(C) Common Dreams
This story was originally published by Common Dreams and is unaltered.
. . . . . . . . . .
Why Tucker Carlson’s recent embrace of ‘great replacement’ is different [1]
['Philip Bump', 'National Columnist']
Date: 2022-07-20
Listen Comment on this story Comment Gift Article Share
For decades, Tucker Carlson has cultivated a very specific skill: proving he’s not wrong. This has taken various forms, including starting a blog and spending innumerable hours arguing on cable television. In recent years, he’s drifted away from having to defend his positions on his show; a New York Times analysis found that he’s decreasingly hosted guests who disagree with him, to the point of near-nonexistence.
On his show Tuesday night, Carlson again turned his attention to trying to prove correct his most controversial assertion: that there’s a deliberate effort underway to replace native-born Americans with immigrants. The outline of his argument was familiar, given that he’s been making it on and off for more than a year now.
But the particular iteration offered on Tuesday was different. It was more direct in mirroring the arguments used and championed by white nationalists, it looped in a common antisemitic assertion — and, critically, it all hinged on Carlson’s willful misrepresentation of how the political left views immigration.
“Sometime around 1965, our leaders stopped trying to make the United States a hospitable place for American citizens, their constituents, to have their own families,” Carlson said. He isolated that year because it saw the passage of the Immigration and Nationality Act, legislation that reversed decades of strict limits on immigration to the United States, as he then explained. But it’s worth pausing briefly to recognize what Carlson is doing: He’s marking a shift toward welcoming migration as 1) an anti-American failure by political leadership, and 2) an essential element of making America “inhospitable” to citizens.
Since 1965, the country’s population has grown, but this was “not the kind of organic growth that you would see in a healthy society that’s become more prosperous and welcoming of families.” Instead, he insisted, it was “exactly the opposite of that”: growth due to immigration. Let’s set aside that America is appealing to immigrants precisely because it is prosperous, has had a healthy society and was welcoming of families even from other countries. Instead, let’s note that the population growth was primarily a function of immigration only if you count the children and grandchildren of immigrants as also being immigrants, even if they were born in the United States. If you view immigration as something of a stain:
When Carlson’s maternal ancestors came to America from Italy and had native-born kids, that was the building of a great society. When immigrants from Mexico, Central America and Asia come? The exact opposite.
Advertisement
Carlson cast the 1965 law as foundationally naive, quoting Sen. Ted Kennedy’s (D-Mass.) defense of it: “The bill will not flood our cities with immigrants,” Kennedy said. “It will not upset the ethnic mix of our society.”
But then he criticized political leaders for giving up on meeting the needs of American families and relying on population growth by “import[ing] new people.” So which is it? Were Democrats dumb? Lying? Scheming?
That last option is at the heart of the “great replacement theory,” the racist idea that the left is willfully encouraging immigrants to come to the United States to subvert the native-born population. In Carlson’s framing, that’s manifested most obviously in elections.
“You can’t just replace the electorate because you didn’t like the last election outcomes,” he said Tuesday. “That would be the definition of undermining democracy, changing the voters.” Again, notice the quick interconnection with other right-wing frustrations: The Democrats are the real insurrectionists, because immigration!
Advertisement
But this is also the point at which Carlson’s rhetoric collapses with the loudest thud. He played clips (as he’s done before) of various Democrats talking about how demographic change will prove a boon to Democratic candidates in the future. Never mind that this claim from the left has started to wobble as Hispanic voters start to shift to the right. Carlson takes this claim — if X happens, Y will result — and inverts it: So that Y will result, Democrats are making X happen. First-year logic students can see the flaw here, but Carlson chooses not to.
This is almost certainly a function of his having actively sought to defend his position for the past 14 months. Again, he is experienced at nothing so much as he is trying to prove he’s right. So as outside observers criticized and undermined his argument about an effort to “replace” native-born Americans with immigrants, he redoubled his efforts to prove himself right, pulling these clips that show Democrats nodding at a predicted electoral benefit and pretending it’s proof that this outcome was always intended.
“ ‘The great replacement,’ ” Carlson said, introducing the video snippets. “Yeah. It’s not a conspiracy theory. It’s their electoral strategy. And we know that because they say it all the time.”
Advertisement
After all, why else would President Biden call immigration a “gift,” as he did on the campaign trail? Well, he said this explicitly because immigrants contribute enormously to the economy. But Carlson framed it differently, because he’s trying to prove he’s not wrong.
Carlson used to not say “great replacement” specifically, since that particular phrase is unmistakably associated with racist anti-immigration rhetoric. Now he uses it casually. Defends it.
Very sensitive to accusations that he himself is sympathetic to white nationalism or harbors racist views, Carlson went to great pains to insist that this had nothing to do with race. It’s just that immigrants don’t speak English and are “functionally illiterate” (since they don’t read English) and “broke our laws to get here” (despite the fact that many didn’t) and they’re being shuttled all over the country — isn’t it terrifying??!
Advertisement
Oh, and you know who’s behind it?
“Fox News is reporting tonight that the administration awarded a $172 million grant to a George Soros-linked organization which exists to, quote, ‘help young border-crossers avoid deportation,’ ” Carlson said. “Now, why is some foreign-born billionaire allowed to change our country fundamentally? That’s the big question.”
This funding was actually first reported months ago, for what it’s worth. What’s more, the organization’s work extends well beyond immigration. But this amplification of the funding from Soros — a prominent Jewish donor — has popped up again in recent days, including on sites associated with white nationalism. In his defense, Carlson did not explicitly say “Jews will not replace us.”
Happily for those evaluating the Fox News host’s claims, there is a simpler explanation for large-scale immigration to the United States. This country still offers enormous economic opportunity and personal safety to its residents, something long seen as being to this nation’s credit. There’s also a legal process in place that allows those seeking asylum to a fair hearing and, at times, to remain in the country while those claims are adjudicated.
Most Americans — not just Democrats — see immigrants as a strength, not a burden. But Carlson is committed to his argument that immigrants are damaging the United States and so he keeps trying to defend it.
Even if it means he convinces himself that explicitly echoing an argument espoused by white nationalists isn’t a big deal at all.
GiftOutline Gift Article
[END]
---
[1] Url:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/07/20/why-tucker-carlsons-recent-embrace-great-replacement-is-different/
Published and (C) by Common Dreams
Content appears here under this condition or license: Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND 3.0..
via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds:
gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/commondreams/
