Sick and tired of the "Whites a Minority in America by 2050" bleat

So, once we drop to 49% of the population, we're a minority? Yeah. Right: Like all non-Caucasians will merge into a massive, monolithic, Borg-like collective, the better to oppress us po' white folk.

Jeezus, what are these racists smoking???

isn't anything less than 50% technically a minority?

If it isn't, then what percentage would qualify for the label "minority"?

Would be a plurality.

That's how it works in elections anyway.

:shrug:

hispanics of all race are 20%, blacks are 20% and all others are 11%

whites are not a minority. A plurality as the poster above said, still as the largest "group".

Gimme a break!

What I don't get is why people who say whites will be a minority in 2050 are "racists" for saying what may or may not happen.

It's rather interesting. It's basically a what if it were white people who were the minority sort of scenario. John Travolta movie. This just reminded me of it.
Duckie

still have a question.

Why are the people who are pointing this out "racists"?


Women currently outnumber men in the US. Is pointing that out sexist?

How about the aging population...Baby Boomers? Would pointing out that the Baby Boomers outnumber any other age group be ageist?

The term gets misused so much that it's becoming meaningless.

On a crusade this morning, are you?

discussion would be more productive.

Look at many of the other threads here; The OPs are 20 words or less.

You've given us no context or link. We can't put your comments into perspective without more information.

I think it's much more telling that people obsess about other people being "racists"...sometimes with little to no cause.


As for being on a "Crusade", well...I didn't realize that asking questions on a discussion board could qualify for "Crusade" status.

Especially since I'm not even a Christian.

:shrug:

I think demographic data is interesting. I like to look at historical trends in race, ethnicity, cultural groups etc.

It's not racist to merely not a fact.

If you were to say that it is a horrible tragedy because whites should always be in the majority then ok, that would be racist. But acknowledging it is not.

It's a statement of fact.

HOWEVER...saying that 'whites will be a minority' is not factually correct. What the speaker in that case is doing is comparing 'Whites' with 'Every Other Race Combined Who Is Not White'. It's the cornerstone of an 'Us vs. Them' mentality. People tend to demonstrate their mentality in collectivist statements, and this one indicates that they don't consider any individual race to be an equivalent of white; instead, they view them as a monolithic enemy to be afraid of. It's FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt) directed at anyone who is a different race than White, and (somewhat more secretly) a fear that they will somehow no longer have as much power as they do now. IE...it's a thought that derives strictly from the race of the group (white, nonwhite). Since it is derived strictly from race, it is therefore...racist.

I don't see this as an "us vs them" event.

And while it's not yet factually correct, what's to say it might NOT be factually correct sometime in the future? Maybe it won't be until 2051. Maybe it will happen in 2049. It's probably more correct to say that whites MAY be a "minority" in 2050.


And as far as the FUD idea goes, why would that apply to anybody who even makes the statement that whites will...or may be...a "minority" in XYZ year?


The OP seems to want to imply...or outright state, even...that anyone who makes that statement about when whites will (or may) become a minority is a racist.

I personally think it would be great if we were all one color in the US. A nice shade of coffee, I think. More brown than white. You know why? Because then we wouldn't have to listen to the silly rantings of people who see racism lurking around every corner. Does racism exist? Yes it does. That doesn't mean everything concerning people of different races is "racist".

And I do think it's silly. Just as silly as the RW nuts who see PORN lurking around every corner. Even in children's cartoons, FGS. Yeah, they see porn alright. Because that's what they're looking for.

...will know that it's not a 'minority' that they will be, but that they will be a plurality. If you're wondering about their mindset, do something simple. Correct them. Then watch their response -- if it was an innocent statement, they'll amend their statement or perhaps ask for more information about it (like what the word means, or something like that). They'll clearly display that they want to be factually correct.

Anyone who is doing it out of an agenda will either vehemently deny your correction and get upset/angry/flustered, or will ignore the correction and continue to pursue an agenda behind the statement. There is no agenda that that statement can apply to that involves anything other than a racial view of the world. It's race-ist.

You seem to keep trying to get someone to say something in particular though. These lines here:

I don't see this as an "us vs them" event.

I'll assume you mean 'I don't see how this is an us vs. them type of statement'. Or are ~you~ the one now asserting that this 'minority' statement has some value in fact?

It's an Us vs. Them because there's no point behind it. It's a useless pseudo-factoid with only one known purpose -- to frighten people. It has no correlation to anything remotely of value other than its spectre-like sense of the unspoken 'YOULL be a minority!!!'.

And while it's not yet factually correct, what's to say it might NOT be factually correct sometime in the future? Maybe it won't be until 2051. Maybe it will happen in 2049. It's probably more correct to say that whites MAY be a "minority" in 2050.

Now you're arguing to eventuality. First off, it will likely never be true until the races are blended enough that there is no 'white' to be. Secondly, assuming even that 'at some indeterminate point in the future', it would be true...so what? Again, it's a factoid with absolutely no useful purpose that isn't based on a racial view of some unnamed event.

Enough hemming and hawwing with 'but, if, well it might, but it may be,' and so forth. It's a pretty basic concept. You seem intent on saying it's not racist. So I ask you...demonstrate use of this pseudo-factoid in some relevant, non-racial manner.

Your first paragraph comes off sounding like a cake recipe with very specific instructions to follow in order to get a desired result.

And the part about someone vehemently denying he's a racist, or getting angry about being put through some sort of litmus test, well, that's just ridiculous and meant to justify one's own opinion as to someone else's character. Because this isn't going to be done with someone you don't even suspect of being a racist. It's going to be done against someone you have already decided is a racist. The replies or demeanor of the person won't matter one whit if one has appointed oneself judge, jury, and executioner.

The final word on this will be: "I think you are a racist, so therefore you ARE".


In any event, I don't have the same overwhelming obsession with rooting out "racists" as some here seem to have.

You got it! :fistbump:

that's just math.

It doesn't meant that the other 51% are exactly identical.

are racists, necessarily. I WOULD say that the reason for pointing it out could be racially motivated. The people who like to bring it up are trying to create fear within the "white community", in my opinion.

I would add that the reason for stirring up this fear is economically motivated. The goal being to get middle-class white people to vote against policies that may be in their own best interest, just because that policy may benefit a minority or immigrant.

Having said all that, I would agree that racism gets tossed around to the point where it gets diluted. It seems to be used as the simple explanation for ignorance and hatred, in general.

But racially motivated and racist are often mutually inclusive, even if one is not aware that they are. I believe there are plenty of racist people who don't realize it, or don't consciously realize it.

But more to the point...about your statement on racism. To some extent I agree; sometimes racist ~is~ bandied about a tad too much. But I do not think this is one of those cases. Even in the case of 'the goal being to get middle-class white people...', you tacitly admit that the goal is to get white people to vote against their self interests because it may benefit a minority. Why would that bother them? It would only do so if they were racist (!).

Pardon me if I'm wrong, but weren't whites a minority when they first arrived in this country too?

For all the racists wringing their hands over this (and yes, if you're upset by this, I've got news for you: you ARE a racist), I say this: Who gives a flying F? What horrors do you think are going to come crashing down upon your head once you no longer technically outnumber the "infidels" or people who don't look like you?

It is good---to be understood. (And that's as close to poetry as my Scots-Irish ass is ever gonna get!) :toast:

I think you mean plurality.

They absolutly see it as Us: whites, vs Them: everyone else.

I think they are concerned that their past treatment of fellow human beings, that were not white, may come back to bite them in the butt.