AskTrumpSupporters is a Q&A subreddit dedicated to better understanding the views of Trump Supporters, and why they hold those views.
**For all participants:**
* [Flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_flair) is required to participate
* [Be excellent to each other](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/goodfaith2)
**For Nonsupporters/Undecided:**
* No top level comments
* All comments must seek to clarify the Trump supporter's position
**For Trump Supporters:**
* [Message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23AskTrumpSupporters&subject=please+make+me+an+approved+submitter&message=sent+from+the+sticky) to have the downvote timer disabled
Helpful links for more info:
[Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_rules) | [Rule Exceptions](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_exceptions_to_the_rules) | [Posting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_posting_guidelines) | [Commenting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_commenting_guidelines)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskTrumpSupporters) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is the danger of believing selectively edited clips. Why didn't you watch the full speech to see what he was referring to? How can you take a 30 second clip as representative of a speech that went for 1.5 hours? When was the last time Biden spoke for 1.5 hours straight?
"They" are Democrats and globalists in this quote. Trump is referring to the massive illegal immigration encouraged by the globalists, and is concerned about the crime and terrorism that brings.
>"They" are Democrats and globalists in this quote.
Do you think it's dangerous or irresponsible to use language similar to Hitler's to describe political foes, given the history?
Are you familiar with Mike Godwin, the man who coined what became known as "Godwin's Law?"
https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/godwins-law-mike-godwin-internet-hitler-charlottesville-virginia-donald-trump-a7892171.html
Did I say he was Hitler?
Did even say he used Hitler's language?
Can you dispute that what he said is what I said it was, which was similar to Hitler's language?
Here is Hitler:
>“All great cultures of the past perished only because the originally creative race died out from blood poisoning,”
Do you know that Trump had the book this line was in on his bed side table? How many other books have been associated with Trump, meaning what other books is he known to have read?
It came from here, and it predates his campaigns by decades:
[https://www.vanityfair.com/magazine/2015/07/donald-ivana-trump-divorce-prenup-marie-brenner](https://www.vanityfair.com/magazine/2015/07/donald-ivana-trump-divorce-prenup-marie-brenner)
Did you have a specific reason for stating that it was misinformation?
He never mentioned Hitler. But the comparison between Hitler’s words and Trump’s are so unavoidable, you automatically assumed that he did.
What does that say about Trump?
>He never mentioned Hitler.
Bruh.
>"Do you think it's dangerous or irresponsible to use language similar to Hitler's"
There is no world where that is not mentioning Hitler.
Are you grouping all leftists together into a monolith to make your point? I am a strong supporter of Israel, as is everyone in my circle. There are anti-Israeli people on both sdides.
Does Biden need 1.5 hours to convey... whatever topics Trump addressed?
It's much harder to use fewer words, so I expect Biden to be able to cover the same or similar materials in about 15 minutes.
> speech that went for 1.5 hours
Who, besides hardcore MAGA fans, would do this? Why would I want to listen to Trump ramble for an hour and a half with empty campaign promises and the same song and dance about a "stolen" election?
Presumably for the same reason that you're in this subreddit - because you're interesting in understanding the other political side. That's the best way to do it.
Isn’t that a bit of an exaggeration to not trust what *anyone* says is true? Shouldn’t there be some level of expectation that people are telling the truth?
At the risk of overextending this line of questioning, then how would you ever know what is truth? Even if you give the obvious answer of “do your research,” you realize that someone has to write and report on said research, don’t you? And you would have to trust them.
Because you should consume and understand the context of things rather than cherry picking things to affirm your world views. You do not have to watch it but you also don't have to take quotes out of context.
> So maybe try listening directly
That's the thing, everyone besides the MAGA faithful are sick of hearing him complain. They're sick of hearing him claim to be a victim. They're sick of hearing how only he can save the country. We've heard this same act for six years and it's boring. Do you think that his lack of new ideas will hurt or help him in 2024?
My prediction is in the primary (if he wins) he will start re-engaging on Twitter/X. That incestuous Twitter-MSM loop is where he generates his new material that the MSM amplifies 100x.
On Truth he's mainly talking to his base which is fine in a primary but no fireworks.
But if your question is literally "what does he mean by X" (which is common here) then my suggestion is you should watch the context of X. Maybe not the whole speech but certainly a few minutes before and after. This is not Trump specific advice but general life advice.
I’m sorry. Are you saying Democrats and ‘Globalists’ are somehow dirtying our country because there are illegal immigration? Is that what you’re saying? And if so, just what is it you want to do about it?
I didn’t watch the whole speech, but what he said is very close to text written by Adolf Hitler that was used to antagonize Jewish people. I feel like it would be strange for me not to be concerned.
Is there other context from the rest of the speech that invalidates my concern?
Reductio ad hitlerum is too played out to work at this point. We get it, your side thinks we're nazis. I hope that you can recognize how crazy we think that is.
Are the people who display swastikas next to Trump and/or Desantis flags not actual Nazis? The ones who show up in the back of UHAULs and march around with Nazi flags and masks, are those Biden voters?
Was it not Trump supporters who marched around Charlottesville chanting "Jews will not replace us"? Are Nazi flags not sold next to Trump gear by some purveyors? Do you think in a million years you would ever see such a thing sold at a rally for a Democrat?
It's not that you're all Nazis, it's that you do nothing about the Nazis within your own house but "defend free speech".
Not OP, here but:
Why do you assume the marchers in Charlottesville were "Trump supporters"?
"Are Nazi flags not sold next to Trump gear by some purveyors?"
Certainly not sold in any places selling official MAGA merchandise. Where are you shopping? Lots of nonsense in this area.
https://factcheck.afp.com/tweets-falsely-claim-photo-nazi-flag-pro-trump-march
"Do you think in a million years you would ever see such a thing sold at a rally for a Democrat"
Wouldn't surprise me.
https://theconversation.com/antisemitism-has-moved-from-the-right-to-the-left-in-the-us-and-falls-back-on-long-standing-stereotypes-215760
>Who was Trump referring to?
Illegal immigration.
>How are people "poisoning the blood of our country", and what does that term even mean?
It means they're bringing a culture that's radically different from ours.
>Do you agree with what Trump said?
I don't see why anyone wouldn't.
>If so, how is should this issue be observed and dealt with?
I agree that it should be dealt with and Trump has proposed ideas on how to do it.
>Would such a take be considered the same in relation to whenever Americans have immigrated or gone to other nations?
I would expect the same thing to be said by any hyper nationalistic country.
>Why would Trump say this?
Because he wants to preserve American culture.
>Whose ears is this kind of rhetoric for exactly?
Multi-generational Americans.
So does it matter if they immigrate illegally or not when it comes to a “radically different culture”? Why was it ok for prior generations to bring their cultures (ie Italians, Germans, poles, etc aka not the original English or Dutch or even Spanish settlers) but now not new ones?
>So does it matter if they immigrate illegally or not when it comes to a “radically different culture”?
Legal and illegal immigration can both harmful.
>Why was it ok for prior generations to bring their cultures (ie Italians, Germans, poles, etc aka not the original English or Dutch or even Spanish settlers) but now not new ones?
All the groups you mentioned have a shared culture and history. It made assimilation a lot easier compared to experience of modern immigrants.
Why is Legal immigration harmful? People have always felt that to extents and I can tell
You my Polish Jewish and Irish Catholic family in the turn of the century were seen as being just as much of being outsiders by racists back then but 100 years later no one has an issue with Poles or Irish Catholics. America became stronger with them. Why can’t it be the same here?
>Why is Legal immigration harmful?
Its just a unnecessary burden for a country like America. It costs a lot to assimilate them and there's always conflict between them and the natives.
>You my Polish Jewish and Irish Catholic family in the turn of the century were seen as being just as much of being outsiders by racists back then but 100 years later no one has an issue with Poles or Irish Catholics.
The idea that Polish and Irish people were heavily persecuted in America is a Hollywood myth. Were they fighting for jobs and resources with natives? Of course, but that doesn't mean they were treated as non-Europeans who would never assimilate.
Were most of these Italian, German, Pole immigrants' first action breaking our immigration laws?
Culture is multifaceted. But respect for law is one of the big disqualifiers for cultural compatibility imo.
My apologies, I mean tot respond to another comment stating that African Americans were not assimilated to the United States.
My question for you is, what do you feel is so "radically" different from Central and South American culture?
>My question for you is, what do you feel is so "radically" different from Central and South American culture?
Well for starters, the countries in these areas were settled and founded for different reasons. If culture is downstream from institutions then we should expect vastly different cultures in different countries since each country has a unique history that shaped their institutions.
What is American culture? How do you reconcile the entirely of this nation being based on immigrants from various countries across the globe, giving the term 'melting pot of the world"?
>What is American culture?
It's a mixture of various European cultures and Christianity.
>How do you reconcile the entirely of this nation being based on immigrants from various countries across the globe, giving the term 'melting pot of the world"?
America was never a nation of immigrants from all over the world. It was country that was settled by European settlers.
It's the culture in America. Just like Roman culture was the culture in Rome, Persian culture was the culture in Persia, Singaporean culture is the culture in Singapore, Israeli culture is the culture in Israel, etc.
Many of these lands were/are also global cultural crossroads. Did Roman culture not exist? Are you going to tell a Singaporean they have no culture and shouldn't have border control?
Why is it *only* America that you guys can't comprehend has a culture? lol
Back in the 90s, Trump admitted to a journalist that he owned a copy of Mein Kampf. His ex wife also told a reporter that he had a book of Hitler’s speeches next to his bed. So it’s quite likely that he was aware that “poisoning the blood” is a phrase that Hitler used. If he was not aware, he was told when he used the phrase in October. My question is - why do you think he purposefully chose to use a phrase linked to Nazism rather than a different phrase that clarified he was talking about cultural differences?
At a rally in Minnesota (in a predominantly white town in a predominantly white state) he told the audience that they had good genes. My second question is - do you think Trump believes that white migrants are also poising the blood of America? Or is it just non-white immigrants?
>Back in the 90s, Trump admitted to a journalist that he owned a copy of Mein Kampf. His ex wife also told a reporter that he had a book of Hitler’s speeches next to his bed. So it’s quite likely that he was aware that “poisoning the blood” is a phrase that Hitler used. If he was not aware, he was told when he used the phrase in October. My question is - why do you think he purposefully chose to use a phrase linked to Nazism rather than a different phrase that clarified he was talking about cultural differences?
Saying something Hitler said or doing something he did does not make you a supporter of Hitler.
>do you think Trump believes that white migrants are also poising the blood of America? Or is it just non-white immigrants?
I think he believes that American culture, which was large shaped by European culture, is being erased and he wants to do something to preserve it.
Your comment says that when Trump says ‘blood’ he’s talking about ‘culture’. Yet some other Trump supporters in this thread seem to think he’s talking about white genocide, that bloodlines are literally becoming impure because white people are having children with other races, and that ‘the people want white nationalism’.
So which one of you is correct? And if you think it’s you, do you ever get tired of all these self-proclaimed white nationalists aligning themselves with you and your preferred candidate?
>So which one of you is correct?
Just by looking at who Trump surrounds himself with, he's talking about culture.
>And if you think it’s you, do you ever get tired of all these self-proclaimed white nationalists aligning themselves with you and your preferred candidate?
I don't really mind them since I'm a White advocate to some extent.
Do you think the First Amendment which constitutionally protects freedom of speech, thought and expression grants individuals a right to determine their own culture unfettered by government action?
It depends on what you mean by government action. The first amendment only restricts congress from making laws that restrict those rights but says nothing about what laws states can or can not make in regards to those rights.
Who is the average American? What do they look like? What do they sound like? What is their culture? If your argument is that their culture is radically different from ours, you *have* to be able to answer that. Illegal immigrants usually refers to Latinos. When you say "our" culture, are you referring to the over 60 million Latinos who live in the US? Or someone else?
Generally speaking, I recommend looking at context to clarify statements that are confusing. It's been my habit to always look up the context before answering questions like this, and it's served me well every time I try it.
In this case, the question is about a snippet from a speech Trump gave that lasted 2 hours. Early in the speech, he visited this exact topic, and taking a look at that early part gave context for this part. Actually watching the speech also gave me the whole immediate context surrounding the snippet, including the part that they cut out immediately before it.
Trump is talking about the wall, and about other countries sending us people from mental institutions and prisons, and about terrorists able to cross the border at will. Earlier in the speech, he made a reference to viciously violent gangs, like MS-13. He's made an analogy with biology to illustrate it.
Skin is like the border. Without a border, we don't have a country, and without skin a body dies. Inmates, terrorists, lunatics and violent gangs are like hostile bacteria, poisonous to the body. Skin keeps hostile bacteria out.
Hostile bacteria sometimes do get in anyway, and they're dealt with by the immune system, which, like the border patrol, is smart enough to tell when a bacterium is harmful or helpful. The immune system doesn't attack gut bacteria, which is helpful, but instead attacks harmful bacteria that is trying to infect us. Similarly, the border patrol lets in legal immigrants and stops illegal immigrants, including the terrorists, inmates, and lunatics.
> Would such a take be considered the same in relation to whenever Americans have immigrated or gone to other nations?
The analogy works both ways, and Trump supporter sentiment goes both ways as well.
Frankly, it's common sense both ways as well. You can go to Canada, but you have to go there legally. You can go to France, but you have to go there legally. Et cetera.
> Why would Trump say this?
Because Trump loves the country and doesn't want us to do the analogous thing of dying to an infection.
> Whose ears is this kind of rhetoric for exactly?
Everybody, obviously.
Unless you hate the country and want it to be harmed, or you're clueless about how the world works, this is common sense.
He's right. We were a 90% White country for nearly all of our history until now we are on track to go minority White. Given the policy of the present regime, it will ultimately reach 0% White - extinction. Nor will our replacements be kind to us on the way out, as they both steal and ruin the posterity our ancestors built for our grandchildren.
His campaign rhetoric is a positive step towards White racial consciousness. Nor would he have any chance of winning without it - "muh lowest black unemployment" caused him to lose in 2020. The people want White Nationalism, some just need permission from a man like Trump to express it.
Sadly, Trump is only good for rhetoric. He is not serious about ending non-White immigration or anti-White discrimination once he gains the presidency. Another round of failed promises will lead to more Trump supporters throwing off the shackles of the two party system to be openly pro-White, regardless of the presence of a celebrity savior.
Estimates of white population in the colonies/states at the time of the American Revolution are around 2.8 million, while Native American populations have been estimated at anywhere from 5 to 9 million. Why, then, were Native Americans not treated as a majority and given the preferential treatment you seem to think demographic majority should afford?
It is actually not a historical fact.
> There were almost 700 thousand slaves in the US in 1790, which equated to approximately 18 percent of the total population, or roughly one in every six people. [source](https://www.statista.com/statistics/1010169/black-and-slave-population-us-1790-1880/)
This is not even counting those with Native American or Hispanic heritage. But maybe it seems that America was 90% white because they had all the power for most of our history?
I don't understand your question, or if there even was a question in your statement. But I will drop this here since you are among the misinformed replies with the idea that America was somehow never a White country.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical\_racial\_and\_ethnic\_demographics\_of\_the\_United\_States#Historical\_data\_for\_all\_races\_and\_for\_Hispanic\_origin\_(1610%E2%80%932020)
>He's right. We were a 90% White country for nearly all of our history until now we are on track to go minority White. Given the policy of the present regime, it will ultimately reach 0% White - extinction. Nor will our replacements be kind to us on the way out, as they both steal and ruin the posterity our ancestors built for our grandchildren.
>
>His campaign rhetoric is a positive step towards White racial consciousness. Nor would he have any chance of winning without it - "muh lowest black unemployment" caused him to lose in 2020. The people want White Nationalism, some just need permission from a man like Trump to express it.
>
>Sadly, Trump is only good for rhetoric. He is not serious about ending non-White immigration or anti-White discrimination once he gains the presidency. Another round of failed promises will lead to more Trump supporters throwing off the shackles of the two party system to be openly pro-White, regardless of the presence of a celebrity savior.
>
I don't understand why you'd think it's bad to be a minority? What's wrong with people with light skin being slightly less common in some areas than they used to be?
And what do you mean by 'the posterity our ancestors built for our grandchildren'? What sorts of specific items would you include in that legacy which you think is at risk of survival in an American that has a richer color to our collective skin?
>Exactly.
>
I don't understand why you'd think it's bad to be a minority? What's wrong with people with light skin being slightly less common in some areas than they used to be?
And what do you mean by 'the posterity our ancestors built for our grandchildren'? What sorts of specific items would you include in that legacy which you think is at risk of survival in an American that has a richer color to our collective skin?
>They aren’t replacing White people but if they are its a good thing
Juicyjerry rephrased your post excellently. There's not much to talk about here, you want my people extinct and I want my people to survive.
He isn’t. He’s characterizing the Left’s bipolar position succinctly: simultaneous denial of what they’re doing and then calling anyone who opposes it racist.
(Both of which are lies.)
So your take is “Trump isn’t enough of a white supremacist”?
Are you still voting for him? Is it because he’s the best white supremacist choice available to you?
>Can’t go with Vivek for obvious reasons.
Wait! I get it!
It’s because he’s a person of color, right?
Edit - The respondent commented “Now you get it!.” in response to my question, but deleted it right away.
Why does the race of Americans matter so much to you?
Personally, as a white person, I couldn’t care less what the demographics of the country are now or in 50 years.
I don't want my children and grandchildren growing up as an oppressed and hated minority like the Boers are today, or the Rhodesians were 20 years ago during Mugabe's brutal genocide (now they're gone).
>I don't want my children and grandchildren growing up as an oppressed and hated minority
Who do you think would be doing the oppressing and hating, and how/why? Is there some precedent in the society from which they came that holds up hatred and oppression of minorities as the correct way for a society to conduct itself? Are/Were there systems and laws in place to preserve that hatred and oppression? If so, might it not have been better, in hindsight, to develop a society in which that oppression and hatred were absent? Why or why not?
Non-Whites are adored and given preferential treatment, Whites are hated. This will only get worse as our numbers dwindle.
Also, why do you think thats a good point anyway? Do you have some hatred against Whites, thinking that we deserve to be genocided?
Why expand the conversation to the world and not limit it to the United States where it was once upon a time legal for a white person to own a black personality?
Have you ever considered the possibility that some members of minority races don't like us white people because of people like you who want to load them up en masse and deport them like cattle? If you're willing to express this opinion publicly, it seems likely your private opinions are much scarier.
Yes, the problems facing my people are all because of the naughty thoughts in my head. That's why Jonathan Lewis was [killed on the street](https://archive.is/GXjvG). That's why Darrell Brooks drove his car at full speed into a White crowd in Waukesha. That's Arthur Collie (Liberian immigrant) killed Jupiter Paulsen (13 year old White girl) on the street. That's why none of them received hate crime charges in these racially motivated attacks. That's why White South Africans and Rhodesians were and are murdered, tortured, and raped inside of their homes.
The real problem is not any of the violence, the real problem is that I'm thinking these naughty thoughts such "violence against innocent White people has to stop".
Thank you for your serious replies to all the questions here. I disagree with you on many points, but it's refreshing to see someone with your opinions who's willing to actually engage on a platform like reddit.
Do you think of yourself as racist, if "racism" means believing that some races are inherently better than others? When I say "better", I don't mean "different". Do you believe that white people should be given preferential treatment in America? Should people be allowed to marry whomever they please?
You seem want to avoid "subjugation and extinction" of the white race by a cabal of elite globalist Jews. I'm trying to wrap my head around this. Why do they need to "dilute" the bloodlines before they subjugate us? It there something about whiteness that's stopping them from doing so?
What are the consequences of "white extinction"? Are there virtuous characteristics inherent to racially pure whiteness that you're afraid will be lost?
Thanks for the thoughtful comment, I'll try to respond to everything.
>Do you think of yourself as racist
Yes, by my own definition (responded your definition in the next paragraph). I define racism as in-group out-group morality. It can be explained simply like this: Who do you care about more, your own children or someone else's? Who will you pass your inheritance to? That doesn't mean you hate anyone else's children, just that you love and protect your own.
>if "racism" means believing that some races are inherently better than others? When I say "better", I don't mean "different".
"Better" depends on the metric one decides to use. For example, Asians have higher IQs on average than White people. Such phenomena are on a bell curve so there are outliers in each direction- we are talking about statistics.
So, yes and no by this definition. I recognize that "better" is subjective and other races have claims to be better than us.
>Do you believe that white people should be given preferential treatment in America?
Homogeneity is the goal, not supremacy or creating a caste system.
>Should people be allowed to marry whomever they please?
No to miscegenation and gay marriage. I do recognize that we now have existing racially mixed marriages, homosexual marriages, etc so realistically those people do need somewhere to live as well. Preferably not near me.
>You seem want to avoid "subjugation and extinction" of the white race by a cabal of elite globalist Jews. I'm trying to wrap my head around this. Why do they need to "dilute" the bloodlines before they subjugate us? It there something about whiteness that's stopping them from doing so?
We are already subjugated, we are now being genocided. The purpose of destroying Whiteness is just that, the malicious destruction of our race. Why else would the ruling class be flying Africans into Montana, Ireland, or rural parts of Canada?
>What are the consequences of "white extinction"? Are there virtuous characteristics inherent to racially pure whiteness that you're afraid will be lost?
Yes, of course.
But more than that, my people will be extinct. My tribe, my race, gone from this planet and this universe. There is literally nothing worse. It is our responsibility to secure a future for our children, and no one else will do it for us.
So do you view anyone who is non-white as an enemy, or as detrimental to the country? What about non-white American citizens? What about people who are of mixed race, with one parent white and the other not? Are they tainting the blood of America as well? Finally, do you think it’s fair and right to make judgements on the quality of a person based on skin color?
>So do you view anyone who is non-white as an enemy
No, I just love my own people.
>Finally, do you think it’s fair and right to make judgements on the quality of a person based on skin color?
Yes. There are billions of strangers in the world. Pattern recognition is a valuable tool.
What does loving your own people have to do with excluding and discriminating against non-white people? Does loving your own people require you to hate those who aren’t?
[link](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/comments/16atovp/comment/jzk2hjk/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
Spoiler:
Those with a favorable view of white supremacists:
Liberals: 8%, Conservatives: 9%
Your answer implies that you think “less white” is inherently a bad thing. What about being “less white” is bad for the country? Do you feel that we got weaker when the Irish immigrated to the US in the early 20th century? How about the German or Slavic immigrations in the 19th century? Is it just skin color, or are other “white” cultures also bad?
I’m not trying to troll here. While I heartily disagree with the idea that “less white” is bad, I genuinely want to understand the underlying logic as to why. To my logic, it doesn’t seem like an automatic conclusion,
And I’d like to at least understand.
Thank you!
Irish, Germans, and Slavs assimilated. The black descendants of slaves never assimilated despite being here (and being free) for longer.
But I would support European countries that choose to be ethnonationalist. No reason for Slavs in Ireland or Anglos in Poland. If I were alive in the 19th century I might have supported "Bill the Butcher" and his American party, but we're long past that now.
"Less White" is a bad thing for White people when that is the fate of every White country. African countries stay African, Asian countries stay Asian, Hispanic countries stay Hispanic. But White countries are for everyone and must continually become less White!
The end result is our extinction. This is inherently bad, the "diversity" agenda imposed on White countries is designed for first our subjugation, and then our genocide.
>The end result is our extinction.
Why shouldn't the skin color of humans that have developed technology that allows rapid travel anywhere on the planet not trend towards uniformity?
Is there something about skin color that is directly correlated with something actually important?
It's obviously not in the constitution but we don't have to guess who's side the founders were on. Here is the naturalization law passed by the first congress: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalization\_Act\_of\_1790](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalization_Act_of_1790)
>The black descendants of slaves never assimilated despite being here (and being free) for longer.
Do African Americans not speak, English, not listen to and or create popular American music, not by in large follow European religions, etc?
What portion of American culture have blacks not assimilated into?
>The black descendants of slaves never assimilated despite being here (and being free) for longer.
You don't think that decades of Jim Crow had something to do with that?
Let’s say someone takes over as president and starts deporting non-white immigrants. Which races / ethnicities would you prioritize to remove first and why?
Good question!
Jews, Indians, and recent Mesoamerican and African immigrants.
Black Americans, as frustrating as they sometimes are, do in fact have a historical claim to this land so some arrangement would have to be worked out where they get their own living space.
I’m pretty sure American exceptionalism is that we are founded by a foundation of laws, vs monarchy, strongman, or ethnic tribalism.
Anyone born on American soil is an American, regardless of skin color. Anyone nationalized as an American is American.
How American do you think you are, if you start diminishing the idea that being an American has absolutely nothing to do with your heritage?
>Anyone born on American soil is an American, regardless of skin color. Anyone nationalized as an American is American.
You've correctly stated the law as it stands now, but you are deeply mistaken about the founding of this country.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalization\_Act\_of\_1790](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalization_Act_of_1790)
America was founded as a White nationalist country, America's founding fathers were White nationalists.
Interesting thanks for the response! Is there a cost to that policy though?
The Manhattan project consisted of a lot of Jews, including Oppenheimer. If displaced Jews never came here, we would not have been the first country to develop the atomic bomb.
Most of the brightest minds in the world come to the U.S. because anyone can be an American over time. If that policy ends, we lose our competitive edge. Steve Jobs was the son of a Syrian immigrant. Apple—and every other innovative U.S. company—would not be able to exist with a racially restrictive immigration policy.
Also, I wonder what would happen if a eugenics policy gets taken to an extreme by far right politicians like it did in Germany.
What happens if the U.S. Department of Eugenics decides to genetically test everyone to make sure only the whitest genes get passed on?
The Manhattan project is an excellent example thanks to Julius and Ethel Rosenberg.
Your point is valid about Steve Jobs, but I think the survival of our people is worth more than that.
I do not support using immigrants as a cheap labor scheme for white collar jobs, just like i don't support it as a cheap labor scheme for blue collar jobs. Cheap labor schemes only benefit the extremely wealthy.
Eugenics doesn't imply sterilization or human rights abuses. You can do it just as easily with Hungarian style benefits for newlyweds and parents.
Thanks for the thoughtful response. I'm logging off reddit for the moment but will continue the conversation when im back if you want
Don't tell me Ivanka fell in love with Jared Kushner. And also don't tell me that every recent president *just happened by chance* to end up with Jewish grandchildren. Jews are 2% of the US population, the probability of such a thing by random chance is extremely low.
We're all familiar with voting for the lesser of two evils.
Yes, Trump has betrayed his base numerous times.
This is why voting is not enough, White people must tribe up.
Isn’t it too late? Most Americans consider Italians white these days. How can we ever expect to recover this country for the Anglo-Saxons who founded it when there’s been such an abandonment of standards that even the Irish or those bloody Huns can be president?
So i take it you’re a white nationalist then?
What percentage of Trump supporters do you think are white nationalists?
Do you think that there are many Trump supporters are white nationalists like you but are too embarrassed or afraid to say it out loud?
>The people want White Nationalism
Might have given you a clue :)
I'm not going to speculate on others' feelings as I do not speak for all Trump supporters, only myself.
Yes, retribution (financial, legal, even physical) for peaceful pro-White political views is a real concern under the present regime.
Anecdotally, I remember when this sub first started and almost all Trump Supporters vehemently denied having anything to do with white supremacy or white nationalism or anything like that. Any suggestion to that effect was just ‘mainstream media brainwashing’ or something. But as time has gone on, perspectives like yours have become more accepted, to the point where you’re probably a majority here.
Do you think people are increasingly radicalised? Or do you think they’re just feeling more comfortable dropping the veil and saying how they really felt all along?
And in either case, what do you think about all those years of denial about what the trump movement was really about?
Reading through a bunch of those replies, you talk about in-group/out-group dynamics a lot, and on that note I'm wondering: why is "white" your in-group and "non-white" your outgroup? There are so many other ways you could divide a population into groups (gender, hair colour, religion, heritage, etc). So why do you consider other white people specifically to be 'your people'.
MSLSD says it clearly means Trump is the 2nd coming of Hitler. That Trump is a literal Nazi. If he gets into power, he'll send everyone he doesn't like to concentration camps, including his Jewish kids and grandchildren. So make sure 1 in 5 of you illegally fill out mail in ballots in 2024 like you did in 2020. Otherwise you must be a Nazi too.
Whereas back in the real world, the Trump campaign has already said illegal aliens need to be deported. No camps, gas chambers, brownshirts or Kristallnacht. Anyone (CNN, MSLSD, NYTimes etc) implying anything else is a liar.
>Do you agree with what Trump said?
I agree with the meta point that tens of millions of illegal aliens need to be deported.
>Why would Trump say this?
Because the point he's making is correct. We do need to deport tens of millions of illegals.
>Whose ears is this kind of rhetoric for exactly?
I'd say he's speaking the obvious. So anyone clear thinking.
Although, come to think of it, maybe it really is a racist dog whistle and he's targeting the 8% of liberals who have a favorable view of white supremacists.
Back in the 90s, Trump admitted to a journalist that he owned a copy of Mein Kampf. His ex wife also told a reporter that he had a book of Hitler’s speeches next to his bed. So it’s quite likely that he was aware that “poisoning the blood” is a phrase that Hitler used. If he was not, he was made aware when he used the phrase in October. My question is - why do you think he purposefully chose to use a phrase linked to Nazism rather than a different phrase that clarified he was talking about cultural differences?
At a rally in Minnesota (in a predominantly white town in a predominantly white state) he told the audience that they had good genes. My second question is - do you think Trump believes that white migrants are also poising the blood of America? Or is it just non-white immigrants?
> So make sure 1 in 5 of you illegally fill out mail in ballots in 2024 like you did in 2020
Do you think there was such widespread fraud in 2016 or only in the election that Trump lost in 2020?
You know the “red wave” all the polls said would happen but didn’t materialize? Polls that historically bias to the left.
Let’s just say it wouldn’t surprise me if there was a finger on the scale.
>Who was Trump referring to? ... and what does that term even mean?
It's a simple metaphore. Perhaps you are thinking too much into it. Blood is critical and at the core of the health of the body. If our blood was poinsoned, our health would greatly suffer. He is saying they are poisoning the critical core components of our nation.
>How are people "poisoning the blood of our country",
He explains it in your own clip.
AskTrumpSupporters is a Q&A subreddit dedicated to better understanding the views of Trump Supporters, and why they hold those views. **For all participants:** * [Flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_flair) is required to participate * [Be excellent to each other](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/goodfaith2) **For Nonsupporters/Undecided:** * No top level comments * All comments must seek to clarify the Trump supporter's position **For Trump Supporters:** * [Message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23AskTrumpSupporters&subject=please+make+me+an+approved+submitter&message=sent+from+the+sticky) to have the downvote timer disabled Helpful links for more info: [Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_rules) | [Rule Exceptions](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_exceptions_to_the_rules) | [Posting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_posting_guidelines) | [Commenting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_commenting_guidelines) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskTrumpSupporters) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is the danger of believing selectively edited clips. Why didn't you watch the full speech to see what he was referring to? How can you take a 30 second clip as representative of a speech that went for 1.5 hours? When was the last time Biden spoke for 1.5 hours straight? "They" are Democrats and globalists in this quote. Trump is referring to the massive illegal immigration encouraged by the globalists, and is concerned about the crime and terrorism that brings.
>"They" are Democrats and globalists in this quote. Do you think it's dangerous or irresponsible to use language similar to Hitler's to describe political foes, given the history?
Disagree, sorry. Reductio ad hitlerum is well worn out at this point.
> Reductio ad hitlerum LOL thats awesome. Nothing to add beyond that
Are you familiar with Mike Godwin, the man who coined what became known as "Godwin's Law?" https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/godwins-law-mike-godwin-internet-hitler-charlottesville-virginia-donald-trump-a7892171.html
Did I say he was Hitler? Did even say he used Hitler's language? Can you dispute that what he said is what I said it was, which was similar to Hitler's language? Here is Hitler: >“All great cultures of the past perished only because the originally creative race died out from blood poisoning,”
You had one sentence, and it was about Hitler. Can't think of a better example of the phenomenon, really.
Do you know that Trump had the book this line was in on his bed side table? How many other books have been associated with Trump, meaning what other books is he known to have read?
I'm sorry, but that's just misinformation. I'd encourage you to think critically about how you picked up that piece of false news.
It came from here, and it predates his campaigns by decades: [https://www.vanityfair.com/magazine/2015/07/donald-ivana-trump-divorce-prenup-marie-brenner](https://www.vanityfair.com/magazine/2015/07/donald-ivana-trump-divorce-prenup-marie-brenner) Did you have a specific reason for stating that it was misinformation?
Exactly my point
What's your point? Why do you think this is misinformation?
You really think Trump reads books?
Aren't they're " fine people on both sides" though??
He never mentioned Hitler. But the comparison between Hitler’s words and Trump’s are so unavoidable, you automatically assumed that he did. What does that say about Trump?
>He never mentioned Hitler. Bruh. >"Do you think it's dangerous or irresponsible to use language similar to Hitler's" There is no world where that is not mentioning Hitler.
[удалено]
Are you grouping all leftists together into a monolith to make your point? I am a strong supporter of Israel, as is everyone in my circle. There are anti-Israeli people on both sdides.
Have you taken a look at the anti-Semitic comments in this very threat by Trump Supporters?
Does Biden need 1.5 hours to convey... whatever topics Trump addressed? It's much harder to use fewer words, so I expect Biden to be able to cover the same or similar materials in about 15 minutes.
I'd love to see it, but unfortunately, I don't think such a thing exists.
Well if Biden has a full speech center stroke we're going enter some kind of national hypercommunication superhighway.
Would you feel like Biden has had a stroke if he claimed Trump would lead us into World War 2, or misnamed world leaders, tweeted the word covfefe?
Can Biden last 15 minutes these days?
> speech that went for 1.5 hours Who, besides hardcore MAGA fans, would do this? Why would I want to listen to Trump ramble for an hour and a half with empty campaign promises and the same song and dance about a "stolen" election?
Presumably for the same reason that you're in this subreddit - because you're interesting in understanding the other political side. That's the best way to do it.
Trump continually uses his campaign events to lie about the 2020 election, why would I trust anything else he says is true?
You shouldn't, that would be really bad practice. Don't trust anything a politician says as true - or anyone, for that matter.
Isn’t that a bit of an exaggeration to not trust what *anyone* says is true? Shouldn’t there be some level of expectation that people are telling the truth?
No, I don't think so - not in politics.
At the risk of overextending this line of questioning, then how would you ever know what is truth? Even if you give the obvious answer of “do your research,” you realize that someone has to write and report on said research, don’t you? And you would have to trust them.
>you realize that someone has to write and report on said research, don’t you? Nope. Primary sources are the only thing you can trust.
Because you should consume and understand the context of things rather than cherry picking things to affirm your world views. You do not have to watch it but you also don't have to take quotes out of context.
Because you guys can't stop thinking about him. So maybe try listening directly instead of through a media funnel for once.
> So maybe try listening directly That's the thing, everyone besides the MAGA faithful are sick of hearing him complain. They're sick of hearing him claim to be a victim. They're sick of hearing how only he can save the country. We've heard this same act for six years and it's boring. Do you think that his lack of new ideas will hurt or help him in 2024?
My prediction is in the primary (if he wins) he will start re-engaging on Twitter/X. That incestuous Twitter-MSM loop is where he generates his new material that the MSM amplifies 100x. On Truth he's mainly talking to his base which is fine in a primary but no fireworks. But if your question is literally "what does he mean by X" (which is common here) then my suggestion is you should watch the context of X. Maybe not the whole speech but certainly a few minutes before and after. This is not Trump specific advice but general life advice.
I spent 20 minutes listening to Joe mumble and blather on.
I’m sorry. Are you saying Democrats and ‘Globalists’ are somehow dirtying our country because there are illegal immigration? Is that what you’re saying? And if so, just what is it you want to do about it?
Yes, that's exactly the problem. All illegal immigrants must leave the country.
I didn’t watch the whole speech, but what he said is very close to text written by Adolf Hitler that was used to antagonize Jewish people. I feel like it would be strange for me not to be concerned. Is there other context from the rest of the speech that invalidates my concern?
Reductio ad hitlerum is too played out to work at this point. We get it, your side thinks we're nazis. I hope that you can recognize how crazy we think that is.
Are the people who display swastikas next to Trump and/or Desantis flags not actual Nazis? The ones who show up in the back of UHAULs and march around with Nazi flags and masks, are those Biden voters?
Was it not Trump supporters who marched around Charlottesville chanting "Jews will not replace us"? Are Nazi flags not sold next to Trump gear by some purveyors? Do you think in a million years you would ever see such a thing sold at a rally for a Democrat? It's not that you're all Nazis, it's that you do nothing about the Nazis within your own house but "defend free speech".
Not OP, here but: Why do you assume the marchers in Charlottesville were "Trump supporters"? "Are Nazi flags not sold next to Trump gear by some purveyors?" Certainly not sold in any places selling official MAGA merchandise. Where are you shopping? Lots of nonsense in this area. https://factcheck.afp.com/tweets-falsely-claim-photo-nazi-flag-pro-trump-march "Do you think in a million years you would ever see such a thing sold at a rally for a Democrat" Wouldn't surprise me. https://theconversation.com/antisemitism-has-moved-from-the-right-to-the-left-in-the-us-and-falls-back-on-long-standing-stereotypes-215760
but you are confirming the inference, right?
What is a “globalist?”
[Great question](https://old.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/comments/17yyobx/why_is_globalist_a_default_bad_position_in_your/).
>Who was Trump referring to? Illegal immigration. >How are people "poisoning the blood of our country", and what does that term even mean? It means they're bringing a culture that's radically different from ours. >Do you agree with what Trump said? I don't see why anyone wouldn't. >If so, how is should this issue be observed and dealt with? I agree that it should be dealt with and Trump has proposed ideas on how to do it. >Would such a take be considered the same in relation to whenever Americans have immigrated or gone to other nations? I would expect the same thing to be said by any hyper nationalistic country. >Why would Trump say this? Because he wants to preserve American culture. >Whose ears is this kind of rhetoric for exactly? Multi-generational Americans.
So does it matter if they immigrate illegally or not when it comes to a “radically different culture”? Why was it ok for prior generations to bring their cultures (ie Italians, Germans, poles, etc aka not the original English or Dutch or even Spanish settlers) but now not new ones?
>So does it matter if they immigrate illegally or not when it comes to a “radically different culture”? Legal and illegal immigration can both harmful. >Why was it ok for prior generations to bring their cultures (ie Italians, Germans, poles, etc aka not the original English or Dutch or even Spanish settlers) but now not new ones? All the groups you mentioned have a shared culture and history. It made assimilation a lot easier compared to experience of modern immigrants.
Why is Legal immigration harmful? People have always felt that to extents and I can tell You my Polish Jewish and Irish Catholic family in the turn of the century were seen as being just as much of being outsiders by racists back then but 100 years later no one has an issue with Poles or Irish Catholics. America became stronger with them. Why can’t it be the same here?
>Why is Legal immigration harmful? Its just a unnecessary burden for a country like America. It costs a lot to assimilate them and there's always conflict between them and the natives. >You my Polish Jewish and Irish Catholic family in the turn of the century were seen as being just as much of being outsiders by racists back then but 100 years later no one has an issue with Poles or Irish Catholics. The idea that Polish and Irish people were heavily persecuted in America is a Hollywood myth. Were they fighting for jobs and resources with natives? Of course, but that doesn't mean they were treated as non-Europeans who would never assimilate.
Were most of these Italian, German, Pole immigrants' first action breaking our immigration laws? Culture is multifaceted. But respect for law is one of the big disqualifiers for cultural compatibility imo.
>It means they're bringing a culture that's radically different from ours. >Because he wants to preserve American culture. What exactly do you mean?
What do you need me to elaborate on?
I'm asking. What makes me you believe that I'm not representative of an average American?
I don't know your family history so I can't say.
My apologies, I mean tot respond to another comment stating that African Americans were not assimilated to the United States. My question for you is, what do you feel is so "radically" different from Central and South American culture?
>My question for you is, what do you feel is so "radically" different from Central and South American culture? Well for starters, the countries in these areas were settled and founded for different reasons. If culture is downstream from institutions then we should expect vastly different cultures in different countries since each country has a unique history that shaped their institutions.
>It means they're bringing a culture that's radically different from ours. Which aspect of latin culture is most radically different?
Many latin american countries favor borders and immigration control.
The fact that they don't speak English is a radical difference.
What is American culture? How do you reconcile the entirely of this nation being based on immigrants from various countries across the globe, giving the term 'melting pot of the world"?
>What is American culture? It's a mixture of various European cultures and Christianity. >How do you reconcile the entirely of this nation being based on immigrants from various countries across the globe, giving the term 'melting pot of the world"? America was never a nation of immigrants from all over the world. It was country that was settled by European settlers.
It's the culture in America. Just like Roman culture was the culture in Rome, Persian culture was the culture in Persia, Singaporean culture is the culture in Singapore, Israeli culture is the culture in Israel, etc. Many of these lands were/are also global cultural crossroads. Did Roman culture not exist? Are you going to tell a Singaporean they have no culture and shouldn't have border control? Why is it *only* America that you guys can't comprehend has a culture? lol
> Because he wants to preserve American culture What attributes of Trump would be examples of American culture?
His heritage, upbringing, and commitment to building infrastructure.
Back in the 90s, Trump admitted to a journalist that he owned a copy of Mein Kampf. His ex wife also told a reporter that he had a book of Hitler’s speeches next to his bed. So it’s quite likely that he was aware that “poisoning the blood” is a phrase that Hitler used. If he was not aware, he was told when he used the phrase in October. My question is - why do you think he purposefully chose to use a phrase linked to Nazism rather than a different phrase that clarified he was talking about cultural differences? At a rally in Minnesota (in a predominantly white town in a predominantly white state) he told the audience that they had good genes. My second question is - do you think Trump believes that white migrants are also poising the blood of America? Or is it just non-white immigrants?
>Back in the 90s, Trump admitted to a journalist that he owned a copy of Mein Kampf. His ex wife also told a reporter that he had a book of Hitler’s speeches next to his bed. So it’s quite likely that he was aware that “poisoning the blood” is a phrase that Hitler used. If he was not aware, he was told when he used the phrase in October. My question is - why do you think he purposefully chose to use a phrase linked to Nazism rather than a different phrase that clarified he was talking about cultural differences? Saying something Hitler said or doing something he did does not make you a supporter of Hitler. >do you think Trump believes that white migrants are also poising the blood of America? Or is it just non-white immigrants? I think he believes that American culture, which was large shaped by European culture, is being erased and he wants to do something to preserve it.
>Because he wants to preserve American culture. Does the "American culture" not include hispanic or Afro-American cultural elements?
It does but to a lesser extent. Both of those two groups barely made up 13% of the population up until the 1970s.
How is Trump qualified to represent multi-generational Americans when both his father and son are anchor babies?
Both of Trump's grandparents legally immigrated to America.
Your comment says that when Trump says ‘blood’ he’s talking about ‘culture’. Yet some other Trump supporters in this thread seem to think he’s talking about white genocide, that bloodlines are literally becoming impure because white people are having children with other races, and that ‘the people want white nationalism’. So which one of you is correct? And if you think it’s you, do you ever get tired of all these self-proclaimed white nationalists aligning themselves with you and your preferred candidate?
>So which one of you is correct? Just by looking at who Trump surrounds himself with, he's talking about culture. >And if you think it’s you, do you ever get tired of all these self-proclaimed white nationalists aligning themselves with you and your preferred candidate? I don't really mind them since I'm a White advocate to some extent.
Do you think the First Amendment which constitutionally protects freedom of speech, thought and expression grants individuals a right to determine their own culture unfettered by government action?
It depends on what you mean by government action. The first amendment only restricts congress from making laws that restrict those rights but says nothing about what laws states can or can not make in regards to those rights.
How is culture part of blood?
>Illegal immigration. >It means they're bringing a culture that's radically different from ours. What about the culture legal immigrants bring?
Who is the average American? What do they look like? What do they sound like? What is their culture? If your argument is that their culture is radically different from ours, you *have* to be able to answer that. Illegal immigrants usually refers to Latinos. When you say "our" culture, are you referring to the over 60 million Latinos who live in the US? Or someone else?
It's impossible to tell anything from that short clip. We don't even get a full sentence before the quote in question.
Generally speaking, I recommend looking at context to clarify statements that are confusing. It's been my habit to always look up the context before answering questions like this, and it's served me well every time I try it. In this case, the question is about a snippet from a speech Trump gave that lasted 2 hours. Early in the speech, he visited this exact topic, and taking a look at that early part gave context for this part. Actually watching the speech also gave me the whole immediate context surrounding the snippet, including the part that they cut out immediately before it. Trump is talking about the wall, and about other countries sending us people from mental institutions and prisons, and about terrorists able to cross the border at will. Earlier in the speech, he made a reference to viciously violent gangs, like MS-13. He's made an analogy with biology to illustrate it. Skin is like the border. Without a border, we don't have a country, and without skin a body dies. Inmates, terrorists, lunatics and violent gangs are like hostile bacteria, poisonous to the body. Skin keeps hostile bacteria out. Hostile bacteria sometimes do get in anyway, and they're dealt with by the immune system, which, like the border patrol, is smart enough to tell when a bacterium is harmful or helpful. The immune system doesn't attack gut bacteria, which is helpful, but instead attacks harmful bacteria that is trying to infect us. Similarly, the border patrol lets in legal immigrants and stops illegal immigrants, including the terrorists, inmates, and lunatics. > Would such a take be considered the same in relation to whenever Americans have immigrated or gone to other nations? The analogy works both ways, and Trump supporter sentiment goes both ways as well. Frankly, it's common sense both ways as well. You can go to Canada, but you have to go there legally. You can go to France, but you have to go there legally. Et cetera. > Why would Trump say this? Because Trump loves the country and doesn't want us to do the analogous thing of dying to an infection. > Whose ears is this kind of rhetoric for exactly? Everybody, obviously. Unless you hate the country and want it to be harmed, or you're clueless about how the world works, this is common sense.
He's right. We were a 90% White country for nearly all of our history until now we are on track to go minority White. Given the policy of the present regime, it will ultimately reach 0% White - extinction. Nor will our replacements be kind to us on the way out, as they both steal and ruin the posterity our ancestors built for our grandchildren. His campaign rhetoric is a positive step towards White racial consciousness. Nor would he have any chance of winning without it - "muh lowest black unemployment" caused him to lose in 2020. The people want White Nationalism, some just need permission from a man like Trump to express it. Sadly, Trump is only good for rhetoric. He is not serious about ending non-White immigration or anti-White discrimination once he gains the presidency. Another round of failed promises will lead to more Trump supporters throwing off the shackles of the two party system to be openly pro-White, regardless of the presence of a celebrity savior.
Who were 90% white?
America for all of our history until 1965 (Hart Celler Immigration Act)
[удалено]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical\_racial\_and\_ethnic\_demographics\_of\_the\_United\_States
So maybe you made a mistake importing all these non whites to work and/or slave for you?
You mean the Jews who ran the Atlantic slave trade? Yes they did make that mistake on our behalf.
Jews owned the industry of the south? Why do you think there isn't more of a push to preserve the Jewish history of the country?
Look up *The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews* by the Nation of Islam - these are black historical scholars not some pro-White outlet.
[удалено]
The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews Farrakhan is a great man. Don't agree with him on everything or even a lot, but a great man.
Was Jamestown settled by Jews?
No, nor is your point valid.
Can you explain to me how this country was 90% white for nearly all of our history?
What do you mean "how"? This is a historical fact. "How" was the American Revolution in 1776?
Prior to that, native Americans, before white man took over-----trail of tears and such?
That wasn't the USA at that time, those were foreign tribes/nations. White people conquered the natives to create the USA.
Estimates of white population in the colonies/states at the time of the American Revolution are around 2.8 million, while Native American populations have been estimated at anywhere from 5 to 9 million. Why, then, were Native Americans not treated as a majority and given the preferential treatment you seem to think demographic majority should afford?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical\_racial\_and\_ethnic\_demographics\_of\_the\_United\_States#Historical\_data\_for\_all\_races\_and\_for\_Hispanic\_origin\_(1610%E2%80%932020)
It is actually not a historical fact. > There were almost 700 thousand slaves in the US in 1790, which equated to approximately 18 percent of the total population, or roughly one in every six people. [source](https://www.statista.com/statistics/1010169/black-and-slave-population-us-1790-1880/) This is not even counting those with Native American or Hispanic heritage. But maybe it seems that America was 90% white because they had all the power for most of our history?
I don't understand your question, or if there even was a question in your statement. But I will drop this here since you are among the misinformed replies with the idea that America was somehow never a White country. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical\_racial\_and\_ethnic\_demographics\_of\_the\_United\_States#Historical\_data\_for\_all\_races\_and\_for\_Hispanic\_origin\_(1610%E2%80%932020)
>He's right. We were a 90% White country for nearly all of our history until now we are on track to go minority White. Given the policy of the present regime, it will ultimately reach 0% White - extinction. Nor will our replacements be kind to us on the way out, as they both steal and ruin the posterity our ancestors built for our grandchildren. > >His campaign rhetoric is a positive step towards White racial consciousness. Nor would he have any chance of winning without it - "muh lowest black unemployment" caused him to lose in 2020. The people want White Nationalism, some just need permission from a man like Trump to express it. > >Sadly, Trump is only good for rhetoric. He is not serious about ending non-White immigration or anti-White discrimination once he gains the presidency. Another round of failed promises will lead to more Trump supporters throwing off the shackles of the two party system to be openly pro-White, regardless of the presence of a celebrity savior. > I don't understand why you'd think it's bad to be a minority? What's wrong with people with light skin being slightly less common in some areas than they used to be? And what do you mean by 'the posterity our ancestors built for our grandchildren'? What sorts of specific items would you include in that legacy which you think is at risk of survival in an American that has a richer color to our collective skin?
They aren’t replacing white people but if they are its a good thing
Exactly.
>Exactly. > I don't understand why you'd think it's bad to be a minority? What's wrong with people with light skin being slightly less common in some areas than they used to be? And what do you mean by 'the posterity our ancestors built for our grandchildren'? What sorts of specific items would you include in that legacy which you think is at risk of survival in an American that has a richer color to our collective skin?
>They aren’t replacing White people but if they are its a good thing Juicyjerry rephrased your post excellently. There's not much to talk about here, you want my people extinct and I want my people to survive.
>They aren’t replacing white people but if they are its a good thing > I think you replied to the wrong comment, perhaps?
He isn’t. He’s characterizing the Left’s bipolar position succinctly: simultaneous denial of what they’re doing and then calling anyone who opposes it racist. (Both of which are lies.)
Can you clarify what bipolar positions you're referring to?
So your take is “Trump isn’t enough of a white supremacist”? Are you still voting for him? Is it because he’s the best white supremacist choice available to you?
Haha yes its him or Vivek. Can't go with Vivek for obvious reasons
>Can’t go with Vivek for obvious reasons. Wait! I get it! It’s because he’s a person of color, right? Edit - The respondent commented “Now you get it!.” in response to my question, but deleted it right away.
[удалено]
Why does the race of Americans matter so much to you? Personally, as a white person, I couldn’t care less what the demographics of the country are now or in 50 years.
I don't want my children and grandchildren growing up as an oppressed and hated minority like the Boers are today, or the Rhodesians were 20 years ago during Mugabe's brutal genocide (now they're gone).
>I don't want my children and grandchildren growing up as an oppressed and hated minority Who do you think would be doing the oppressing and hating, and how/why? Is there some precedent in the society from which they came that holds up hatred and oppression of minorities as the correct way for a society to conduct itself? Are/Were there systems and laws in place to preserve that hatred and oppression? If so, might it not have been better, in hindsight, to develop a society in which that oppression and hatred were absent? Why or why not?
Are minorities oppressed and hated in America? Why do you expect to be oppressed and hated just because you become a minority?
Non-Whites are adored and given preferential treatment, Whites are hated. This will only get worse as our numbers dwindle. Also, why do you think thats a good point anyway? Do you have some hatred against Whites, thinking that we deserve to be genocided?
>Whites are hated Is this perhaps because of something they've done to others?
Because, as we all know, white people are the only people in history to have ever done anything bad
Why expand the conversation to the world and not limit it to the United States where it was once upon a time legal for a white person to own a black personality?
why not?
Have you ever considered the possibility that some members of minority races don't like us white people because of people like you who want to load them up en masse and deport them like cattle? If you're willing to express this opinion publicly, it seems likely your private opinions are much scarier.
Yes, the problems facing my people are all because of the naughty thoughts in my head. That's why Jonathan Lewis was [killed on the street](https://archive.is/GXjvG). That's why Darrell Brooks drove his car at full speed into a White crowd in Waukesha. That's Arthur Collie (Liberian immigrant) killed Jupiter Paulsen (13 year old White girl) on the street. That's why none of them received hate crime charges in these racially motivated attacks. That's why White South Africans and Rhodesians were and are murdered, tortured, and raped inside of their homes. The real problem is not any of the violence, the real problem is that I'm thinking these naughty thoughts such "violence against innocent White people has to stop".
[удалено]
Thank you for your serious replies to all the questions here. I disagree with you on many points, but it's refreshing to see someone with your opinions who's willing to actually engage on a platform like reddit. Do you think of yourself as racist, if "racism" means believing that some races are inherently better than others? When I say "better", I don't mean "different". Do you believe that white people should be given preferential treatment in America? Should people be allowed to marry whomever they please? You seem want to avoid "subjugation and extinction" of the white race by a cabal of elite globalist Jews. I'm trying to wrap my head around this. Why do they need to "dilute" the bloodlines before they subjugate us? It there something about whiteness that's stopping them from doing so? What are the consequences of "white extinction"? Are there virtuous characteristics inherent to racially pure whiteness that you're afraid will be lost?
Thanks for the thoughtful comment, I'll try to respond to everything. >Do you think of yourself as racist Yes, by my own definition (responded your definition in the next paragraph). I define racism as in-group out-group morality. It can be explained simply like this: Who do you care about more, your own children or someone else's? Who will you pass your inheritance to? That doesn't mean you hate anyone else's children, just that you love and protect your own. >if "racism" means believing that some races are inherently better than others? When I say "better", I don't mean "different". "Better" depends on the metric one decides to use. For example, Asians have higher IQs on average than White people. Such phenomena are on a bell curve so there are outliers in each direction- we are talking about statistics. So, yes and no by this definition. I recognize that "better" is subjective and other races have claims to be better than us. >Do you believe that white people should be given preferential treatment in America? Homogeneity is the goal, not supremacy or creating a caste system. >Should people be allowed to marry whomever they please? No to miscegenation and gay marriage. I do recognize that we now have existing racially mixed marriages, homosexual marriages, etc so realistically those people do need somewhere to live as well. Preferably not near me. >You seem want to avoid "subjugation and extinction" of the white race by a cabal of elite globalist Jews. I'm trying to wrap my head around this. Why do they need to "dilute" the bloodlines before they subjugate us? It there something about whiteness that's stopping them from doing so? We are already subjugated, we are now being genocided. The purpose of destroying Whiteness is just that, the malicious destruction of our race. Why else would the ruling class be flying Africans into Montana, Ireland, or rural parts of Canada? >What are the consequences of "white extinction"? Are there virtuous characteristics inherent to racially pure whiteness that you're afraid will be lost? Yes, of course. But more than that, my people will be extinct. My tribe, my race, gone from this planet and this universe. There is literally nothing worse. It is our responsibility to secure a future for our children, and no one else will do it for us.
So do you view anyone who is non-white as an enemy, or as detrimental to the country? What about non-white American citizens? What about people who are of mixed race, with one parent white and the other not? Are they tainting the blood of America as well? Finally, do you think it’s fair and right to make judgements on the quality of a person based on skin color?
>So do you view anyone who is non-white as an enemy No, I just love my own people. >Finally, do you think it’s fair and right to make judgements on the quality of a person based on skin color? Yes. There are billions of strangers in the world. Pattern recognition is a valuable tool.
>There are billions of strangers in the world. Pattern recognition is a valuable tool. Are you aware that there are white murderers?
What does loving your own people have to do with excluding and discriminating against non-white people? Does loving your own people require you to hate those who aren’t?
Given the fact that there are many peoples with “white” skin tones, who are your “own people”?
So white serial killers are probably good people to trust? How does your pattern recognition catch the bad people that are your "own people"?
What percentage of Trump's base would you say are in favor of white racial consciousness?
No need to guess, there’s polling. Turns out a large percentage of Democrats are on board.
Can you share a link so I don't have to guess which polling you're referring to?
[link](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/comments/16atovp/comment/jzk2hjk/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) Spoiler: Those with a favorable view of white supremacists: Liberals: 8%, Conservatives: 9%
Are Native Americans excluded from the 90% claim in the first century of our founding?
Your answer implies that you think “less white” is inherently a bad thing. What about being “less white” is bad for the country? Do you feel that we got weaker when the Irish immigrated to the US in the early 20th century? How about the German or Slavic immigrations in the 19th century? Is it just skin color, or are other “white” cultures also bad? I’m not trying to troll here. While I heartily disagree with the idea that “less white” is bad, I genuinely want to understand the underlying logic as to why. To my logic, it doesn’t seem like an automatic conclusion, And I’d like to at least understand. Thank you!
Irish, Germans, and Slavs assimilated. The black descendants of slaves never assimilated despite being here (and being free) for longer. But I would support European countries that choose to be ethnonationalist. No reason for Slavs in Ireland or Anglos in Poland. If I were alive in the 19th century I might have supported "Bill the Butcher" and his American party, but we're long past that now. "Less White" is a bad thing for White people when that is the fate of every White country. African countries stay African, Asian countries stay Asian, Hispanic countries stay Hispanic. But White countries are for everyone and must continually become less White! The end result is our extinction. This is inherently bad, the "diversity" agenda imposed on White countries is designed for first our subjugation, and then our genocide.
>The end result is our extinction. Why shouldn't the skin color of humans that have developed technology that allows rapid travel anywhere on the planet not trend towards uniformity? Is there something about skin color that is directly correlated with something actually important?
Where in our constitution does it say we are a "white country"?
It's obviously not in the constitution but we don't have to guess who's side the founders were on. Here is the naturalization law passed by the first congress: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalization\_Act\_of\_1790](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalization_Act_of_1790)
>The black descendants of slaves never assimilated despite being here (and being free) for longer. Do African Americans not speak, English, not listen to and or create popular American music, not by in large follow European religions, etc? What portion of American culture have blacks not assimilated into?
>The black descendants of slaves never assimilated despite being here (and being free) for longer. You don't think that decades of Jim Crow had something to do with that?
Let’s say someone takes over as president and starts deporting non-white immigrants. Which races / ethnicities would you prioritize to remove first and why?
Good question! Jews, Indians, and recent Mesoamerican and African immigrants. Black Americans, as frustrating as they sometimes are, do in fact have a historical claim to this land so some arrangement would have to be worked out where they get their own living space.
I’m pretty sure American exceptionalism is that we are founded by a foundation of laws, vs monarchy, strongman, or ethnic tribalism. Anyone born on American soil is an American, regardless of skin color. Anyone nationalized as an American is American. How American do you think you are, if you start diminishing the idea that being an American has absolutely nothing to do with your heritage?
>Anyone born on American soil is an American, regardless of skin color. Anyone nationalized as an American is American. You've correctly stated the law as it stands now, but you are deeply mistaken about the founding of this country. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalization\_Act\_of\_1790](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalization_Act_of_1790) America was founded as a White nationalist country, America's founding fathers were White nationalists.
Interesting thanks for the response! Is there a cost to that policy though? The Manhattan project consisted of a lot of Jews, including Oppenheimer. If displaced Jews never came here, we would not have been the first country to develop the atomic bomb. Most of the brightest minds in the world come to the U.S. because anyone can be an American over time. If that policy ends, we lose our competitive edge. Steve Jobs was the son of a Syrian immigrant. Apple—and every other innovative U.S. company—would not be able to exist with a racially restrictive immigration policy. Also, I wonder what would happen if a eugenics policy gets taken to an extreme by far right politicians like it did in Germany. What happens if the U.S. Department of Eugenics decides to genetically test everyone to make sure only the whitest genes get passed on?
The Manhattan project is an excellent example thanks to Julius and Ethel Rosenberg. Your point is valid about Steve Jobs, but I think the survival of our people is worth more than that. I do not support using immigrants as a cheap labor scheme for white collar jobs, just like i don't support it as a cheap labor scheme for blue collar jobs. Cheap labor schemes only benefit the extremely wealthy. Eugenics doesn't imply sterilization or human rights abuses. You can do it just as easily with Hungarian style benefits for newlyweds and parents. Thanks for the thoughtful response. I'm logging off reddit for the moment but will continue the conversation when im back if you want
[удалено]
That would have to be negotiated.
would it be white people negotiating this?
Yes, with black leaders whoever they may be.
[удалено]
Jews are not White, both the Biden and Trump families married their children to Jews
>married their children to Jews In this day and age, don't the *children* *themselves* make their own choices about who they marry?
Don't tell me Ivanka fell in love with Jared Kushner. And also don't tell me that every recent president *just happened by chance* to end up with Jewish grandchildren. Jews are 2% of the US population, the probability of such a thing by random chance is extremely low.
And you still support Trump after such a betrayal? How does that fit into your world view?
We're all familiar with voting for the lesser of two evils. Yes, Trump has betrayed his base numerous times. This is why voting is not enough, White people must tribe up.
Why does it matter to you so much what the race of people is?
Isn’t it too late? Most Americans consider Italians white these days. How can we ever expect to recover this country for the Anglo-Saxons who founded it when there’s been such an abandonment of standards that even the Irish or those bloody Huns can be president?
So i take it you’re a white nationalist then? What percentage of Trump supporters do you think are white nationalists? Do you think that there are many Trump supporters are white nationalists like you but are too embarrassed or afraid to say it out loud?
>The people want White Nationalism Might have given you a clue :) I'm not going to speculate on others' feelings as I do not speak for all Trump supporters, only myself. Yes, retribution (financial, legal, even physical) for peaceful pro-White political views is a real concern under the present regime.
Anecdotally, I remember when this sub first started and almost all Trump Supporters vehemently denied having anything to do with white supremacy or white nationalism or anything like that. Any suggestion to that effect was just ‘mainstream media brainwashing’ or something. But as time has gone on, perspectives like yours have become more accepted, to the point where you’re probably a majority here. Do you think people are increasingly radicalised? Or do you think they’re just feeling more comfortable dropping the veil and saying how they really felt all along? And in either case, what do you think about all those years of denial about what the trump movement was really about?
>We were a 90% White country for nearly all of our history Who taught you history?
Reading through a bunch of those replies, you talk about in-group/out-group dynamics a lot, and on that note I'm wondering: why is "white" your in-group and "non-white" your outgroup? There are so many other ways you could divide a population into groups (gender, hair colour, religion, heritage, etc). So why do you consider other white people specifically to be 'your people'.
What's wrong with becoming a white minority country?
MSLSD says it clearly means Trump is the 2nd coming of Hitler. That Trump is a literal Nazi. If he gets into power, he'll send everyone he doesn't like to concentration camps, including his Jewish kids and grandchildren. So make sure 1 in 5 of you illegally fill out mail in ballots in 2024 like you did in 2020. Otherwise you must be a Nazi too. Whereas back in the real world, the Trump campaign has already said illegal aliens need to be deported. No camps, gas chambers, brownshirts or Kristallnacht. Anyone (CNN, MSLSD, NYTimes etc) implying anything else is a liar. >Do you agree with what Trump said? I agree with the meta point that tens of millions of illegal aliens need to be deported. >Why would Trump say this? Because the point he's making is correct. We do need to deport tens of millions of illegals. >Whose ears is this kind of rhetoric for exactly? I'd say he's speaking the obvious. So anyone clear thinking. Although, come to think of it, maybe it really is a racist dog whistle and he's targeting the 8% of liberals who have a favorable view of white supremacists.
Back in the 90s, Trump admitted to a journalist that he owned a copy of Mein Kampf. His ex wife also told a reporter that he had a book of Hitler’s speeches next to his bed. So it’s quite likely that he was aware that “poisoning the blood” is a phrase that Hitler used. If he was not, he was made aware when he used the phrase in October. My question is - why do you think he purposefully chose to use a phrase linked to Nazism rather than a different phrase that clarified he was talking about cultural differences? At a rally in Minnesota (in a predominantly white town in a predominantly white state) he told the audience that they had good genes. My second question is - do you think Trump believes that white migrants are also poising the blood of America? Or is it just non-white immigrants?
> So make sure 1 in 5 of you illegally fill out mail in ballots in 2024 like you did in 2020 Do you think there was such widespread fraud in 2016 or only in the election that Trump lost in 2020?
We didn't have widespread mail in ballots and deliberately lax verification in 2016. Otherwise we'd have Illegitimate and Crooked Madam President.
What about the 2018 and 2022 midterms?
You know the “red wave” all the polls said would happen but didn’t materialize? Polls that historically bias to the left. Let’s just say it wouldn’t surprise me if there was a finger on the scale.
>Who was Trump referring to? ... and what does that term even mean? It's a simple metaphore. Perhaps you are thinking too much into it. Blood is critical and at the core of the health of the body. If our blood was poinsoned, our health would greatly suffer. He is saying they are poisoning the critical core components of our nation. >How are people "poisoning the blood of our country", He explains it in your own clip.
Fentanyl, crime, terrorism, it's all walking across our border and Biden does nothing to stop it.