At CPAC, “The Great Replacement” Theory Meets Anti-Abortion Nonsense

“If you’re worried about this quote-unquote replacement, why don’t we start there? Start with allowing our own people to live.”

John Locher/File/AP

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

This week, the racist “the great replacement” theory officially collided with anti-abortion nonsense at—where else?—the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Budapest, Hungary.

For years, hard-right politicians have flirted with the idea that non-white immigrants would supplant white Americans and use their newfound majority status for political and social gain. Conspiratorial versions concoct a “global elite” orchestrating a “white genocide”—an older idea, and cross-national one, tied to long held anti-Semitic suppositions. Last weekend, an 18-year-old gunman who subscribed to the this idea of replacement allegedly killed 10 Black people at a supermarket in Buffalo, New York.

That meant that this week, both abortion and the “Great Replacement” dominated headlines. And so, in an apparent attempt to jam every piece of prominent news into one burble of bigotry, CPAC head Matt Schlapp said that stopping abortion could also help those worried about replacement.

Apparently referring to the prospect of immigrants taking American jobs, Schlapp said, “If you say there is a population problem in a country, but you’re killing millions of your own people through legalized abortion every year, if that were to be reduced, some of that problem is solved.”

He continued, “You have millions of people who can take many of these jobs. How come no one brings that up? If you’re worried about this quote-unquote replacement, why don’t we start there? Start with allowing our own people to live.”

It’s a bit unclear what Schlapp means. Is he attempting to recruit, or convince, white supremacists whose main issue is replacement to take on the wider conservative goal of being anti-abortion? Or is he mad no one has connected the issues in this way? Is he critiquing “quote-unquote replacement” believers for not talking enough about the potential end of Roe?

As Adam Serwer wrote in the Atlantic, “sanitized” versions of the great replacement theory have become common from conservatives in the United States. We hear it often from our right-wing commentariat. They claim that Democrats are purposefully changing immigration law to “replace you, the American voter,” in the words of Fox News host Laura Ingraham. Throughout Europe, the theory is interwoven into the anti-immigrant sentiment prominent across many countries. (There’s a reason CPAC is in Hungary!) French writer Renaud Camus provides a famous example of the racist rhetoric with an intellectual spin. A gay man who marched in “homosexual component” of socialist uprisings in 1968, Camus legitimized the fear of replacement in his writings. He coined the phrase “Grand Remplacement” in a book in which he argued that Europe was being “reverse colonized.” (Supposedly, this was all because he was mortified upon seeing women in veils.)

Still, when Schlapp says “our own people,” he presumably means white people. There’s an obvious problem with his logic, beyond the fact that there are far fewer than a million abortions in the US each year: White people are not the only ones who get abortions. Abortion-related conspiracy theories work in the opposite direction, too, with some claiming that legal abortion is tantamount to Black genocide. But no matter which way you slice it, attempting to pitch abortion bans as a boon to engineering demographics is twisted.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate