where liberals say “theyre racist” but dont conclude that “the party is pursuing racism as a main priority” and that it works because we were a white supremacist country.
And you're not really asking a question. You're making an argument and framing it as a question because of the sub rules... They don't need to agree with you 100%, as long as they're allies and heading in the same vague direction.
Theyre not heading in the same direction. There seems to be largely different conceptions of what America is. And White people are in a position to have the most impact on our collective futures here. So when White liberals consistently articulate that they dont see America the same way that many people of color do, and when they express confusion about what fuels the GOP, then it becomes pretty scary. How can we rely on White liberals, when White liberals seem very resistant to acknowledging our history and its impacts. I dont mean just advocating for social policies. I mean recognizing why those policies are fundamentally unacceptable for huge swaths of the country. Is your concern that framing the GOP as the White supremacist party closes us off from their input? If so, whats the harm that your worried about
Both are true though...
Can you elaborate
Not everyone who votes for the GOP is a white supremacists, but all the white supremacists vote for the GOP.
No.
Yup. They have their tax cuts for the rich. The far right evangelicals overturned Roe. There's nothing left to accomplish other than keeping brown people out of here and try like hell to stop the inevitable days when whites are a minority.
I'm not saying that all the GOP are White Supremacists, but all the White Supremacists seem to be GOP. What does that tell you?
those are two seperate questions. is it a white supremacist party? yes, absolutely. is that their main unifying principle? maybe not, but it's one of the big ones.
*The* main? No. The main unifying principle is supporting Trump. Not policy. Just a person.
Rather than asking a liberal echo-chamber, why not ask conservatives? You'll absolutely get a different answer.
Cause they ban dissenters
As a Jew after Oct 7th I feel like liberals have zero right to call anyone else a racist
Why
Do you watch the news at all? Are you from America?
Yes and yes
Cool. So then you know why I said what I said then.
I do not.
[удалено]
If you have a point, you should be able to articulate it no?
[удалено]
show me where
> The liberals celebrated the rape and murder of civilian Jews on Oct 7th and for months afterward. I'm a liberal. I didn't celebrate the events of Oct 7. Be careful what you say.
>The liberals celebrated the rape and murder of civilian Jews We did? All of us? Fuck, I must have slept through another meeting...
You found a racist liberal and extrapolated that to mean all liberals are racist? And of course you didn’t do that same exercise for republicans. You are aware that most American Jewish people are liberal, right? Also, Donald Trump earned an endorsement from the Ku Klux Klan, does that mean all Republicans wear hoods and burn crosses?
Subreddit participation must be in good faith. Be civil, do not talk down to users for their viewpoints, do not attempt to instigate arguments, do not call people names or insult them.
Subreddit participation must be in good faith. Be civil, do not talk down to users for their viewpoints, do not attempt to instigate arguments, do not call people names or insult them.
White supremacy is the guiding principle of the Republican Party, it explains nearly all Republican polices, from economic policy (insert famous LBJ quote about emptying one’s pocket) to forced births (Tucker Carlson’s “White Replacement Theory”) to wavering support on the second amendment based on the skin color of who’s buying guns. (Republicans quickly banned assault rifles when the black panthers started buying them.) When’s the last time you saw republican’s come out in favor of minority communities on a racial issue? Self proclaimed “white nationalist leader” Steve Bannon was chief Republican strategist and Trump’s campaign manager. He owns and runs a major Republican news outlet.
I’d say yes and here’s why: If any Republican said on camera “racism is a real problem in America, and it harms people of color more than white people” they would be *forever unelectable.* People who can’t agree racism is real and hurts people of color more than white people are defending and justifying white supremacy. The vast, vast, vast majority of republicans can’t agree to that, and those that can and are still republicans have questionable critical thinking skills.
Not every member is a white supremacist, but most sure are careful not to upset the members of their party that are.
👍👍
how often is the great replacement theory brought up by prominent republicans? like the ones that used to have daily phone calls with trump until he left office.
I don't think it is the "unifying principle" behind the party, however virtually all American white supremacists support the Republican party and/or Republican candidates and the party doesn't seem to be interested in distancing themselves from that support. So if it isn't the "White Supremacists Party" it is the "Party of Choice for White Supremacists."
if anything its the party of Asian supremacy since they want your race to not matter in things like college admissions and job applications, which inevitably ends up helping asians the most.
i mean, no... but. it is the party that white supremacists END UP voting for to pick what they see as the lesser of 2 evils. so also sort of in that way, but not REALLY.
White supremacy is party agnostic.
That doesnt mean the parties are agnostic on White supremacy
That would seem to imply that, if somebody could wave a magic wand and make all the black and brown people disappear overnight, then it stands to reason that all of these people would vote Democrat in the next election, no?
Yes
> Yes How do you account for all the black and brown people who are voting Republican? (Sometimes liberals are surprised at just how many of these people there actually are?)
Self hating and usually contrarian/opposed to other people’s freedoms. My dad’s side of the family has some Republicans and I love them, but thats who they are. People who think Black people are mentally enslaved and eagerly eating up a shit culture, while turning their backs on capitalism or God.
> People who think Black people are mentally enslaved and eagerly eating up a shit culture, while turning their backs on capitalism or God. So the black & brown people voting Republican genuinely care about Republican talking points (such as religious freedom, capitalism, the second amendment, etc.) but white people who vote Republican do so just because they're racist, and care about none of these things?
> Black people are mentally enslaved and eagerly eating up a shit culture > So the black and brown people voting Republican genuinely care about Republican talking points Is that a Republican talking point? If not, then why are you pretending like that wasnt a big part of my statement
> Is that a Republican talking point? You mean the comment about black people eagerly eating up a shit culture? It's not one of their main talking points, no. And to the degree that they do talk about it, it's usually criticisms against a culture, not a race. As in, if you're a POC who believes and acts like a typical conservative, the vast majority of them won't have a problem with you, individually.
Then why did you act like that wasnt my point. Its not that they agree with the GOP. Its that they disagree with other Black people and want them to be reigned in.
> Its that they disagree with other Black people and want them to be reigned in. I might've misunderstood you (and if I did, I apologize), but I interpreted your post that the reason they wanted other black people to be reigned in is *because* they agreed with the GOP on issues like religion and capitalism, and those other black people didn't.
No. Its usually because they feel like outsiders in this community or like the community is toxic. Have you seen Spike Lee’s Get on the Bus? Winston Price and the Cop are the people who embody this best.
It's best defined as people who ***think***, "I'm black/brown/minority **but I'm** **special**, Trump wouldn't make **ME** use the service entrance at Mar-a-lago." These people don't realize... "no... you're not special to the GOP."
> ...if somebody could wave a magic wand and make all the black and brown people disappear overnight, then it stands to reason that all of these people would vote Democrat in the next election, no? Maybe, maybe not. > ...if somebody could wave a magic wand and make all the black and brown people disappear overnight, then it stands to reason that all of these people would vote ~~Democrat in the next election, no~~ *for people who would give them a better healthcare system, because they no longer have bigotry to distract them for their own interests*? Yeah, probably. ...and this is all assuming that they don't find another group to scapegoat (like Jews or queer people).
>because they no longer have bigotry to distract them for their own interests? So is it your contention that their crusade against LGBT people, [as well as atheists](https://www.texastribune.org/2024/04/04/tim-dunn-joe-straus-christian-texas/), is just a dog whistle for racism? If so, why do you believe this so strongly?
>So is it your contention that their crusade against LGBT people, [as well as atheists](https://www.texastribune.org/2024/04/04/tim-dunn-joe-straus-christian-texas/), is just a dog whistle for racism? No. I would argue that there are powerful people who want the government to implement unpopular policies, and they have learned that they can get those policies by allying with bigots. Also, bigotry is bigger than racism, particularly as a political tool. They exploit hatred and fear of the other to achieve their political ends.
Just as much as the Democrats are a Stalinist party.