Buffalo mass shooting - Great Replacement Theory & the long trail of blood

ancapailldorcha

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119086039#Comment_119086039

Quote please.

charlie_says

Some things that are hard to refute from my understanding of the theory, which isn't a real theory (because it's a conspiracy theory right? )or concise, so makes the whole thing subjective, but anyway.....

1. Immigration is deliberately engineered.

2. Immigration is politically and ethnically motivated.

3. Immigration will lead to the ethnic displacement of Whites and the potential extinction of some White ethnic groups.

Overheal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119086300#Comment_119086300

Basically and they're mad as hell to the point of bullets.

Dyr

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119086151#Comment_119086151

You already understand what "European" means in relation to people. "European" has been as a descriptor for people for a very long time and is very well establised. In the same way that African, Asian and so forth are. You know this and everyone else does. You do realise people see through the constant attempts to redefine terms deflection?

For the sake of your argument the term is used to describe the people who are native to Europe. If you want an example, Maghrebis are not Europeans.

Is the next fallback "what does "native" mean" 😂

You realise people see through the constant attempts to redefine terms as nothing more than deflection?

Mr_Jacko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119086344#Comment_119086344

cope

Overheal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119086344#Comment_119086344

The thing you're doing right now?

Overheal

“Progressive liberals, neo-Marxists dazed by the woke dream, people financed by George Soros and promoters of open societies … want to annihilate the Western way of life that you and us love so much,” Orban said during his speech.

“We must coordinate the movement of our troops as we face a big test, 2024 will be a decisive year,” he added, and “reconquer the institutions in Washington D.C. and Brussels.”

Orban also praised Carlson, who broadcast his Fox News show from Hungary for a week in 2021, as the only American media figure willing to challenge “the rule of the liberal media.”

While his keynote address offered plenty of red meat for his right-wing audience made up of prominent American and European leaders and media figures, it was his comments in a speech on Monday that made headlines around the world.

Orban took his oath of office on Monday for a fourth consecutive term leading a country where critics claim he has successfully gutted civil liberties and impeded the democratic process.

During his remarks, Orban echoed the controversial replacement theory and claimed that liberal Europeans are pushing a “suicide attempt” by implementing “the great European population replacement program.”

Orban went on to say that the left is working to “replace the missing European Christian children with migrants.”

The so-called replacement theory has become a central topic of conversation in the United States after the accused Buffalo shooter cited it in the online screed he allegedly wrote laying out his motivations for killing ten Black Americans in a grocery store. Critics have blamed right-wing American media personalities for pushing the ideology that claims left-leaning leaders want to engineer demographic change to disenfranchise right-leaning voters.

The Guardian pointed out that Orban also took aim at LGBTQ rights in the U.S. and Europe, a rising talking point in the culture wars dominating American politics today.

“Echoing another popular theme on the American right, he argued that another form of cultural suicide was ‘gender madness’, a reference to the spread of LGBTQ+ rights in the west,” the Guardian reported.

https://www.mediaite.com/news/viktor-orban-pushed-replacement-theory-anti-lgbtq-rhetoric-ahead-of-cpac-hungary-opening-featuring-tucker-carlson/

Orban has a long history of inflammatory rhetoric from his longstanding attacks on billionaire George Soros to statements defending his nationalist policies as “illiberal democracy” meant to preserve Hungarian culture. In 2018, he sparked fury by saying, “We do not want our own color, traditions, and national culture to be mixed with those of others.”

Other prominent U.S. media figures to speak at the conference include Candace Owens and Jack Posobiec. Former White House chief of staff, Mark Meadows, will address the conference virtually on Friday.

Other prominent right-wing European leaders addressing the conference include the former head of the U.K.’s Independence Party, Nigel Farage, Herbert Kickl, head of the Austrian Freedom Party, and Santiago Abascal, the President of Spain’s Vox party.

Dyr

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119086373#Comment_119086373

So you're disputing that my definition of "European" as it applies to people is not the same defintion that has been in common use since time immemorial?

Overheal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119086394#Comment_119086394

I'm disputing, as I have for 300 posts now that you are not at all arguing in good faith.

Kaybaykwah

Ok

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119086376#Comment_119086376

Of course, numbskulls like Orban don’t shy away from pointing to anyone in their « native » population that doesn’t conform to a given aspect of nationality, and therefore authenticity, and plain old acceptability. The gypsies, the homos; all to be thrown under the bus, or suppressed.

Guys like Carlson are just tilling the soil and planting the seeds of discord on a vast scale for idiots like Chump to effect a comeback. These are gloomy effing times à la power of ten.

porkmaster

What is a goose?

It's an elephant with the right paperwork.

Overheal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119086546#Comment_119086546

Which humorously sums up a lot of the chaffe in the topic.

Boils down however to the culmination of all facts, politics, policy, and rhetoric, incl. from Bully Pulpits used by eg. Carlson and Orban, and even the manifestos of previous shooters, don't talk themselves down by the same means or semantics. They're purebloods, and they want to kill the mongrels, whether they consider themselves proudly white, proudly european, or whatever.

Ush1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119086563#Comment_119086563

And you accuse others of arguing in bad faith?

Overheal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119086596#Comment_119086596

I'm not sure I understand your question/loaded-accusation, please elaborate.

ancapailldorcha

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119086596#Comment_119086596

Yep.

Case in point:

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119086293#Comment_119086293

Whenever you're ready.

Ush1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119086622#Comment_119086622

I'm sure you do understand though. There's a name for that...

Ush1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119086651#Comment_119086651

You're some craic, read over your own posts.

Overheal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119086663#Comment_119086663

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119086667#Comment_119086667

And you accuse others of arguing in bad faith?

ancapailldorcha

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119086667#Comment_119086667

Nothing then. Just lies.

goose2005

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119085670#Comment_119085670

people don't use these kind of arguments wrt Native Americans or Palestinians or Inuit, "ah sure people are people, does it really matter if there are ten million Tibetans here or ten million Han?"

Emigration and immigration are not "natural", they are the result of choices - we could choose to take 10 million or we could choose to take none.

Overheal

Fox Guest calls Fox News out on pushing GRT, gets shut down by nervous host about 'letting them adjudicate' the shooting and signaling they wanted to stay the hell away from it... lol

"We also have to remember the ‘Great Replacement’ theory that has been spewed on this network alone, and the Buffalo shooter referenced it. These are all remnants of the Republican party. That’s the party of hate."

“We’re gonna let them adjudicate that case without us commenting on it,” Faulkner responded, and when she turned the floor over to Charlie Hurt, he said “I just think the idea of taking a horrible, horrible, unthinkable tragedy like what we saw in Buffalo, New York and trying to advance a partisan political agenda off of it is just beyond reprehensible to me.”

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/fox-news-guest-calls-out-network-on-air-for-pushing-great-replacement-theory/

This was Fox News advancing a partisan political agenda last night off the tragedy

https://video.foxnews.com/v/6306359096112#sp=show-clips

A Buffalo survivor recalls during his dry run, the shooter asked her (white, WRT Wibbs) why she worked at 'an all black store'

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/red-flags-grocery-manager-tells-fox-news-buffalo-shooter-once-asked-her-why-she-works-in-all-black-store/

Wibbs

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119086137#Comment_119086137

Slaves. Not exactly a great point for migration.

Roman culture was a mix, but it was far less a mix of people. And of course they were an imperial power, so what people did migrate into the greater Roman world, or were subjugated by it, to have any chance of an easy life and certainly a prosperous one aping Roman customs and culture was a given. So adopting the dress, religion, language, building styles, naming your kids with Roman names etc. Or they were a slave. They were at times very proud of the "world" being represented in Rome, where you could see and hear "foreigners" about the place. At the same time it was considered good business and on the statutes of slave trading to declare where your slave was from, as different origins got different prices. Those from "evil nations" were cheaper.

And given your examples of the goths etc migration it seems the locals had very good reason to be fearful of the other as when they crossed the Rhine that was the death knell of their culture and empire. Even simple things like pottery stopped being produced, with literacy and writing fell off a cliff for a couple of centuries. Again not a great point for migration. There's a reason we still call those who destroy things with no obvious purpose "vandals".

So to recap: Your examples of stable and successful societies of the past with "diversity" were either diverse because of slavery, or empire building subjugating the other and in each case the dominant culture was, well, dominant and only multicultural if and when it suited the dominant culture and when it started to lose that dominance the culture was on the way out.

Kaybaykwah

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119086814#Comment_119086814

If we all harken back to the Hun and Vandal invasions to prove our modern world’s incompatible mixes of population, we might as well call it quits as humanity goes.

But , I’ll give you that, at least the Huns and Vandals were scoping out European tributes. You’d probably have to eliminate Hungarians from the list of prospective immigrants of host countries.

One thing about Orban’s sucking up to Poutine’s nationalism mixed in with his love of Native culture:

I was in Budapest for the 60th anniversary of the uprising. I remember distinctly how the commemorators had placed a Soviet tank pointing its gun at the National Museum the way the Russians had decades before. There is so much mutual respect for cultures among them lil' kinglets. That’s probably what is playing out in Ukraine right now. One man’s Torturer is another one’s saviour.

Wibbs

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119085670#Comment_119085670

Yeah. African populations have the widest genetic diversity as Africa is where anatomically modern humans evolved and then later on got the wanderlust(like Homo Erectus way before that. Those buggers were like New Zealander college students😁) and spread into the rest of the world. A Norwegian and a Greek are more related to each other than say a Gongalese and a Tanzanian living twenty miles from each other could be. When some of us left Africa it got interesting as we were going into places where there were already people and got jiggy with them. Europeans and Asians have archaic hominid genes and active ones too, so clearly had/have some purpose if they've survived even down to today. An obvious one is Nepalese and Tibetan folks who got genes from Denisovans that give them a big advantage in living at altitude. Africans have their own archaic admixture but recovering readable DNA in those climates is difficult, but there are clues in living people.

The interesting thing about pale skin is native Tasmanians who lived in a climate very like Europe only on the other side of the world were and remained a very dark people over tens of thousands of years. Farming may have been the driver in the northern hemisphere. That because Tasmanians never developed agriculture their hunter gatherer diet being more varied and nutricious than a farmers diet meant they got folic acid and vit D from their food, so didn't need to evolve pale skin(though Neandertals who had a similar lifestyle had pale skin, with a couple of gingers thrown in. Different genes to us though). Asians can be very pale, but their pale adaptation uses different genes to Europeans. Better genes too. EG they have about the same rates of skin cancer as Africans and are less prone to sun based skin damage than pale Europeans.

But I digress. 😁

Wibbs

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119086916#Comment_119086916

If we all harken back to the Hun and Vandal invasions to prove our modern world’s incompatible mixes of population, we might as well call it quits as humanity goes.

I wouldn't say call it quits, I would say be realistic and consider basic human nature, rather than thinking we can socially engineer that out. That only goes so far. OK I'm a pale Irishman. At Dracula's book of the month club meeting I'd be still one of the palest feckers in the room. Imagine I move to America tomorrow, get a job, gaff, live my life as a migrating non born and bred Yank. Who is more likely to be stopped by the police, arrested, gaoled, get shot, assaulted, get an interview and job, get a loan etc? Me or a born and bred African American whose family, culture and ties goes back centuries in the country? Hell, who's more likely to get the nod in an interview with the same qualifications here in Ireland? Me or a Nigerian?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119086814#Comment_119086814

The Romans and Greeks etc imported slaves labour as when their society developed a labour shortage resulted. Ancient cultures dealt with it through importing slaves. Modern culture imports paid labour. What do those Greek and Romans slaves become though? Modern Greeks and Italians

Kaybaykwah

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119086968#Comment_119086968

Yes, I get your drift, but if you shack up and beget kids with an African American woman, and the cycle of continues, you may still bravely go on as deathly white, but, but… your offspring…

So the solution to that is there has to be segregation to avoid the misfortunes of mixitudinousness?

Kaybaykwah

It’s important to note that the African continent, including swaths of Northern Africa that had been part of the Roman empire, began to be "explored" in the nineteenth century. The trade in slavery, commencing in earnest in the 17th C, was done by aggregating subjugated in coastal towns by Africans, and therefore, limited the potential knowledge of Native cultures by the Western traders. The exercise was not a cultural one, and conquest disguised as cultural enlightenment is not either, it is a commercial matter.

Dyr

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119085836#Comment_119085836

Oh right, So the current levels of non European immigration to Europe were, in fact, the norm, up until the 17th Century and then they stopped?

Interesting, provide some more detail

Dyr

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119086409#Comment_119086409

I'm not even at the arguing point yet, We've been to go on a linguistic adventure to establish that "Europeans are being replaced by non Europeans in some Europeans countries" is a statement of fact. Most sensible people wouldnt have bothered to contest it, realising that its a sticky wicket but this is Boards so no suprise.

You can feel free to have a go to. Then we can move onto whether this is a good thing, bad thing or indifferent thing.

Overheal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119087548#Comment_119087548

I think the only bit worth clearing up is whether, there is anyone on this thread, that actually believes "GRT is happening" not in the sense of dry economical replacement stats etc. but actually in the theory-as-fact that, Jews/NWO liberals are behind this all to reshape the globe to their aims or whatever. In other words, I'd like to as per the aims stated at the foot of the OP, like to know if for example, there are people here that are largely in sympatico with the theories espoused by these people in their manifestos, about it all being planned etc by some freemason cabal of lizard people who are looking to wipe out Granny Smith and the Whites etc.

I have too much faith in everyone here in the thread to imply or believe that anyone here thinks violence is a witworthy response to the refugee/migration/miscegenation (wow I finally spelled that right the first time) question.

Ush1

Can you define your version of the theory first? Shocking thread altogether.

Dyr

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119087741#Comment_119087741

So you agree as that European people are being replaced in some European countries but do not think that its caused by jews/lizard people/the Rothschilds?

Quin_Dub

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119086394#Comment_119086394

No , we're disputing your refusal to speak plainly and actually say what you really mean.

Which is that you don't want to see too many Dark faces or suggestions of the Muslim faith when you are out and about in Ireland.

Because it's "different" and "not the way it used to be" or something.

Overheal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119087750#Comment_119087750

If it was my theory this thread would be in a whole other forum.

https://www.adl.org/resources/backgrounders/the-great-replacement-an-explainer

Ush1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119087769#Comment_119087769

Can you show me anywhere in that link where it is espousing physically moving Europeans elsewhere as was being harked on earlier in the thread?

Overheal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119087756#Comment_119087756

In the dryest, technically-correct sense of the verbiage as it pertains to replacing the anticipated size of the population or the workforce of the economy (ie. immigration by quota, or by skillset). I do not view accepting refugees as replacing other people in the ethnical or cultural sense. I do not believe government officials are waving in millions of refugees to eg. replace republican voters with voters who will do what I tell them to etc. or to wipe out the Christians, or any of that guff.

At worst, I think you could argue but also call a spade a spade that there was a radical-muslim campaign in France for example that, in the most disassociate terms, was a campaign of forced miscegenation, but at the end of the day it was a brutal campaign of rape, coordinated or not. But from there we start to see how these mass killers are getting radicalized: 'my country isn't stopping this' was iirc the whole thrust of Anders Breivik's whole massacre, an act of terror to shake up his country to do something about the muslims, they were his 'mongrels' that were replacing him.

My main concern is we need to bridge all these issues together and talk about them right, or it (the politically charged massacres, lone wolf or otherwise*) will keep happening again.

(just learning this bit. Investigators are reportedly going after ~10 of them who actually connected to the stream, per Wapo:)

https://techcrunch.com/2022/05/18/buffalo-shooter-journal-discord-google-docs/

kowloon

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119083891#Comment_119083891

Wibbs is on the case

Overheal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119087779#Comment_119087779

I don't remember harking that myself so I might be the wrong person to reference in relation to what you say was harked earlier on thread, and with it, how whatever was harked may or may not relate to the ADL article above, which explains the gist of things.

John Doe1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119084084#Comment_119084084

There are very few Spanish Americans in the US. There are plenty of latin americans who you would not mistake for European origin also.

Overheal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119087984#Comment_119087984

The spanish owned Florida for a while you know, or at least, gave it a good try - eg.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castillo_de_San_Marcos

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119087522#Comment_119087522

The major waves of inward migration to Europe in the common era would have been the Jews, the huns, the Slavs, the tartars and various other Turkic migrations, the ottoman and the Romani.

From about 1500 until about 1950 Europe became a continent of net outward migration however. Aligning with the initial position I posted that migration is about people following the resources. During that time Europe had a rapidly expanding population, so populations had to move elsewhere to get resources, and the expanding population also left no opportunities for inward migrants.

Wibbs

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119088074#Comment_119088074

With the exceptions of Romani and Jews, you left out the part where these "migrations" were on the back of warfare, invasion and imperial expansion. Indeed the Jewish diaspora migration post 70 AD was driven by warfare and invasion in their homeland when a bunch of angered up Italians took a wrecking ball to Jerusalem. And it's not as if being Roma has been a walk in the park.

As well as resources the other reason migrations into Europe stopped was because from about 1500 invading European countries was not much of an option any more for those outside who wanted to try. Ottoman expansion was halted. The Mongols had a go, but there was little chance of that succeeding. Slavs are European anyway.

The European outward migration was also on the back of invasion and imperial expansion and it didn't do the locals of the places they expanded into much good. Between the British, French and the Spanish in North America the Native American population dropped by over 80%.

RobbieTheRobber

The biggest killer of the native population following the Europeans arrival is disease. Smallpox wiped out entirely some smaller tribes on its own and in some areas accounted for up 90% of the population decrease by some estimates.

It wasn't warfare that primarily wiped out the peoples of the Americas.

Wibbs

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119087054#Comment_119087054

People tend to "segregate" themselves. The vast majority have kids with people like them; in background, education and yes "race". In the US the group the "Whites" are most likely to get together with are "Hispanics".

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119087097#Comment_119087097

Very much so. Always follow the money. Local Africans on the Slave Coast made plenty of cash out of the Atlantic slave trade and banned the practice itself long after Europeans in Europe and the Americas did. Never mind the Arab slave trade in Africans which went on long before the Atlantic slave trade and long after it(it was more about women "concubines" than men to work fields).

It could be argued that the Atlantic slave trade died out as much because of the machinery of the industrial revolution which rendered slaves and slavery less economically viable.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119088379#Comment_119088379

There are two ways to look at history. The top down, kings, dates, battles and politics, or the bottom up, what is experienced in the lives of people. Wars dont just happen because to kings dont like each other. Its driven ultimately by the demographic shifts within the population and often the seeds of an event that results in one country invading another are a rapid shift in resource availability to population though both natural and man made phenomenon.

Taking just one of the migrations into central Europe - the Slavs arrived in to lands vacated by Germanic tribes following the invasion of the Huns. A large numbers of the Slavs themselves being under pressure in their lands further east migrated to an area where available resources could support the population. Underlying it all is people trying to make a life for themselves.

What happened the Americas had two causes, both the movement of Europeans into the Americas, and the isolation of the Native American from the bulk of Global population. Through no fault of their own they were vulnerable to diseases that were circulating freely through the remainder of the globe. This was a consequence of isolation and yet more evidence of the benefits of movement of people.

TheW1zard

The video was crazy, america is mental

Wibbs

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119088660#Comment_119088660

Hardly a benefit when such movements have killed tens of millions to get said benefit. The reason why was as much to do with the fact that Native Americans didn't have the domesticated animals of the Old World. A large proportion of our pathogens are zoonotic. Covid the most recent example. It's also why Old World diseases fecked the New World, but the reverse didn't happen. With the possible exception of syphilis* Europeans didn't bring back plagues from the Americas.

And you're still avoiding the point that the vast majority of migrations in world history are on the back of warfare, invasion and imperial spread and it rarely works out so well for the locals. People "trying to make a life for themselves" in new lands usually means the locals get the pooey end of the stick. No amount of "two ways to look at history" can deflect from that.

If we look at the current post WW2 politic of migration as multiculturalism, it's not worked out too well for some demographics. Particularly those who look and act the most different to the host culture and peoples. Pick any multicultural White Western nation where being of African origin means you're less likely to be unemployed, requiring social assistance, in prison, undereducated, exposed to poverty. I'll save you the trouble; there isn't one. And the same pattern is seen across generations and different host cultures and politics of same. East Asians being the outlier here as they tend on average to do better in those metrics than the host peoples. There are many reasons for this, racism among the host population being a major one, but it seems it's an intractable one too. In Ireland after only twenty years of this politic running we're already seeing the exact same patterns emerging.

*it was long thought to be American in origin, but there have been examples of the disease found in pre Columbian Europeans.

Dyr

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119088074#Comment_119088074

Jews started showing up around 300 BC

The Huns were around the 400s I think they were invaders not immigrants and they didnt stick around

Tartars around the 1200s, again they were invaders not immigrants and they were driven off

Ottomans also invaders not immigrants and the parts they populated would not be great showcases for the benefits of immigration, given that the word "Bakanization" exists

Romanii have been in Europe for about 1000 -2000 years so that assertion is sorta racist

So, according to you, up until 1950 we have Jews immigrating and we can safely say that they did not come here in the numbers that non Europeans are coming here now. Lets just accept that the current levels of non European immigration are without precedent and move on.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119088946#Comment_119088946

Its racist to say the Romai arrived in Europe in the common era is it now? The Common era being CE aka AD.

As I tated the popultion pressures in Europe resulted in nt outward migration for ca. 500 years up until the last century. So just becasue the migration was more outward than inward does not mean migration is not a fact of life.

I could list all the various groups that have migrated into europe if you like? Not to mention the large numbers of migrations of vastly different peoples within Europe. Why is the migration being European or non European so important to you?