The Great Replacement

Here is a fascinating interview of Renaud Camus, a French intellectual, political theorist, and creator of a concept popularly known as the Great Replacement Theory, which has been in the news as of late. An excerpt:

I do not care much for the future of the Right, which has betrayed the country and the people just as much as the Left and the present ‘centre’. Elections do not mean much today since opinion is manipulated more than ever in history; by school and university teachings, by the so-called ‘new means of communication’, by the collapse of general culture and the progress of mass hebetude, and by the mainstream Press, which is entirely devoted to global replacism and practically belongs to it, and now even official Government “disinformation boards." In such conditions, it is difficult to take electoral results seriously. When a country is handed over to foreign peoples and foreign forces, occupied, colonised, daily humiliated in every way and its indigenous people daily attacked, robbed, raped, slaughtered, Left vs. Right are not the most urgent of issues. Resistance is.


With the current narrative being that “Great Replacement Theory” is right wing conspiracy theory disinformation, Ann Coulter takes us on a trip down memory lane in “Here Are the Nutcases Who Believe in ‘Replacement’ ”, quoting Democrats from 1998 through the present about, to cite one triumphalist book, The Emerging Democratic Majority.

In 2010, Tim Wise wrote “Open Letter to the White Right”, which concluded:

We just have to be patient.

And wait for you to pass into that good night, first politically, and then, well…

Do you hear it?

The sound of your empire dying? Your nation, as you knew it, ending, permanently?

Because I do, and the sound of its demise is beautiful.


As I’ve written before, all the great world civilizations have had about 3000 years—India, China, Mesopotamia, Egypt. So, even if ypu want to date “western civilisation” back to Alexander ( surely that’s the earliest date you could choose) we’ve only had a run of about 2300 years. We should be good for another 7 centuries! It’s still our turn right now. Chill. Then the world can go back to “people of color” enslaving and abusing each other.


Why would we not date Western civilization back to the writing of the Iliad? That would put us approximately at the 3,000 year mark.


You may, if you like. But Alexander was the Great Hellenizer, and the Romans culturally appropriated Greek Civ. Of course, there’s them that would trace it back to the B’hagvad Gita (sp? I never wrote that before.) I was goin’ more for the popular (read, “misinformed”) received knowledge on the subject. I mean lookit all our government buildings, columns and plinths galore! I actually thought I was being generous time-wise. Betcha the Greeks AND Romans were prett-ty swarthy; they just look white now cuz all the paint has flaked off their marble effigies.

Only as the world whitened and lightened (as in “Enlightenment”) did things start to get much better for the people at the bottom, y’know, the ones who threw themselves under the Juggernaut and lost their heads at the rate of 1 every 10 minutes on the step pyramids . Those beneficent black, brown and yellow emperors starved, worked and slaughtered their own co-ethnicities at rates we can hardly conceive, until the relentlessly awful 20th century, when Mao killed 8 million Chinese and Stalin killed his fellow Slavs (wait, are Georgians Slavs?) by the hundred-thousands, at least, in The Holodomor. Oh and had all his own faithful Russian soldiers shot after WW II if by some miracle they had survived the Western Front.
I, as you may have noticed if you’ve ever enlarged my picture here, am white. So, y’know, if there’s gonna be a race war, I’m rootin’ for the whites. Along those same lines: thank GOD for Roe v. Wade.


Here are the mechanics of The Great Replacement - clearly laid out as it has been in the works for quite some time. Right before our eyes, it is happening every day and everybody knows it. This knowledge was a major reason for the election of Trump and an explanation for the venomous hatred of him and of us.


There used to be a pretty easy to find video of a German MP (maybe a local political official in Germany somewhere) speaking from the legislative body how wonderful it was that Germany’s population was turning more Turkish and less German. This lady was German herself! Nonetheless, replacement is not a theory. We have over here in the States wizards of stupid like Billy Kristol saying that he would much rather have a workforce of Hispanics than he would of white, working class Americans.

I don’t know why they are so offended that we have noticed and are now openly saying it to their faces?


It is the same reason that in medicine, successful treatment begins with naming and characterizing the disease. And we are talking about a fatal (for the American experiment) societal/cultural/political self-induced disease - rather like cancer, to extend the analogy to its conclusion. In short, they are afraid we will mount a spirited resistance, rather than shrink, RINO-style, as usually happens.


Oh I think the terminal illness destroying the US matastisized (spelling) a long time ago. Much like with cancer, whenever a large mass of politicians coalesce together and begin to rapidly multiply, your liberties and freedoms require immediate extraction of the mass or things become terminal. Our political tumor began malignancy in 1787 and we are all out of chemo.


The “baby formula” (as if babies are some kinda machine) shortage ,it just hit me: is deliberately engineered to prevent white women from breeding. It’s well educated white women who are most likely to be deterred from birth by the thought that, not only will they actually have to GIVE birth, which is inconvenient enough—but NO WAY are they gonna open a snack bar every 15 minutes.
I just read that inMexico if they’re swimming in Enfamil! That makes sense, too, gotta free up those border-breachin’ moms!
(And I dont care WHAT you call me. )


Everything the Democrats are doing is intended to punish America’s white population.


What about the decimation of the native americans? From the north the Cherokee, Sioux, from central the Aztecs, in the south the Tupi-Guarani? Wasn’t that replacism? You cannot blame the media or political organisations for something all europeans did to the whole continent in the past?


That is a little apples & oranges. Back in the 1500s, the Europeans who took their diseases to the Americas had no idea about those disease processes. And the diseases did a lot worse than decimate (i.e. kill 10%) the native populations. Europeans were themselves horribly familiar with diseases wiping out large numbers of their own people. They probably did not even recognize that the native Americans were experiencing new (to them) diseases.

Equally, should we blame all native Americans for what they did in the past by gifting previously-unknown sexually transmitted diseases to those ancient Europeans?

There are deliberate acts, and then there are unforeseen consequences. Let’s not confuse the two.


It’s just that when I read the interview posted by the OP, I don’t see anything remarkably concrete in terms of politically motivated hidden agenda. I understand it as an anthropological analysis of the consequences of globalisation, ultimately from colonialism. If we think in the super long term, humankind would merge into no ethnicities and more like everyone becoming more or less having the same colour, facial features, etc. And calling it the great replacement or just The Future, has no real consequence other that fodder for NIMBY fanatics who think there is a leftist agenda against everyone else.

1 Like

Except that here in the United States, there definitely is a leftist agenda directed toward replacing the legacy white population with those considered to be more receptive to the Democratic Party’s agenda.


500 years ago, white europeans colonizers were a minority and they gained a majority by looting, bringing enslaved africans to work the fields while multiplying their numbers. And the natural course of society is to mix all those races, and it’s also a function of whites mixing with blacks and reds and asians. This mixed heritage on the long term will normalize all ethnicities. There will be no more whites, nor blacks nor asians, everyone in the long run will be just (surprise) humans. Now claiming that this natural evolutive fact is a political agenda, well, you can call anything you want as you’re entitled to your opinion, at least while the current democratic state of affairs lasts.

But this has not been the “natural course of society” since the emergence of modern humans and their migration from Africa starting around 70,000 years ago. Genetic evidence and the lack of genetic diversity among humans compared to other species suggests humans went through a population bottleneck around 75,000 years ago which reduced the human population to between 10,000 and 30,000 individuals, with all modern humans descended from this very genetically uniform founder population.

As human populations spread around the globe, the various environments they inhabited caused evolution to shape them to adapt and succeed in those environments, and isolation of geographically separated populations and genetic drift caused diversity among populations to increase, resulting in the major racial groups recognised today and smaller and less apparent differences now revealed by genetic analysis.

Thus, over 70 millennia of history, human diversity has increased, not decreased or become uniform. Humans tend to spontaneously self-segregate into like groups and distrust outsiders, leading to conflict among groups whose differences are, to those not involved, almost indistinguishable.

Now, perhaps the shining utopian future promised to us by the globalists will put an end to this history which is as old as our species, but I don’t think that’s the way to bet. In fact, if you look at the history of Lebanon, the Soviet Union, and Yugoslavia in recent decades, it appears fissiparous forces are more powerful than the urge to merge. Economics increasingly demonstrates that railroad-era, continental-scale, resource-extraction empires are impotent, obsolete, and uncompetitive against smaller, agile, self-assembled, and homogeneous populations. Thus I would expect these relics of the 18th and 19th centuries to increasingly dissolve into smaller territories in which human diversity will continue to increase.


Recessive genes tend to disappear with time. Sexual partners are most likely to find each other by their scent, that indicates that genetic differences increases immune system response in their offspring. Evolutionary biology predicts that in the future everyone will look Brazilian. With all that I tend to believe that in the long run, there’s no replacement, it’s just plain evolution. With every technological advance we decrease the distance between people and although I agree that genetic variability can increase, I still think that ethnically we’ll look more alike than not. Look at what’s happening in Japan, their population is decreasing in numbers and some estimate that the Japanese people will disappear, although their genes are less recessives, so their genetic contribution will live on. But it’s only my opinion.


It is certainly true that PAST technological advances have tended to decrease certain distances between people, thereby leading to inter-marriage. But it would be a bold transgendered single mother of color who would assume that technological advances such as horses, ships, canals, trains, planes will continue to occur in the future. In Western society, we have decided to employ unaffordably large numbers of well-paid overhead lawyers & bureaucrats to make sure no more significant technological advances get implemented. Technological advances will continue in places like China and India – places where we may be certain there is no desire to have everyone going Brazilian.

Socially, we may be at a rather unique point in history when it may be easier for a Japanese male to find a Ukrainian girlfriend than a willing Japanese female – which would tend to support the Brazilian hypothesis. But scratch the surface – that model works only for high-earning Japanese males and unusually attractive Ukrainian females. The great bulk of both populations will remain separated.

Think about how things have changed within living memory. Not so very long ago, smart attractive lower-class Western women would marry up, marrying the boss. Now we have assortive mating, where the children of the Beautiful People meet at exclusive colleges, marry, and send their children to the same exclusive colleges – the distance between the nomenklatura and the rest of the population is increasing. If the Ruling Class were able to build a sustainable society, perhaps we would end up with a Brazilian-looking Ruling Class directing “racially different” hoi polloi. But since the Ruling Class has already demonstrated their inability to run societies, that projection will not come to pass.


Actually, no. It depends upon their effect on the phenotype and the selective pressures in effect. For example, lactase persistence (the ability in humans to metabolise lactose into adulthood) is a recessive trait which requires inheriting two copies of the hypolactasia allele from one’s parents. There are six single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with this, all of which are recessive.

Nonetheless, in populations which developed dairy farming, lactase persistence has become overwhelmingly common (90% or higher in northwestern Europe), but rare in populations whose ancestors did not consume animal milk (less than 5% among Native Americans and most East Asians). This is a recent phenomenon: the most common allele for lactase persistence in the northwest European population is estimated to have appeared between 2450 and 2140 BCE.

This is an example of a recessive gene which confers an evolutionary advantage becoming dominant in the population (children who can drink animal milk into adulthood survive and have more offspring). Recessive genes which do not affect reproductive success tend to be neutral and are not selected out. Only those which reduce the number of offspring are eliminated. And this depends upon the environment. The recessive sickle cell anemia gene increases reproductive success among heterozygous carriers in regions where malaria is endemic and has persisted and been selected for among populations living there despite being deleterious to fatal to homozygous carriers of the abnormal HBB gene.

Genetics are complicated. Our genomes are in a continuous dialogue with the environment which itself is constantly changing, just as we are changing our environment.