Conservatives Fear Discrimination

iBlazed

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Feb 27, 2014
1,593
1,224
New Jersey, United States
Wow, this article is pretty telling. Some fascinating poll results here. I think as much as the right wing of this country tried to disguise it and some even try to change it, there is a general theme of racism and fear in the GOP. Many of them already think whites are a minority and think that discrimination against white people will naturally increase because of it. (I think they're afraid of karma)

I have a theory, it may be incorrect, but just an observation. The South is predominantly conservative, the North is predominantly liberal. I believe that most of today's white conservatives (most conservatives) descend from slave owners or poor southern whites and these are the same people who's families fought to preserve slavery and 100 years later fought against civil rights. (And today are the same ones fighting gay rights) White Liberals, on the other hand, descend from the abolitionists. Of course, liberals have many more minorities in their ranks than conservatives which gives them a major advantage. This theory may be overly general, but I think there's some truth behind it. It seems the same groups of people, the same families, are consistently on the wrong side of history every century.

Let's discuss why it's mostly conservatives who already think whites are a minority, why it scares them so much, and how they're using that fear mongering to win themselves more votes while they still can.

On a side note, many blacks also think that whites are currently a minority, and Im puzzled as to why that may be. So much to talk about, please start...

"They don't know what's coming." That's what Republican pollster Bill McInturff told the Wall Street Journal this week about the demographic wave threatening to swamp his party. McInturff is enormously respected -- indeed, one of the most highly regarded pollsters in U.S. politics. But in this particular instance, he's wrong. They do know it's coming. In fact, many think it's already here.

In June and July, Latino Decisions conducted a national poll for the Center for American Progress and PolicyLink. The poll's sample was especially large -- 2,943 adults, including 1,319 non-Hispanic whites. In one question, respondents were asked to give their "best guess" about the percentage of racial and ethnic minorities in the U.S. population.

Every racial group overestimated the size of the nonwhite population, which in reality is about 37 percent. "Asians had the most accurate estimates," the survey report stated, "with respondents estimating an average of 43 percent -- followed by whites with an average of 48 percent, Latinos with an average of 50 percent, and African Americans with an average of 53 percent."

It's pretty amazing that blacks, on average, think they are currently living in a nation with a nonwhite majority. (They also have experienced a rising sense of "satisfaction" with their lives despite a brutal recession and its aftermath, which hit blacks especially hard.) But this being a piece about conservatives, the white numbers are the relevant ones.

On average, whites overestimated the nation's minority population by 11 percentage points. Digging a little deeper, the poll showed that 59 percent of conservatives estimated the minority population at 41 percent or higher, with 33 percent of conservatives believing nonwhites account for more than half of the U.S. population, a demographic milestone that is still decades away.

Keep that figure in mind as you consider this result from the same poll report: "Sixty-one percent of white conservatives and 56 percent of whites ages 65 or older agree that discrimination against whites will increase due to rising diversity."

So conservatives think the nation is already either majority or almost-majority nonwhite, and a majority of conservatives believes that they will be discriminated against as the nation becomes more nonwhite.

Great, so who's ready to have that conversation about how Republicans have to pass immigration reform legalizing 11 million more brown people?

Boehner? . . . Boehner? . . . Boehner?

This is the immigration vise in which Republicans find themselves. Through the birth of the Tea Party to Obama phones and Obamacare, fear of losing out to the "47 percent" has pervaded and largely defined conservative politics since President Barack Obama's 2008 election. Much of the conservative base views demographic change as zero sum, with whites on the losing end.

Immigration and race are inexorably linked in American political culture and always have been. As John Higham wrote in his history of American nativism, "Strangers in the Land," American white Protestants considered themselves heirs of "the supreme Anglo-Saxon virtue, a gift for political freedom," which included a "unique capacity for self-government." By muddying the racial composition of the nation, immigration not only jeopardizes white privilege, it risks undermining the foundations of freedom itself.

Racial animosity is only one among several threads of opposition to immigration, of course, including economic rationales rooted in concern for the working class. But race has an especially visceral power. The declining white share of the population already has many conservatives rattled. If it declines more rapidly due to mass legalization of undocumented immigrants, many conservatives figure it can only be bad for them and their vision of the good life.

Republicans cannot continue to thrive as a nearly all-white party. Party strategists know they need to pass immigration reform -- with a legalization (though not necessarily citizenship) component -- to eliminate the first of multiple obstacles to winning Hispanic votes. Yet the House has managed to pass only punitive legislation in this Congress, alienating Republicans further from the voters they desperately need to win.

From outside the conservative bubble, the Republicans' Caucasian march into a multiracial century looks like political malpractice -- terminal short-sightedness or possibly the onset of madness. But resistance is deeply rooted in conservatism. It's clear from House Speaker John Boehner's repeated efforts to bring up immigration reform that he desperately wants to clear the party's path to the future. Trouble is, that future is the stuff of conservative nightmares.
Link
 

Meister

Suspended
Oct 10, 2013
5,455
4,265
I dont think people should be labeled as black, white, yellow, female, male, gay, straight aso.
Every person is completely different and thats a good thing.

Besides that the predominant skin pigmentation will tend to be darker in the future United States.
That initself as neither good nor bad.
 

wrinkster22

macrumors 68030
Jun 11, 2011
2,622
6
Toronto
I am not sure the statistics in Canada but Toronto is very multicultural. Large populations of Somali, Vietnamese, Portuguese, Greek, and other nationalities and a right wing mayor was Elected. Also the PM is conservative and has a majority government.
 

iBlazed

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Feb 27, 2014
1,593
1,224
New Jersey, United States
I am not sure the statistics in Canada but Toronto is very multicultural. Large populations of Somali, Vietnamese, Portuguese, Greek, and other nationalities and a right wing mayor was Elected. Also the PM is conservative and has a majority government.
But what is the definition of a conservative in Canada? What are their values?
 

Huntn

macrumors demi-god
May 5, 2008
17,032
16,495
The Misty Mountains
I dont think people should be labeled as black, white, yellow, female, male, gay, straight aso.
Every person is completely different and thats a good thing.

Besides that the predominant skin pigmentation will tend to be darker in the future United States.
That initself as neither good nor bad.
People tend to function with tribe mentality. What better way to identify "them" than appearance? Racial discrimination is a fact. While labels maybe somewhat of a negative, and not accurate (look at DNA ethnenticity results), nor are descriptions of race, humans still react in negative ways to perceived appearance, identified by racial stereotypes. IMO the labels are required to quantify the motivations behind common discrimination.
 

SoAnyway

macrumors 6502
May 10, 2011
476
179
There are two qualities that I attribute to conservatives, they are ignorance and intellectual laziness. It makes no difference what the issue is, in this case a perceived discrimination against whites, it can often be traced back to utter ignorance and a failure to think critically. From that, fear is ginned up to rile the base and in the end, we get nonsense like this with no benefit to anyone, not even to the shrinking conservative minority.
 

sviato

macrumors 68020
Oct 27, 2010
2,274
44
HR 9038 A
I am not sure the statistics in Canada but Toronto is very multicultural. Large populations of Somali, Vietnamese, Portuguese, Greek, and other nationalities and a right wing mayor was Elected. Also the PM is conservative and has a majority government.
But what is the definition of a conservative in Canada? What are their values?
The conservatives in Canada are less conservative than the Republicans and Democrats in the States lol
 

LIVEFRMNYC

macrumors 604
Oct 27, 2009
7,432
8,605
The conservatives in Canada are less conservative than the Republicans and Democrats in the States lol
If that's true, then the liberals in Canada must be annoying pricks that sort their recyclable waste in 30 different categories. :p
 

Meister

Suspended
Oct 10, 2013
5,455
4,265
If that's true, then the liberals in Canada must be annoying pricks that sort their recyclable waste in 30 different categories. :p
Thats germans. Here they have garbage police. They dig through the trash and if its not sorted correctly they try to identify the garbage criminal by analyzing the garbage to prosecute him. And instead of "Cops" they have TV shows that follow around the exciting garbage patrol. Of course the TV show is force financed by a fee payed by every citizen!

I kid you not!

Again: I kid you not!
 

LIVEFRMNYC

macrumors 604
Oct 27, 2009
7,432
8,605
Thats germans. Here they have garbage police. They dig through the trash and if its not sorted correctly they try to identify the garbage criminal by analyzing the garbage to prosecute him. And instead of "Cops" they have TV shows that follow around the exciting garbage patrol. Of course the TV show is force financed by a fee payed by every citizen!

I kid you not!

Again: I kid you not!
What's the show called?
 

Meister

Suspended
Oct 10, 2013
5,455
4,265
What's the show called?
I dont remember. i saw it many years ago. I havent watched german tv for over 10 years.
I still remember it until today. Maybe you can find it on youtube. I remember that the episode I saw played in cologne.
(I couldnt find it on youtube. But I think it was called "Ordnungshueter ...")

Another story:
Two years ago i threw away a bunch of junk at my workplace and the janitor scolded me.
He explained to me about the garbage police that will fine my place of employment if they see the unsorted trash.
He explained to me that they come regularly to dig through it.

I was then forced to dig through a huge trashbin and take things apart because they contained a bit of plastic or wood or paper.
They have all kinds of trashbins.
 
Last edited:

lannister80

macrumors 6502
Apr 7, 2009
476
17
Chicagoland
Thats germans. Here they have garbage police. They dig through the trash and if its not sorted correctly they try to identify the garbage criminal by analyzing the garbage to prosecute him. And instead of "Cops" they have TV shows that follow around the exciting garbage patrol. Of course the TV show is force financed by a fee payed by every citizen!

I kid you not!

Again: I kid you not!
I wish busting people improperly recycling was the worst thing around here (and hence put on cops). Instead we have multi-generational poverty.
 

Meister

Suspended
Oct 10, 2013
5,455
4,265
Instead we have multi-generational poverty.
No worries. Germany also has plenty of that and on top of that it has multi-generational undereducation.
And an educational system that sorts children in three intelligents categories at the age of 10. According to which they have to go to different schools.
Interestingly children in the "not-intelligent-enough-category"almost always stem from poor families or imigrant families.
 
Last edited:

Zombie Acorn

macrumors 65816
Feb 2, 2009
1,301
9,062
Toronto, Ontario
And yet you didn't address the topic at hand. You ignored it completely and only replied once you found a post to be offended about. Shocker.
Well to be honest your entire post pretty much fell apart when you started stating that conservatives were slave holders and liberals were the abolitionists. Nevermind the conservative states that fought and bled on the correct side of the war. :rolleyes:

I wasn't going to say anything at first, but no one else did which is pretty telling although not surprising here in liberal land.
 

iBlazed

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Feb 27, 2014
1,593
1,224
New Jersey, United States
I disagree with you.

In my recent discussion with Dmunjal about the bailout I disagree with his position, but you can't accuse him of not engaging in fact based discussion.

I think there are also plenty of valid conservative arguments to be made about the tax system being overly complex, welfare and work, education, and to some extent transportation.

One of the problems US conservatives have is that a lot of their positions are totally out of step with the rest of the developed world. Abortion should be legal, the pre-Obamacare US healthcare system was fundamentally broken, the US spends far too much on defence, campaigning for gun rights when you live in an urban country and where effective protest is mostly peaceful is pretty silly.
Maybe I'm missing something but I'm not sure how any of this is related to the thread or even to my comment that you replied to. First of all, he didn't engage in any debate. He only attempted one witty comeback which failed. And other than that I don't see what all of America's shortcomings you just listed have anything to do with the OP. :confused:

----------

Well to be honest your entire post pretty much fell apart when you started stating that conservatives were slave holders and liberals were the abolitionists. Nevermind the conservative states that fought and bled on the correct side of the war. :rolleyes:

I wasn't going to say anything at first, but no one else did which is pretty telling although not surprising here in liberal land.
I said myself it was overly general but there is some truth behind it. You can't really deny a demographic reality. Are you really saying that it's completely false and there is no correlation whatsoever?
 

Zombie Acorn

macrumors 65816
Feb 2, 2009
1,301
9,062
Toronto, Ontario
I said myself it was overly general but there is some truth behind it. You can't really deny a demographic reality. Are you really saying that it's completely false and there is no correlation whatsoever?
Considering we have entire conservative states that fought on the opposite side of the war I am going to have to go ahead and say that being conservative has nothing to do with being a descendent of a slave owner.

Compared to liberals today everyone was conservative back then.

----------

Did we also completely forget that Abraham Lincoln was a Republican?
 

iBlazed

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Feb 27, 2014
1,593
1,224
New Jersey, United States
Did we also completely forget that Abraham Lincoln was a Republican?
I refuse to go over the party switch ever again with any conservative ever. I'm sure you know about it pretty well but continue to use that argument hoping the person you're debating doesn't know about it. Disassociate the names of modern day American political parties with conservatives and liberals of the past.
 

APlotdevice

macrumors 68040
Sep 3, 2011
3,109
3,749
Did we also completely forget that Abraham Lincoln was a Republican?
Yes: A pre-Southern Strategy, socially progressive Republican.

What people do seem to forget is that both parties underwent a major shift in their demographics during the 20th century.
 
Last edited:

Zombie Acorn

macrumors 65816
Feb 2, 2009
1,301
9,062
Toronto, Ontario
Yes, a pre-Southern Strategy, socially progressive Republican.
He would still be considered a conservative today merely for his beliefs in limited government, protecting the constitution, and god. Seems to be a lot of distortion around his image as the liberals attempt to envelop him to their cause.
 

APlotdevice

macrumors 68040
Sep 3, 2011
3,109
3,749
He would still be considered a conservative today merely for his beliefs in limited government, protecting the constitution, and god. Seems to be a lot of distortion around his image as the liberals attempt to envelop him to their cause.
"And God"? You know, conservatives don't hold a monopoly on religion. Most liberals in this country are, just by virtue of demographics, Christians. The only difference is that we don't have the religious zealots screaming to have the bible codified into law. Lincoln would likely have been sickened at the sight of so many modern Republicans pandering to these people. He understood that others had different beliefs, and respected that.
 
Last edited:

Eraserhead

macrumors G4
Nov 3, 2005
10,300
10,365
UK
Maybe I'm missing something but I'm not sure how any of this is related to the thread or even to my comment that you replied to. First of all, he didn't engage in any debate. He only attempted one witty comeback which failed.
His argument is that the bailout is bad as it encourages bad behaviour and would have been better to let the banks enter bankruptcy than to save them.

While I disagree his argument does make logical sense.

And other than that I don't see what all of America's shortcomings you just listed have anything to do with the OP. :confused:
We have a conservative government here, one of their policies is to pay welfare monthly like a salary rather than weekly and to make people on benefits pay their rent themselves rather than the government paying it directly to their landlords. That position on welfare makes logical sense to me as it makes being on welfare like having a real job - although it removes the guarantee of government rent to landlords so they are less likely to take tenants on benefits. They also have promoted charter schools and things like that.

Almost all conservatives here are pro-choice, they support the NHS, they might support less restrictions on guns, but they do so from a position where guns are pretty heavily restricted, and they might support more defence spending, but they do so when we spend half as much on defence as a percentage of GDP as the US does. They also aren't against things like high-speed rail on principle. They also are pretty likely to support gay marriage, even though unlike the US it isn't clearly unconstitutional to be against it.

If US conservatives talk about tax and welfare reform and education they can back their points up with logic in a way that they can't if they talk about mainstream conservative talking points like Obamacare.