Washington, DC – Ahead of the next presidential debate, advocates and experts raise concerns about the dangers of normalizing rhetoric associated with the great replacement conspiracy theory, like describing migrants and asylum seekers as an “invasion.” The moderators of these debates have a responsibility not to amplify this dangerous rhetoric.
Again and again, our country has experienced hate violence inspired by this conspiracy theory-driven rhetoric. We know this because racist mass murderers tell us this in their screeds. Driven by fear-mongering about “replacement” and “invasion,” terrorists targeted the Latino community in El Paso, Texas, Black Americans in Buffalo, New York, and Jews in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and in Poway, California, among other communities.
This is of particular concern because in the last debate, one of the moderators, Bret Baier, formulated a question by employing the “invasion” rhetoric. Stuart Varney’s show, one of the moderators for the upcoming debates, has repeatedly provided a platform for “invasion” language.
According to Jamie Beran, CEO at Bend the Arc Jewish Action: “The great replacement conspiracy theory is designed to serve a dangerous purpose: inflaming white supremacy and racism to deflect responsibility for inequality away from the politicians who cause it. Debate moderators know this. Being trusted with this national platform comes with heightened responsibility. Instead of helping perpetuate these lies that increase the risk of hate-based violence against Black people, immigrants, Jews, Muslims and others, moderators must interrupt and name fear-mongering, and hold candidates accountable for their and their Party’s contribution to rising inequality in America, which is being experienced by people of all races, religions and ethnic backgrounds.”
According to Michael Breen, President and CEO of Human Rights First: “Communities from El Paso to Buffalo and from Pittsburgh to Poway can tell us all that hate begets violence. Presidential debate moderators must not allow the high-profile events they manage to become platforms to normalize white supremacist conspiracy theories, like a so-called ‘migrant invasion,’ that have led to such violence.”
According to Vanessa Cárdenas, Executive Director at America’s Voice: “Rhetoric that is linked to real-world acts of violence like ‘invasion’ and ‘replacement’ has no place in the public debate about immigration and the border. We can disagree on how to approach the challenges we face, but words matter. Language that is associated with a body count and that is fueling threats of violent domestic extremism is completely unacceptable. Those tasked with the critical role of moderating political debates have an urgent responsibility not to further normalize bigoted conspiracy theories in those debates.”
According to Matt Nelson, Executive Director of Presente Action: “Unquestionably, the presidential debates are poised to take a perilous turn, endangering BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and People of Color) and other targeted communities. This deadly rise of White Nationalist and Antisemitic rhetoric, couched in terms of ‘invasion,’ presents an imminent threat to our society and must be confronted urgently. Numerous violent attacks we’ve witnessed on our communities are a byproduct of this rhetoric, and we demand nothing less than immediate intervention. Our commitment to protecting the safety and full dignity of all of our communities is unwavering.”
According to Amy Spitalnick, CEO of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs: “Over the last few years, we’ve seen bigotry and conspiracy theories once considered fringe move into the mainstream in our politics – with deadly consequences. The media has an obligation not only to avoid normalizing this dangerous rhetoric, but to actively call it out for what it is: anti-immigrant, antisemitic, and racist lies that have fueled a cycle of extremist violence. With so many communities under threat, it’s critical that the debate moderators recognize that these words have consequences.”
According to Lindsay Schubiner, Western States Center’s Director of Programs: “The media’s role in protecting our democracy is vital. When debate moderators fail to reject, or worse, echo rhetoric associated with the racist and antisemitic great replacement conspiracy theory, they grant it the legitimacy of their platform. This dehumanizing rhetoric continues to inspire deadly attacks on immigrants, religious minorities, and people of color, eroding the safety of entire communities. The moderators of future debates have a critical decision to make. They can normalize bigoted rhetoric and be complicit in its impact on our democracy. Or they can challenge candidates who rely on racist conspiracy theories and share accurate information instead, helping to defend an inclusive democracy for all.”
According to Wendy Via, Co-founder, Global Project Against Hate and Extremism: “The ‘Great Replacement’ conspiracy theory and the dangerous ‘invasion’ rhetoric that some politicians are spreading is nothing but lies designed to dehumanize immigrants and people of color, and it must stop. Far-right political and media figures have helped to normalize this white supremacist thinking, and it has led to deadly extremist violence as well as inhumane policies. For the good of our country and communities, debate moderators must be honest about this racist talking point and call it out for what it is.”
According to Joanna YangQing Derman, Director of the Anti-Profiling, Civil Rights, and National Security Program at Asian Americans Advancing Justice | AAJC: “What we saw during the last Republican debate was fear-mongering that sought to weaponize harmful ‘Great Invasion’ conspiracy theories. This is the kind of racial and anti-immigrant animus that also motivates anti-Asian bigotry and inflammatory U.S.-China rhetoric. At a minimum, it is critical that the upcoming debate avoids conflating the actions of the Chinese government with people who are Chinese and seeking a better life in America. If we do not, the consequences of this hostility will have ramifications for the civil and human rights of all Asian Americans and immigrants. We are not so far removed from the surge in anti-Asian hate that we saw with the COVID-19 pandemic for us to relax our vigilance when it comes to language that could stoke further discrimination against our communities.”
