[late]

"Carlson is one of the leading voices of what passes for conservatism today and a possible Republican presidential contender. So his embrace of the same poisonous rhetoric that fills hate-filled manifestos from neo-Nazi websites and far-right terrorists is yet another step downward into the ninth circle of hell for American democracy.

But it’s important to point out here that Carlson’s views–while expressed more distastefully than most conservative pundits would dare–are fundamental to modern conservatism. All you need to know are two basic facts. First: America is indeed becoming less white, less conservative and less religious. Both through immigration and more importantly through simple generational change, evangelical white conservatives are becoming outnumbered by voters who do not share their views. It’s not a conspiracy by leftists: it’s just how change happens.
But second and perhaps more important is this: attempting to conserve the current hierarchy of wealth and power held in the hands of white men is to believe implicitly in a version of white supremacy. It follows inescapably through cold logic.

Conservatives hate being labeled as racists or misogynists for merely “being conservative.” The problem for them is that there really isn’t a difference. If you’re trying to stop non-whites from voting, you’re a white supremacist."

https://washingtonmonthly.com/2021/04/10/tucker-carlsons-white-supremacy-is-the-core-of-american-conservatism/

[Godstud]

Tucker Carlson is a white supremacist and his history is one of supporting it.

Conservatives hate being labeled as racists or misogynists for merely “being conservative.” The problem for them is that there really isn’t a difference. If you’re trying to stop non-whites from voting, you’re a white supremacist."

QFT.

This is similar to the white supremacists who post on this forum, who get offended if you call them racist or label you an anti-racist(making the excuse that it's a "religion" ) when you call them out for it.

If you are going to spout racist rhetoric, you're a racist. It has nothing to do with someone being AGAINST that. It's got to do with what you choose to affiliate yourself with, and what you are saying.

[Unthinking Majority]

Some white nationalists are just that: they believe caucasians and anglo-American culture should have their own nation-state in order to preserve their own race/culture, but don't believe white people are genetically superior/inferior to any other race.

Other white nationalists believe the above, but also believe white people are inherently superior in genetics and culture to all other races, and believe in a genetic hierarchy.

The first group is kind of understandable. I don't think most Turks would want 100 million Chinese to move to Turkey and make them a minority, nor would Mexicans want 100 million Indians to move to Mexico. The bigger problem is the latter group, the more hardcore white supremacists who believe them superior genetically, the neo-Nazi types. But I guess it depends on what you mean by "white supremacy"? The term has morphed to mean not only a belief in racial genetic superiority but also the belief that whites should have control/dominance in American/European society, so sometimes its unclear what people mean when using the term. Maybe they should make them 2 separate terms.

Nationalism is a heck of a tricky thing and racial nationalism even more so. Is it even justified? Are Jews justified to have their own nation-state? Or Palestinians? Or the Scottish? Or Japanese? Or indigenous people? Or anyone? I mean, is it ok for ie: Italians to want Italy to remain an Italian nation-state where Italians are the majority? Wpuld it be ok if a third were Italians, a third Africans, a third Arabs?

[Godstud]

@Unthinking Majority Having a separate nation state, like Israel, might work were USA not a country made up of people from every ethnic origin in the world. USA's diversity is its strength and a reason why white nationalist/supremacy(little real different in the effects) cannot function well.

[Unthinking Majority]

@Unthinking Majority Having a separate nation state, like Israel, might work were USA not a country made up of people from every ethnic origin in the world. USA's diversity is its strength and a reason why white nationalist/supremacy(little real different in the effects) cannot function well.

What about Britain? France? Italy?

The USA is more complicated i agree because it was founded by Brits, had indigenous there before, quickly brought West Africans over, then the rest of the UK and various European groups, then Asians etc. Europe and much of Asia is made of nation-states, but i'm not sure about USA, Canada etc.

[Godstud]

@Unthinking Majority All these countries were Imperialistic countries that ended up having people from all their Empires, come to their country to live. It's history you can't erase.

USa, Canada, etc. were built on that backs of immigrants from all over the world. White supremacists simply want to deny that heritage.

[Unthinking Majority]

@Unthinking Majority All these countries were Imperialistic countries that ended up having people from all their Empires, come to their country to live. It's history you can't erase.

USa, Canada, etc. were built on that backs of immigrants from all over the world. White supremacists simply want to deny that heritage.

Sure I can agree with the last paragraph. I don't understand the 1st paragraph. Britain, France, Italy, Greece? Are they nation-states? What about the alt-right in those countries? Can the Japanese ethically reject immigration, or should they embrace it? These are complex and uncomfortable issues.

[Saeko]

Sure I can agree with the last paragraph. I don't understand the 1st paragraph. Britain, France, Italy, Greece? Are they nation-states? What about the alt-right in those countries? Can the Japanese ethically reject immigration, or should they embrace it? These are complex and uncomfortable issues.

What about Native Americans? What country should they get? Now there's a complex and uncomfortable issue.

[Unthinking Majority]

What about Native Americans? What country should they get? Now there's a complex and uncomfortable issue.

Well I guess white Americans and black Americans and native Americans don't get a country, they have a multi-cultural country. Native Americans wanted sovereignty over their reserves...should they be stopped? If native Americans never had a "country", but they did have small pieces of tribal territory they fought over and defended against each other and Brits.

[late]

Modern countries are secular because it's the only way to avoid savage sectarian conflict.

As strong as Israel appears, it will one day pay a price for being sectarian, and it won't be a small one. Before you dismiss my statement, take a brief look at the history of that patch of land.

All that nonsense about ethnically pure countries is nuts. Bonkers.

Speaking of bonkers, a racist once introduced a bill to have everyone tested to see if they had 'even a drop' of Black blood. Then someone whispered in his ear that this was the South, and well, everyone needs a hobby. The bill was dropped.

Republicans are White Supremacists. We should do something about that.

[SpecialOlympian]

Carlson is laundering white replacement theory and that's just the first step toward making the GOP more racist than it already is.

I saw the videos earlier today. Carlson's argument is basically that whiteness will be watered down and that this has to be fought against. Except it won't, because Carlson's job is to placate his idiot viewers into voting Republican while serving the same corporate interests that rely on immigrant labor because they don't want to be subject to American minimum wage laws or labor standards.

So they will get the worst of both worlds: Their economic rights will be stripped away and their pure bloodlines and neighborhoods will be "tainted" by immigration. Which, as Verv has told us, lowers "values" while not telling us what those values are or how those values are diminished because nobody in the Pepesphere has ever thought that far ahead.

Farmers, meat processors, etc. will never pay a living wage or provide decent working conditions without severe government interference. It's not even a cost issue, they just don't want to take a slight hit to their profit margins. Because of this they prefer to hire immigrants who do not have the legal rights to complain about their wages or working conditions. The only issue here is that the same people who subscribe to Carlson's racist tirades are angry that the economic model that supports their affordable meat and potatoes diet has actual consequences for them in the form of having to tolerate non-whites in their presence.