the coloring of America

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of interesting intersecting issues at play. Will take decades to sort out.

As white men are marginalized more and more, there will be less of a common enemy for Democrats. That was at the heart of the affirmative action cases.

The interplay between politics, marriage and child rearing will be interesting. Conservatives are having more children, or perhaps it is more accurate to say that having children is more aligned with conservative values presently. We have no idea how it plays out.

It isn’t a given that as minority groups take power they will continue progressive liberal values (see Michigan townships where Muslim dominated city councils have scaled back on Pride celebrations).

I don’t think a coloring of America leads in a straight line to progressive goals. It will be largely dependent on secularizing immigrant populations and I suspect changing birthing patterns will also be relevant.

-A latino.

Wait so the plan really is for white men to become “marginalized more and more”? Isn’t that exactly what replacement theory is all about?

Glad I am not the only one seeing the "plan" to marginalize "white men".

You know what this is called? Demographic Engineering. And I definitely have seen this trend over the decades...and it’s NOT a good trend.

I met someone years ago and I mentioned that we had a diverse board of 7 directors because there was 1 woman and 1 POC...their response was "that's not diverse enough".

So I think what I'm seeing is indeed demographic engineering...where groups in society are forced to have members with equal % representation from every single different type of demographic even though a a certain group may be only 1% of the entire demographic population. That's not going to ever happen people nor should it ever happen.

The problem is you cannot socially engineer the demographics of society like this. You see it happening with the entertainment industry with the forced inclusion of every single type of demographic.

Some people will read this post and agree that demographic engineering is ok. I personally do not and will not ever support it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of interesting intersecting issues at play. Will take decades to sort out.

As white men are marginalized more and more, there will be less of a common enemy for Democrats. That was at the heart of the affirmative action cases.

The interplay between politics, marriage and child rearing will be interesting. Conservatives are having more children, or perhaps it is more accurate to say that having children is more aligned with conservative values presently. We have no idea how it plays out.

It isn’t a given that as minority groups take power they will continue progressive liberal values (see Michigan townships where Muslim dominated city councils have scaled back on Pride celebrations).

I don’t think a coloring of America leads in a straight line to progressive goals. It will be largely dependent on secularizing immigrant populations and I suspect changing birthing patterns will also be relevant.

-A latino.

Wait so the plan really is for white men to become “marginalized more and more”? Isn’t that exactly what replacement theory is all about?

Glad I am not the only one seeing the "plan" to marginalize "white men".

You know what this is called? Demographic Engineering. And I definitely have seen this trend over the decades...and it’s NOT a good trend.

I met someone years ago and I mentioned that we had a diverse board of 7 directors because there was 1 woman and 1 POC...their response was "that's not diverse enough".

So I think what I'm seeing is indeed demographic engineering...where groups in society are forced to have members with equal % representation from every single different type of demographic even though a a certain group may be only 1% of the entire demographic population. That's not going to ever happen people nor should it ever happen.

The problem is you cannot socially engineer the demographics of society like this. You see it happening with the entertainment industry with the forced inclusion of every single type of demographic.

Some people will read this post and agree that demographic engineering is ok. I personally do not and will not ever support it.

You do realize that women are not 1% of the population right? White people are only about 70% of the population and declining. So your premise is very faulty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of interesting intersecting issues at play. Will take decades to sort out.

As white men are marginalized more and more, there will be less of a common enemy for Democrats. That was at the heart of the affirmative action cases.

The interplay between politics, marriage and child rearing will be interesting. Conservatives are having more children, or perhaps it is more accurate to say that having children is more aligned with conservative values presently. We have no idea how it plays out.

It isn’t a given that as minority groups take power they will continue progressive liberal values (see Michigan townships where Muslim dominated city councils have scaled back on Pride celebrations).

I don’t think a coloring of America leads in a straight line to progressive goals. It will be largely dependent on secularizing immigrant populations and I suspect changing birthing patterns will also be relevant.

-A latino.

Wait so the plan really is for white men to become “marginalized more and more”? Isn’t that exactly what replacement theory is all about?

+1 exactly.

More and more people will be multiracial, like my kids. We just need to all be some shade of tan/brown (my kids are half Asian) so we can stop with this racist BS.

Humans will always find ways to create in groups and out groups. Observable differences like skin color and physical characteristics just make it easier.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of interesting intersecting issues at play. Will take decades to sort out.

As white men are marginalized more and more, there will be less of a common enemy for Democrats. That was at the heart of the affirmative action cases.

The interplay between politics, marriage and child rearing will be interesting. Conservatives are having more children, or perhaps it is more accurate to say that having children is more aligned with conservative values presently. We have no idea how it plays out.

It isn’t a given that as minority groups take power they will continue progressive liberal values (see Michigan townships where Muslim dominated city councils have scaled back on Pride celebrations).

I don’t think a coloring of America leads in a straight line to progressive goals. It will be largely dependent on secularizing immigrant populations and I suspect changing birthing patterns will also be relevant.

-A latino.

Wait so the plan really is for white men to become “marginalized more and more”? Isn’t that exactly what replacement theory is all about?

+1 exactly.

More and more people will be multiracial, like my kids. We just need to all be some shade of tan/brown (my kids are half Asian) so we can stop with this racist BS.

Humans will always find ways to create in groups and out groups. Observable differences like skin color and physical characteristics just make it easier.

but if we are all some shade of brown/tan we can at least dispense with skin color differentiation.

[Anonymous]

After dismantling Affirmative Action, the new class was 47% Asian (while its population is 7% in US). Either way, the elites are turning brown.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:After dismantling Affirmative Action, the new class was 47% Asian (while its population is 7% in US). Either way, the elites are turning brown.

Sorry, I meant new class in MIT --

[url]https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/21/us/mit-black-latino-enrollment-affirmative-action.html?unlocked_article_code=1.FE4.U7fp.l-6vMzgt62JK&smid=url-share[img]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:After dismantling Affirmative Action, the new class was 47% Asian (while its population is 7% in US). Either way, the elites are turning brown.

Sorry, I meant new class in MIT --

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/21/us/mit-black-latino-enrollment-affirmative-action.html?unlocked_article_code=1.FE4.U7fp.l-6vMzgt62JK&smid=url-share

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of interesting intersecting issues at play. Will take decades to sort out.

As white men are marginalized more and more, there will be less of a common enemy for Democrats. That was at the heart of the affirmative action cases.

The interplay between politics, marriage and child rearing will be interesting. Conservatives are having more children, or perhaps it is more accurate to say that having children is more aligned with conservative values presently. We have no idea how it plays out.

It isn’t a given that as minority groups take power they will continue progressive liberal values (see Michigan townships where Muslim dominated city councils have scaled back on Pride celebrations).

I don’t think a coloring of America leads in a straight line to progressive goals. It will be largely dependent on secularizing immigrant populations and I suspect changing birthing patterns will also be relevant.

-A latino.

Wait so the plan really is for white men to become “marginalized more and more”? Isn’t that exactly what replacement theory is all about?

Glad I am not the only one seeing the "plan" to marginalize "white men".

You know what this is called? Demographic Engineering. And I definitely have seen this trend over the decades...and it’s NOT a good trend.

I met someone years ago and I mentioned that we had a diverse board of 7 directors because there was 1 woman and 1 POC...their response was "that's not diverse enough".

So I think what I'm seeing is indeed demographic engineering...where groups in society are forced to have members with equal % representation from every single different type of demographic even though a a certain group may be only 1% of the entire demographic population. That's not going to ever happen people nor should it ever happen.

The problem is you cannot socially engineer the demographics of society like this. You see it happening with the entertainment industry with the forced inclusion of every single type of demographic.

Some people will read this post and agree that demographic engineering is ok. I personally do not and will not ever support it.

You do realize that women are not 1% of the population right? White people are only about 70% of the population and declining. So your premise is very faulty.

I wasn't referring to women or any particular demographic when I referred to 1%, it was merely and example to make a point about demographic engineering. It's about demographic engineering to merely check the box on quotas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of interesting intersecting issues at play. Will take decades to sort out.

As white men are marginalized more and more, there will be less of a common enemy for Democrats. That was at the heart of the affirmative action cases.

The interplay between politics, marriage and child rearing will be interesting. Conservatives are having more children, or perhaps it is more accurate to say that having children is more aligned with conservative values presently. We have no idea how it plays out.

It isn’t a given that as minority groups take power they will continue progressive liberal values (see Michigan townships where Muslim dominated city councils have scaled back on Pride celebrations).

I don’t think a coloring of America leads in a straight line to progressive goals. It will be largely dependent on secularizing immigrant populations and I suspect changing birthing patterns will also be relevant.

-A latino.

Wait so the plan really is for white men to become “marginalized more and more”? Isn’t that exactly what replacement theory is all about?

Glad I am not the only one seeing the "plan" to marginalize "white men".

You know what this is called? Demographic Engineering. And I definitely have seen this trend over the decades...and it’s NOT a good trend.

I met someone years ago and I mentioned that we had a diverse board of 7 directors because there was 1 woman and 1 POC...their response was "that's not diverse enough".

So I think what I'm seeing is indeed demographic engineering...where groups in society are forced to have members with equal % representation from every single different type of demographic even though a a certain group may be only 1% of the entire demographic population. That's not going to ever happen people nor should it ever happen.

The problem is you cannot socially engineer the demographics of society like this. You see it happening with the entertainment industry with the forced inclusion of every single type of demographic.

Some people will read this post and agree that demographic engineering is ok. I personally do not and will not ever support it.

You do realize that women are not 1% of the population right? White people are only about 70% of the population and declining. So your premise is very faulty.

I wasn't referring to women or any particular demographic when I referred to 1%, it was merely and example to make a point about demographic engineering. It's about demographic engineering to merely check the box on quotas.

By the way, I am a professional working woman who simply believes a diverse group does not have to have representation from absolutely every single demographic in order to be considered diverse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of interesting intersecting issues at play. Will take decades to sort out.

As white men are marginalized more and more, there will be less of a common enemy for Democrats. That was at the heart of the affirmative action cases.

The interplay between politics, marriage and child rearing will be interesting. Conservatives are having more children, or perhaps it is more accurate to say that having children is more aligned with conservative values presently. We have no idea how it plays out.

It isn’t a given that as minority groups take power they will continue progressive liberal values (see Michigan townships where Muslim dominated city councils have scaled back on Pride celebrations).

I don’t think a coloring of America leads in a straight line to progressive goals. It will be largely dependent on secularizing immigrant populations and I suspect changing birthing patterns will also be relevant.

-A latino.

Wait so the plan really is for white men to become “marginalized more and more”? Isn’t that exactly what replacement theory is all about?

Glad I am not the only one seeing the "plan" to marginalize "white men".

You know what this is called? Demographic Engineering. And I definitely have seen this trend over the decades...and it’s NOT a good trend.

I met someone years ago and I mentioned that we had a diverse board of 7 directors because there was 1 woman and 1 POC...their response was "that's not diverse enough".

So I think what I'm seeing is indeed demographic engineering...where groups in society are forced to have members with equal % representation from every single different type of demographic even though a a certain group may be only 1% of the entire demographic population. That's not going to ever happen people nor should it ever happen.

The problem is you cannot socially engineer the demographics of society like this. You see it happening with the entertainment industry with the forced inclusion of every single type of demographic.

Some people will read this post and agree that demographic engineering is ok. I personally do not and will not ever support it.

You do realize that women are not 1% of the population right? White people are only about 70% of the population and declining. So your premise is very faulty.

I wasn't referring to women or any particular demographic when I referred to 1%, it was merely and example to make a point about demographic engineering. It's about demographic engineering to merely check the box on quotas.

Ok, but look at the scenario that you described: there was only 1 woman and 1 POC in a room of 7 people. For 'demographic engineering' to be taking place, MORE than 4 of those members should have been women, and MORE than 3 of those should have been POCs. Instead, the person that you were speaking with may have been commenting on the fact that having 1 of each isn't even reflective of our population. That isn't demographic engineering - that's just asking that the leadership of an organization actually reflect the population in which it exists. Because right now, it appears that it was easier to get on the board of directors if you were a white man than any other person.

[Anonymous]

Ah, reminds me of the song ‘It was only in my dreams’. Dream on, punkin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of interesting intersecting issues at play. Will take decades to sort out.

As white men are marginalized more and more, there will be less of a common enemy for Democrats. That was at the heart of the affirmative action cases.

The interplay between politics, marriage and child rearing will be interesting. Conservatives are having more children, or perhaps it is more accurate to say that having children is more aligned with conservative values presently. We have no idea how it plays out.

It isn’t a given that as minority groups take power they will continue progressive liberal values (see Michigan townships where Muslim dominated city councils have scaled back on Pride celebrations).

I don’t think a coloring of America leads in a straight line to progressive goals. It will be largely dependent on secularizing immigrant populations and I suspect changing birthing patterns will also be relevant.

-A latino.

Wait so the plan really is for white men to become “marginalized more and more”? Isn’t that exactly what replacement theory is all about?

+1 exactly.

More and more people will be multiracial, like my kids. We just need to all be some shade of tan/brown (my kids are half Asian) so we can stop with this racist BS.

Humans will always find ways to create in groups and out groups. Observable differences like skin color and physical characteristics just make it easier.

but if we are all some shade of brown/tan we can at least dispense with skin color differentiation.

We will never be the same shade of brown. Your approach may eradicate the lightest and darkest, but there will still be different shades with different (yellow, pink, blue,) undertones, different hair textures, etc. Humans will always find a way to discriminate based on obvious, even if subtle, differences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of interesting intersecting issues at play. Will take decades to sort out.

As white men are marginalized more and more, there will be less of a common enemy for Democrats. That was at the heart of the affirmative action cases.

The interplay between politics, marriage and child rearing will be interesting. Conservatives are having more children, or perhaps it is more accurate to say that having children is more aligned with conservative values presently. We have no idea how it plays out.

It isn’t a given that as minority groups take power they will continue progressive liberal values (see Michigan townships where Muslim dominated city councils have scaled back on Pride celebrations).

I don’t think a coloring of America leads in a straight line to progressive goals. It will be largely dependent on secularizing immigrant populations and I suspect changing birthing patterns will also be relevant.

-A latino.

Wait so the plan really is for white men to become “marginalized more and more”? Isn’t that exactly what replacement theory is all about?

+1 exactly.

More and more people will be multiracial, like my kids. We just need to all be some shade of tan/brown (my kids are half Asian) so we can stop with this racist BS.

Humans will always find ways to create in groups and out groups. Observable differences like skin color and physical characteristics just make it easier.

but if we are all some shade of brown/tan we can at least dispense with skin color differentiation.

We will never be the same shade of brown. Your approach may eradicate the lightest and darkest, but there will still be different shades with different (yellow, pink, blue,) undertones, different hair textures, etc. Humans will always find a way to discriminate based on obvious, even if subtle, differences.

yes but it won't be so extreme. The diversity checkbox will be about something else other than skin color.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of interesting intersecting issues at play. Will take decades to sort out.

As white men are marginalized more and more, there will be less of a common enemy for Democrats. That was at the heart of the affirmative action cases.

The interplay between politics, marriage and child rearing will be interesting. Conservatives are having more children, or perhaps it is more accurate to say that having children is more aligned with conservative values presently. We have no idea how it plays out.

It isn’t a given that as minority groups take power they will continue progressive liberal values (see Michigan townships where Muslim dominated city councils have scaled back on Pride celebrations).

I don’t think a coloring of America leads in a straight line to progressive goals. It will be largely dependent on secularizing immigrant populations and I suspect changing birthing patterns will also be relevant.

-A latino.

Wait so the plan really is for white men to become “marginalized more and more”? Isn’t that exactly what replacement theory is all about?

+1 exactly.

More and more people will be multiracial, like my kids. We just need to all be some shade of tan/brown (my kids are half Asian) so we can stop with this racist BS.

If you think that this group politics will stop just because people's skin color changes, well, there is 10,000 years of human history that says it won't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is what I saw at the DNC convention. It was striking compared to the crowd at the RNC.

The DNC convention had all kinds of people; the RNC had mostly one kind of people. But, then, they don't care about "inclusion" so...

This should not surprise anyone. Remember this?



The top photo is the intern pool in the Obama White House.
The bottom photo is the intern pool in the Trump White House.

This is what the GOP aims for. They have tokens of not even every demographics, but "minorities" as a group get represented by about 3% of the pool. Women are less than 1/4 of the pool.