TO UNDERSTAND THE rise of Donald Trump, you don’t need to go to a diner in the Midwest or read “Hillbilly Elegy,” J.D. Vance’s memoir.

You just need to know these basic facts:

In 1980, white people accounted for about 80 percent of the U.S. population.

In 2024, white people account for about 58 percent of the U.S. population.

Trump appeals to white people gripped by demographic hysteria. Especially older white people who grew up when white people represented a much larger share of the population. They fear becoming a minority.

  • linearchaos@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    29 days ago

    Yeah when Vance released that book and everybody said you’ve got to read it It explains the entire mindset of the conservatives. I found a copy and read it. I kept waiting for the other shoe to drop.

    The entire f****** book is just an explanation that towns were built around big companies in coal mines and the big companies went overseas in the coal mines closed down. In the way it left drugs and joblessness.

    It’s not like immigrants are coming in and taking their jobs. And then the entire right is begging for companies to not have any repercussions for doing any of that s***. It’s like they think if they’re really nice to the companies the companies will be really nice back to them or something.

    The whole book is just a poorly written country song that doesn’t absolve any of the bad behavior at all.

  • blady_blah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    I actually think a core part of being republican has to do with hating someone and feeling superior to them. It can revolve around sex, education, accent, culture, religion, sexual orientation, government structure, or skin color, but they have to hate on someone. You can plot the generations of conservatives by who they (primarily) hate at any given time.

    They have to wrap themselves in their hate-blanket and fantasize about how they’ll have their AR-15 locked and loaded when the baddies come around. First they need to be scared, so they make up stories and lies about how “the other” corrupted their children, stole their jobs, took the government assistance, or performed DDOS on their interview, and then talk with friends or family on how evil the other is. Then they get great pleasure in having a big hate-orgy and trying hard to “trigger a liberal” spewing their made up hysterical bullshit.

    A short list who’s-who hate list for conservatives: communists, socialists, civil rights activists, labor unions, abortion rights people and doctors, environmentalists, academics, immigrants, “the gays” (all LGBTQ+ individuals), muslims, transgender people, “mainstream media”. They’ve got to hate someone.

    • Eiri@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      That reminds me of the primitive human trait of tribalism.

      If you have a group labeled “others”, your group will get closer. If you have no “others” to fear, you’ll find a way to invent such a group.

      It’s why I don’t think humanity will ever get along unless an external, immediate threat unites us. Aliens or something.

      But yeah, it feels like conservative people are just more… “Primitive” in that way. Their fear organ is just more developed.

      • grrgyle@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        30 days ago

        It’s why I don’t think humanity will ever get along unless an external, immediate threat unites us. Aliens or something.

        What like a foreign dictatorship meddling in your democratic process? Or maybe that’s not existential enough - what about an urgent planetary climate crisis caused by a greedy minority trying to steal or planet’s limited resources to turn into useless stock?

        • Eiri@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          30 days ago

          The tragic thing about that is that it’s kind of not concrete enough for our little brains to comprehend on an emotional level.

          Or rather, it’s so large and long-term and complex that we can’t deal with it.

          • grrgyle@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            30 days ago

            I honestly think you’d still have collaborators with an obviously malevolent external force. Like say portals to hell opened up

            • Eiri@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              30 days ago

              Hmm, probably, but I feel like humanity would largely come together, or split into two camps.

              I would envision either “everyone against the demons”, and the few who are with them are a small, covert minority, kind of like criminals, or humanity splitting into two camps, which would still be division, but arguably less divided than how we currently are.

              • grrgyle@slrpnk.net
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                29 days ago

                To this point, how could we increase the number of people who take the side of humanity?

                My thinking is that reducing anomie and inequality, increasing the bonds between people, all help move that number in a positive direction, as more of us realise that we need eachother.

                This is my sneaky way of saying that we could be doing this now. That sure, maybe there will always be those who are just in it for themselves or a tiny in-group, but that’s no excuse for fatalism/doomerism.

                IE we don’t have to wait for baleful aliens or demons spewing forth from hellgates. If we’re not waiting for the perfect unifying scenario, we can start moving the needle in a positive direction now. :)

                • Eiri@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  29 days ago

                  Oh yeah I certainly hope we can. It’s just hard when there are big systemic and evolutionary obstacles in the way.

  • bookcrawler@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    They fear becoming a minority.

    clutches pearls Goodness gracious, someone might treat them like they treat minorities!

    That is literally what the white “christians” have been stressing about here. As a minority mutt that “passes”, maybe try being less of an asshole?

      • draneceusrex@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 month ago

        I guess this is one of the few times American Exceptionalism actually proves right. We’ve always been a melting pot of cultures. That includes many different “white” cultures for a good few centuries, but go ahead and ask the Irish and Italian immigrants if they didn’t feel like minorities as they were coming off the boats to Ellis Island. Even next to the oppression and brutality both Native and Black Americans faced, their contributions to our society are innumerable and invaluable. The new immigrants coming from Latin America are just being played for political gain while we appreciate and depend on their willingness to work our farms and construction sites. Their kids are just as adapted to American culture as mine are, just as every second generation of immigrants turns out to be. We stress a huge amount about racism (and yes we still have a long way to go, as Trump shows) but when you really compare us to other countries, we seem to be doing alright. The melting pot will keep going, even once us white people are under 50% of the population.

        • Novman@feddit.it
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 month ago

          I think that you overextimate the american exceptionalism. In the xx century the europe was destroyed in the ww leaving the usa as the only state not touched by the wars. The rest of the world was lagging techlogicaly. Now the situation is different. Usa is a young country and it is not different from any other.

          • draneceusrex@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 month ago

            11 aircraft carriers, the dollar being the fiat currency of the world, and our cultural dominance pretty much seals the hegemony win for the US since the '90s, but ok, sure dude. We’re no different than other countries…

      • thedirtyknapkin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        white people aren’t even close to becoming a minority, we’re just approaching a point that no race is the majority. there will still be more white people than any other race here for a long long time, and when that changes it’s only going to be because of racial mixing and a loss of racial identity or the birth of a new one. white people will not be a minority just because they become less than 50% of the population. they will lose some of the privilege they have and that may feel like oppression to them, but they will not become a minority.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Also, I wanted to say that the more open Trump is about racism, the more he will turn people off. There are a lot of people who are pretty much racists, but they would never admit it, even to themselves. These are people who cross the street when they see a black man coming toward them, but would never dream of saying the N-word and think Martin Luther King had a dream about something involving ending racism and that was good.

    Those people will not want to be associated with Trump and Vance the more overt they get.

    • jmp242@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      This is an interesting question - if you’re lying to yourself about being racist, and won’t condone racist policies and you know, act in a way to not look racist… Like a philosophical P zombie, are you for all external functional (maybe limited to politically) purposes not racist?

      • thefartographer@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 month ago

        One doesn’t have to acknowledge their cancer to be full of tumors.

        Racism can lay quietly below the surface while festering and slowly rotting away their insides.

        • jmp242@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          28 days ago

          This doesn’t really address my thought experiment though - if they don’t act racist then now we’re just arguing about how they should feel inside, where no one can see their private thoughts. I.e. are we doing a purity test here, or do we care about actual things the people do?

        • jmp242@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          28 days ago

          I was assuming the people that are the potential P zombie here are the ones turned off from Trump because of open racism, and therefore NOT voting for him. I implied that these people are taking actions they (at least think) are not racist, like not voting for Trump.

      • krashmo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 month ago

        All people are racist to some degree. The ability of our brains to perform categorization and pattern recognition are two major reasons why humans have been successful as a species. We can’t help but apply those concepts to the people we interact with.

        Some people are more fear motivated and gravitate towards the “black people are violent” kind of racism while others tend towards the “Asians are good at math” kind of racism but both are forms of racism. Obviously the first type is going to have more negative outcomes in society than the second but that doesn’t mean the second type is not racist. They’re both fundamentally generalizations based primarily on the race of another human.

        Simplifying complex information for quick analysis is how our brains work and that’s essentially what racism is. There is no getting away from it completely.

        • Sternout@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          This is the correct answer. Racism is systematic and it is to simple to blame the individuel.

          • jmp242@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            28 days ago

            Systems don’t vote in the US however (at least in the context of this article) - we’re talking about individuals voting.

        • jmp242@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          28 days ago

          In this case, I think using the term racist here is diluting the term and causing confusion. I think it’s better to us the anthropological term here of tribal, at least in your first and last paragraphs. If everyone is racist then I have trouble not considering that a normal part of being human. It seems like railing against people who breath or something. If we’re biologically programmed to be this way, then we need to stop trying to claim people are bad for their biology, and at best we’re now going to say there’s an acceptable and normal level of racism on the spectrum that everyone is on.

          I don’t think that’s a great framing, and avoiding that framing in my mind means not claiming that everyone is racist.

          • krashmo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            28 days ago

            I think you have a good point but it gets pretty far into the semantics of language. Most people seem to use the term racist in casual language to refer specifically to what are widely considered the worst outcomes associated with grouping people together by race. The “black people are violent” kind of racism that I referred to earlier. However, I don’t think there is anything about the academic definition of the word racist that would limit it to this kind of usage. I also get why you would want to avoid the conclusion that everyone is racist but I really believe that is the most accurate assessment of reality.

            Granted, it is easy to see how your KKK kind of racist would want to latch on to this conclusion to minimize the horrible nature of their beliefs. Still, I don’t think you can get a holistic view of the problem without recognizing the fact that this tendency to make generalizations about groups of people exists within us all. Without seeing the scope of the problem I don’t think you can address it in any meaningful sense.

  • PugJesus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    102
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 month ago

    John Brown didn’t get to kill enough slavers, that’s why we’re all here. We gave the racists a little rope, and now they’re trying to hang us with it. Been that way ever since Reconstruction ended.

    Opposition to racism must be enduring. It must be absolute. It can brook no compromise, because compromise is tacit agreement to the validity (however small or marginal) of the opposition’s point, and racism is based on an absurdity. And when a society starts validating absurdities… well, look at Trump.

    • breadsmasher@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      55
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      and the fact the confederacy was allowed to “live in on” in memory as heritage, and allowed statues honouring traitors to the United States

      If you allow confederate statues to honour enemies of the country, why are there no statues honouring the british red coats from the war of independence? Where are the statues honouring soviet spies executed for espionage?

      • PugJesus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        44
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Constructed largely after the cowards were all dead, in the civil rights era. And yet some people still insist that it’s ‘history’ to leave them standing instead of a blatant attempt to cement the United States as a ‘White Man’s’ polity.

        Fuck them.

        If you allow confederate statues to honour enemies of the country, why are there no statues honouring the british red coats from the war of independence? Where are the statues honouring soviet spies executed for espionage?

        Let’s make some 9/11 memorials to commemorate those brave hijackers too.

        It’s fucking absurd, and while I know HOW it got started, I don’t know how it got started. You know what I mean? Like, I understand the conditions that led to the rise of Lost Causer nonsense, but I just can’t wrap my fucking head around the idea that everyone just fucking normalized it. Like, even if you are a racist (as most 19th century Americans were to at least some degree), what the fuck kind of lunatic country commemorates the ‘heroism’ of literal traitors and secessionists who killed hundreds of thousands of our countrymen?

        Sherman didn’t burn enough.

      • girlfreddy@lemmy.caOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        I mean there should at least be a statue commemorating when we future Canadians had most of DC burning, including the White House and Capitol.

        :p

  • girsaysdoom@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    This is definitely true. It’s something I’ve heard Trump supporters argue about firsthand. But it’s not just only racism or the threat of being a minority, but the fear of losing freedom to do what they want according to their own skewed morals. So while a decent chunk of why they think the way they do is sheer racism and fear around that (especially since the start of the BLM movement), it’s not the core of the problem.

    I believe that this started as the resurgence of toxic masculinity in that Trump showing people it was okay to be misogynistic, racist, and homophobic in opposition to race, gender, and identity politics rising in the 2010s. Women’s rights and LGBT people are in their sights as well and, despite their narrative fitting well with fundamentalist religious morals, this seems more like resentment that those movements didn’t address their needs or issues. COVID restrictions that they disagreed with fanned the growing fire into the fulblown fascist conservative movement we see today.

    So I don’t think it’s the fact that cis het white people are in lower relative numbers but it’s the event of rising social progressivism and more rights for minorities and women that spurred the antagonism of them.

    Tldr: Bigots are upset that they didn’t get anything out of women’s, LGBT, and minorities rights.

    • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Trump showing people it was okay to be misogynistic, racist, and homophobic

      Yup. It’s far more that racism alone.

      It’s all sorts of bigotry that Trump has essentially given them permission to stop hiding.

    • PriorityMotif@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      I’ll agree with you except for the timeline. It started after 9/11, bigotry was far less openly acceptable during the 90s. It just blew up after Obama was elected and social media took off. People were all exposed to the same type of media at the time, and big media companies weren’t spreading extremely racist content, other than a few fringe things like Rush Limbaugh. Fox news really took off after 9/11 too.

      • girsaysdoom@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        I think after 9/11 they were still the same old tactic they used in and after the cold war; security theater and fear mongering. But you’re right, news and political representatives definitely weren’t the completely open bigots that they are today though and I think you might be right about that time period being the start of today’s Fox news.

        Social media definitely had a profound impact on politics, people’s rights, and open bigotry. This definitely gave them the means to have more of a voice with younger demographics but I’ll still argue that it wasn’t until Trump entered the picture that they were able to really push their narrative and decouple “truth” from official news sources in the minds of many. I don’t think I’ve seen so many people just repeat distorted views of reality at once until then.

      • TSG_Asmodeus (he, him)@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        I’ll agree with you except for the timeline. It started after 9/11, bigotry was far less openly acceptable during the 90s.

        I want to disagree with this because bigotry was huge in the 90’s, but so was attacking it. Our cartoon’s were chock-full of anti-bigotry messaging, but then movies would be the opposite.

        I think I, personally, would typify the 90’s with saying that one out-group is ok, but only if we all make fun of another one or you’re the butt of jokes. IE. You can have Will and Grace, but we’re using ‘gay’ as a word to literally just mean ‘bad.’

  • TheFonz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 month ago

    While I do think racism plays a big role, articles like these that paint a large American section with broad brush like this play a dangerous game.

    At this point if you’re still supporting Trump, there is little that can be done for you with regards to changing your mind and youll be hard pressed to find sympathy.

    But there is something to be said about the rural / urban divide. Small town America has been left behind - both economically and culturally and somehow we have to reach them. I don’t know if it’s a failure of messaging on the Dems or what exactly. I also think it’s a much broader issue than just ‘racism’.

    • rezifon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Another way to look at this is that you’ve linked to an article that necessarily lacks the entire last eight years of context necessary to discuss an article written in 2024. Please, join the rest of us in our current reality if you want to discuss what’s happening now.

  • pyre@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    he’s not popular. he’s super unpopular. he was the biggest energizer for democratic voter turnout despite a super unpopular and boring democratic candidate. even when he won the election he lost the popular vote. just because US elections are very antidemocratic doesn’t mean he’s popular. stop making shit up.