Some people on the right worry that immigration will cause America’s white population to be largely replaced by non-whites. This hypothesis is sometimes referred to as “The Great Replacement”. There is a great replacement occurring, but these worriers have things exactly backwards. (As an aside, this post will not examine the pros and cons of a changing ethnic mix. Rather, I’ll argue that the feared change is not occurring.)
To understand why the Great Replacement theory is wrong, it’s helpful to begin with a bit of American history. A century ago, people tended to think about the white race in a more narrow fashion. The original settlers in the 1600s and 1700s tended to be white Anglo-Saxon protestants (WASPs) from northern Europe. This was followed by a new wave of settlers from places like Ireland, Italy and Eastern Europe. Although today we regard these more recent immigrants as white, they were initially viewed as being members of a very different ethnic group—what we would call “minorities”. Over time, they became more successful and assimilated with the majority WASP population. Here’s a screenshot of some books that discussed how these groups became “white” in a cultural sense. (Again, I am using race here as a social construct, not a biological category.)
Today, the vast majority of immigrants come from Latin America and East Asia. They are gradually assimilating with the majority white population, often via intermarriage. In 100 years, the descendants of Asians and Hispanics will be viewed as being just as white as Italian-Americans, Jewish-Americans and Irish-American people are viewed today.
My daughter is a good example. People who meet her for the first time almost universally regard her as “white”. And yet my daughter’s mother is from China. Thus in a sense my East Asian wife is being “replaced” by a white daughter. That’s the actual “Great Replacement”.
It is true that there is somewhat less intermarriage between whites and blacks, but that fact doesn’t change the basic picture. Since 1990, blacks have constituted between 12% and 13% of the US population, about the same as in 1870. The Great Replacement theory is mostly about the effects of Asian and Hispanic immigration, and that’s where assimilation is occurring at a rapid pace.
You will occasionally see predictions of whites becoming a minority at some point in the future. Don’t believe them. I’ve seen this sort of prediction off and on for my entire life, and yet in a cultural sense whites are just as dominant as ever. What changes over time is our concept of what it means to be white. This category will be continually redefined in such a way as to keep whites in the majority. I suppose some on the left might view that process with suspicion, but I believe that assimilation is a very positive development. The greatest ethnic strife tends to occur in countries that do not experience assimilation.
READER COMMENTS
Fazal Majid
May 16 2024 at 12:36pm
In Benjamin Franklin’s misspent youth, he penned a screed about how Pennsylvania should stop immigration of “swarthy” Germans and Swedes, as only the English and Saxons qualified as properly white:
https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Franklin/01-04-02-0080
His concern was that no proper English girl would marry such, and they would never assimilate…
Lizard Man
May 16 2024 at 2:34pm
Isn’t the legal definition of “white” versus minority that matter for affirmative action in higher ed, government contracts to minority owned businesses, etc.? It may be the case that most people are socially white in the US 100 years from now, but if people can be both socially white and legally a minority, why wouldn’t they take advantage of that situation?
Scott Sumner
May 16 2024 at 11:43pm
Didn’t the Supreme Court recently rule affirmative action is illegal?
Lizard Man
May 17 2024 at 12:53pm
My recollection was that Roberts’ ruling said that colleges and universities were free to continue with affirmative action so long as they used the appropriate fig leaf. My expectation is that there will still be rampant discrimination against Asian American applicants. And I don’t recall any ruling striking down minority set asides in government contracting.
nobody.really
May 16 2024 at 2:44pm
1: I largely share Scott Sumner’s view about assimilation, with caveats. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_whiteness_in_the_United_States (Citing scholars noting the changing public views about immigrant groups, but also scholars questioning whether the existence of discrimination against groups can fairly be characterized as rejecting the “whiteness” of those groups. For example, anti-miscegenation laws did to appear to prohibit intermarriage between any people of European descent.)
2: While this is NOT Sumner’s topic, when we observe the benign dynamic that US society has a capacious understanding of “whiteness” that embraces people from many backgrounds within a generation or two, we might pause to acknowledge that over four centuries there is been pretty much ZERO progress in welcoming black people as a group into the category of whiteness. Indeed, I read the burden of Sumner’s essay to be that definition of “whiteness” is capacious because it really just means “not black”; so long as we can clearly identify a group to look down on, it matters not how many people join in the practice of looking down on them.
(Older readers may recall a plot line in All In the Family, wherein the white, working-class Archie Bunker regularly butted heads with his black neighbor, the upwardly mobile George Jefferson. But when a Hispanic family wanted to move onto the block, they became comrades in arms against the idea.)
While I think there has been progress in eliminating the stigma against black people, I don’t see how we will ever abandon the social distinction between black and white—unless alien creature arrive on earth and want to attend our schools.
3: Sumner seems to think that his essay will provide some consolation to people who embrace the Great Replacement Theory.
Maybe so. Perhaps people who express concerns about this theory are worried about power politics, and merely want assurance that they (or their children) will always be on a side the wields the majority of votes. I sense this is Sumner’s belief.
But maybe these people sincerely regard the culture, mores, or even genetics of immigrants as threatening. Consider how Sumner’s message will land on their ears: “Yes, I understand that you regard immigrants as part of an alien invasion force that you find utterly reprehensible. But if you look at history, you can be assured that in time your views will be utterly discarded–even regarded as ridiculous! And don’t worry that this alien force will displace you and your children. Indeed, your children are going to carry their babies! Don’t you feel better now?”
(Throughout the long history of moral panics, I suspect many of the panic-ers were vindicated. “If we tolerate other religions, people will abandon our religion!” “If we don’t stigmatize out-of-wedlock births, we’ll see more out-of-wedlock births!” “If we let young people go out in carriages/cars, they’ll have sex!” “If you let young people go to jazz clubs, they’ll engage in race-mixing!” “If you let young people speak privately on phones, they’ll engage in inappropriate intimacy!” “If we make it easier for people to get divorced, people will get divorced!” Over time, these concerns were vindicated—but society gradually de-stigmatized the consequences. I doubt that knowing this would have consoled the panic-ers; quite the opposite.)
4: On assimilation: While I acknowledge the social benefits of assimilation, what conclusions should we draw about the social consequences of the Amish, or of Hassidic communities? Generation after generation, they consciously resist assimilation. While I may find some Amish and Hassidic views regressive, I generally think the world is richer when people can observe distinct communities to join/emulate if they choose. (I struggle with the idea that innocent children, without any ability to exercise choice in the matter, get acculturated into these regressive societies. But EVERY child gets acculturated into a society without a choice in the matter. Family law is not really the forte of libertarian philosophy….)
steve
May 16 2024 at 3:42pm
Hispanic culture isn’t all that different and many can already blend in based upon appearance. I think you are right about them. Looking at my half-Chinese grandkids they still look pretty Chinese. Culturally, they are about as assimilated as I think it possible to be. Depending upon whom they marry then I suspect their kids will be assumed to be white.
Steve
Mactoul
May 16 2024 at 10:48pm
Italians, Irish, Germans etc were all part of historic Christiandom, irrespective of what fashionable academics of whiteness might theorize.
Dylan
May 17 2024 at 9:57am
How far back do you need to go to be considered part of “historic Christiandom?” Seems like large number of migrants today come from places that have been Christian for a long time. And, probably far more religious than the average native born American.
MarkW
May 17 2024 at 7:27am
It’s hard to know how our racial categories will change going forward. Right now, pretty much everybody who has a plausible claim to being non-white does so. And the US government is preparing to add more non-white options for the census. Despite the recent Harvard admissions decision, there are clearly still advantages to being able to check non-white boxes and our politics remains driven, in part, by trying to build coalitions of racial and ethnic minority groups. I hope efforts to divide us into ever finer grained racial and ethnic affinity groups will ultimately be overwhelmed by time and intermarriage, but I’m not sure it’s going to play out that way. The dynamics are different in the early 21st century than they were in the 19th and early 20th centuries.
Philo
May 17 2024 at 8:00pm
“Again, I am using race here as a social construct, not a biological category.” It is needlessly confusing to use the same word both for a biological category and for a social status. The term ‘white’, as applied to human beings, was originally a biological term. The people who have tried to appropriate this term for a social status should be resisted. (Or is it now too late?)
By the way, as Fazil Majid notes above, the social scene, even prior to the arrival of large numbers of people from southern and eastern Europe, was much more nuanced than a simple dichotomy (or even trichotomy) would suggest.
TGGP
May 20 2024 at 7:18pm
Ignatiev is wrong. European immigrants were always classified as white.
TGGP
May 20 2024 at 7:20pm
We also know of classification going the opposite way. South Asians were legally considered Caucasian for a while, but then lobbied to be considered the same race as East Asians. Middle Easterners & North Africans now seem to be getting separated out from Europeans, though perhaps if Trump is re-elected he’ll reverse that.
Greg G
May 23 2024 at 8:13am
Great post Scott.
We can always count on you for original and independent thinking on topics where that is rare.
Comments are closed.