The Great Replacement Consciousness Test: Part I – Some of My Best Friends Are…

Wikimedia Commons: Plato, considered by many to be the godfather of Western thought

Consider this piece a lengthy addendum to my recent Idiot’s Guide to a Class Analysis of the Great Reset. In Part II of that piece, I discussed how the Great Replacement has been insinuated into the Great Reset, and identity politics absorbed into the ruling class’s divide-and-rule tactics. I’m now going to use something (that’s the kindest shorthand description for it) recently published by Nevermore Media to illustrate how muddled the thinking is in some quarters of The Great Freedom Movement on what it sees as the Great Replacement.

The Nevermore Media piece is titled The Great Replacement – Is it a Thing? It contains a preamble by Crow Qu’appelle, followed by a longer piece written by a friend of his, Jordan Henderson, which is the meat of the whole argument, such as it is.

My goal here is to counter Qu’appelle’s and Henderson’s muddled Great Replacement thinking with my own perspective, which I’m hoping will be less muddled.

A note on vocabulary. If Henderson, a professional Great Replacement theoriser, thinks “replacementism” is a word, then I’m not embarrassed to supplement his lexicon with replacementer as a word to describe his ilk.

Replacementers erect a number of strawmen to facilitate their attack on a perceived erosion of whiteness. It’s as if there’s not enough substance to the issue of Great Replacement itself, so they hunt for unrelated side-dishes to satisfy their appetite for a good brawl.

The logic, as far as I can tell, is that if the White demographic is being eroded, fault must be found with non-White groups and anything perceived as sympathetic to non-Whites. Sort of like a man who goes to a football match and can’t get in because it’s sold out, so he starts throwing stones at everyone in the stadium. The problem is not that people in the stadium are watching the match; the problem is that he doesn’t have a ticket. Focusing on the former is ever so slightly missing the point.

In Henderson’s case, the strawmen are: indigenous people’s record of savagery; Black crime; race issues generally; Hollywood and the you-know-who’s; religion; diversity. The effect of attacking these strawmen is to deflect attention from the real culprits – Western civilisation or culture, and the West’s ruling class. Western civilisation, instead of being viewed as a potential cause of a Great Replacement (if it is happening), is tethered to whiteness and becomes something to be defended, along with whiteness, rather than critically assessed.

While I believe that’s an accurate summary of what is effectively happening, I don’t think replacementers do this consciously. It’s not a carefully thought-out strategy. It’s reflexive. They’re operating from a place of fear. I get the sense that they are in war mode, at night, and operating without night vision goggles. Their fevered and trigger-happy response is to kill whatever scary stuff pops into their line of sight to increase the chances of eventually nailing the enemy, whatever it is. They haven’t yet defined it, so the people in the stadium watching the match will do.

There is no coherent battle strategy. If they looked at war through a Sun Tzu lens, they might take a step back and ask whether this was a fight they should even be engaged in. In all of Henderson’s 7,000-odd words of Great Replacement straw-manning, he briefly identified the enemy – the ruling class, or the ‘they’ I identified in my previous piece. Having arrived at something concrete, he then immediately asserted that the strawmen are equally important, and returned to bayonetting them.

Here's how I’ve structured my counterargument. First, I will try to dismantle the irrational way in which Western culture or Western civilisation is used as the mood music to gee up the troops in the resistance to a Great Replacement. While fleetingly acknowledging its “epic failures”, Henderson (and Great Replacementers in general) view it as an integral component of whiteness and therefore a Good Thing to be defended at all costs. I will demonstrate a fundamental reversal of cause and effect in his argument, thus exposing the irrationality that is a core trait of “replacementism”. Then I will move on to the strawmen he has erected.

If I succeed in my counterargument, it will lay the groundwork for asking what, if anything, should replacementers be fighting? Who is the enemy? What are they trying to achieve? How should “replacementism” be reframed? I will break my argument down into a series of relatively short pieces with the aim of presenting more digestible bites. Here is the structure of the whole piece:

· Part I – Scene setting and dealing with the mood music of Western Civilisation / culture – the reversal of cause and effect.

· Part II – Strawmen numbers one, two, and three – the natives are revolting, interracial crime, and the you-know-who’s.

· Part III – Strawmen numbers four and five – religion and diversity.

· Part IV – The heart of the matter.

Why is “replacementism” a consciousness test?

I believe that replacementers operate from a position of fear, anger, and even vengeance (something I detected in Simon Elmer’s writing). These are low levels of consciousness that we are all prone to, but which we ought not allow to dominate us. I am not asking readers to abandon any belief they might have in a Great Replacement. I am asking all of us to raise our levels of consciousness in thinking about it since it is consciousness and not ingenuity that allows us to forge effective strategies for resistance. This is because consciousness is the tool that frames problems presented to us. How you see the problem determines the strategy to deal with it. Tactics are worthless if the strategy is flawed. Ingenuity determines the efficiency of execution of the strategy. Bad strategies can be executed just as efficiently as good ones, but they fail in the end.

The controllers present problems to us in the hope that we will view them in the way they want us to – from a low level of consciousness. People make the mistake of thinking that because the controllers are evil, they are at a low level of consciousness. In relative terms this is true, but we are where we are because ‘they’ are above the mass of people in consciousness. Using an arbitrary scale for illustrative purposes, if the mass is at level 3, ‘they’ are at 5. If you respond to a problem in the way that helps the controllers, you’re at 3. To win, we need to be higher than 5.

Evermore confusion

Some brief comments about Nevermore Media’s and/or Qu’appelle’s confusion before we move onto the main ideas presented by his “fellow traveller”, Henderson.

Qu’appelle’s presentation of his friend’s ideas is disingenuous. He says the piece is “certain to make you squirm in your seat” and that he wouldn’t publish it if it were not for “the impeccable reputation of its author”. You can tell from his excitement that he’s discovered Great Replacement porn and it’s probably spicing things up in the bedroom. It’s not boring old Doctors and Nurses for this guy anymore. It’s Border Police and Immigrants.

If he is slightly embarrassed about it, I’m guessing it’s because somewhere deep in the recesses of his soul, a little voice is telling him that Henderson, who he’s using as an all too transparent shield, isn’t operating from a good place. As I’ll argue, the place he’s operating from is fear.

Qu’appelle himself doesn’t seem to be sure what’s happening. “So is there a Great Replacement happening?” he asks. He answers, or more accurately doesn’t answer, his question with: “Well, let’s just say that it’s likely that people looking back on this era will think so.”

Launching into another big question, Qu’appelle asks: “Is this Great Replacement a product of a nefarious agenda?”. Channelling Spongebob, the answer is: “I don’t know”. More confusion.

Ok, perhaps I’m being a bit harsh. It’s fine to be confused. It’s fine to say you’re confused. But how did Qu’appelle seek to address all this confusion? By publishing a longer piece of equally muddled thinking by a “friend and fellow traveller”, Jordan Henderson, whose “intentions are good”. Something about the road to hell immediately sprang to mind.

Owing to the perceived sensitivity of the subject matter, and wanting to make it clear to his audience that he has a get-out-of-jail card for racism, Qu’appelle did the equivalent of “some of my best friends are…[insert name of group under alleged attack]”. He says he is a “Euro-Canadian” and his wife is Mexican, his stepfather is Cuban, and his sister-in-law is Chinese. When I see people do that, my eyes roll. Very hard. If your argument has enough logic to walk nimbly on its own two feet, you don’t need to pull out an identity crutch to prop it up. It looks as if Mr Qu’appelle has lazily substituted his identity for presenting a good argument.

Whether the Great Replacement is nefarious or not actually matters a great deal, and Qu’appelle doesn’t seem to care too much about that in promoting the idea that it’s “a thing”. If a demographic shift happened as a result of people of different ethnicities arriving, or intermarrying, or a relative steep decline in the birth rate of a hitherto dominant ethnicity, or a combination of all of them, and there was no ‘nefariousness’ behind this, why would you care? Why would you even give a sinister name to a change in the physical characteristic of skin colour as a result of a geographic movement of different-looking humans from one place to another? Qu’appelle himself seems to have admitted to voluntarily contributing to the Great Euro-Canadian Replacement through his choice of partner.

I could therefore formally charge him with the crime of Complicity in the Great Replacement, adding to the charge sheet the misdemeanour of pretending to be concerned about the victims of his crime, namely himself and all other Euro-Canadians.

Let’s get clear about the nefarious element of this alleged Great Replacement, because there are people out there who posit this theory irrespective of whether there is nefariousness, which is frankly slightly unhinged. If there’s nothing nefarious going on, it’s not a Great Replacement since nothing is being done to anyone without their consent. The prefix ‘Great’ is generally, though not always, reserved for historical calamities. Think ‘The Great War’, or ‘The Great Fire of London’. Absent nefariousness in relation to replacementers’ fears, ‘The Great Change in the Skin Complexion of Europeans’ is not the stuff of Big Screen drama.

Nefarious in relation to a Great Replacement implies mass immigration of non-White people forced on White People without consultation and consent, with the aim of transforming the White demographic from a majority into a minority. And I am going to do Qu’appelle a favour by assuming, for the purposes of this debate, that a nefarious immigration policy is in train. Why? Because I think it’s possible. But I also think it’s highly improbable. I am more concerned about the level of consciousness we’re at when thinking about a Great Replacement, theoretical or real.

So, from this starting point, let’s unpick the Henderson piece that Nevermore Media waved at its readers. It’s titled: On the Great Replacement, I’ve Come Around: Here is Why.

The mood music – Western civilisation and Christian tradition

It starts in the same vein as Qu’appelle’s tippy toeing – this is very dangerous territory because…you know…the slur of racism is far worse than anti-vaxxer or conspiracy theorist. Our intrepid replacementer makes it clear that “standing up for white people” should not be confused with “white supremacy”.

Henderson commences proceedings with the obligatory soaring mood music accompanied by the words “Western civilisation” and “Christian tradition”. Because, he says, replacementism is “tightly interwoven” with beliefs about these things. In his conclusion, he asks readers to “keep in mind not just the epic failures but also the long list of successes that whites and their culture (broadly speaking Western culture) have had in art, architecture, music, clever inventions, and society building.” [emphasis added]

He also states in his concluding remarks that he has “come to see replacementism, and widespread socially acceptable (and promoted) anti-white, anti-Western, anti-Christian-tradition, beliefs as a major proximate cause of our era’s illness.” [emphasis added]

There are two important assertions there to home in on:

1. There is a long list of White cultural successes.

2. Replacementism is a major cause of our era’s illnesses.

It is important to understand the significance of Henderson making only a passing mention of Western culture’s “epic failures”. There is no weighing-up of the failures against the long list of successes. The subtext is that Western culture is a net good. This is a given and requires no debate, in his view.

Crucially, in making replacementism itself the “cause of our era’s illnesses”, and not the culture out of which it arises, there is a problematic reversal of cause and effect (or symptoms if we use the language of illness). This requires unpicking.

Culture can be distilled to the social manifestation of human thought and ideas. It gives rise to a wide range of societal and political institutions, which in turn manifest behaviours and events in the life of the affected society. Replacementism, if you accept it is happening, is such an event, and it is a relatively recent development in the time span of Western civilisation and culture. It is therefore a product of Western culture, specifically its political institutions. Crucial to that point is the fact that there are no external forces in operation propelling a Great Replacement, other than the political institutions of the West which are products of Western culture. This of course was not the case in previous Great Replacements which were imposed on indigenous people by Western civilisation.

Culture as the ongoing background process giving rise to historical events such as replacementism is clearly a cause. Illnesses cause symptoms, and so the relation of culture to replacementism is that of illness to symptom. Henderson’s assertion that replacementism (the symptom) is the cause of “our era’s illness” is a ‘wet roads cause rain’ type of error.

Having removed Western culture itself as a potential (and most likely) cause of a Great Replacement, it is easy for Henderson to elevate it to something that, while not perfect, is to be defended. This weird reversal of cause and effect completely exonerates him from tackling all the institutions produced by Western culture (listed in this footnote[i]) and which are at the forefront of global oppression, or in his words, “our era’s illness”. Listing these institutions, products of Western culture, would not be expedient for the purpose of brandishing Western culture’s “long list of successes”.

To be sure, every culture has its beauty, attraction, and achievements. Culture is simply the social manifestation of human thought and creativity. As such, both horror and beauty inevitably flow from it. If you want to present culture as a Good Thing, you must try to put both the horror and the beauty on the scales and prove a net positive. That’s quite difficult, even under the most objective conditions, but a bias will inevitably assign high scores to the beauty and omit, or downplay, the horror, as Henderson has done.

I am not attacking Western culture. I am attacking the irrational elevation of it to the point where it is seen as something to be defended in a Great Replacement theory, when a rational assessment demands that it be put in the dock as a causal factor in a Great Replacement.

There is another point to be made that reinforces the circular nature of what is happening and helps to get clarity on cause and effect – more precisely who is doing what to whom. It’s clear that Henderson sees whiteness as an integral and inseparable component of Western civilisation and culture, particularly in stressing “the long list of successes that whites and their culture (broadly speaking Western culture) have had in art, architecture, music, clever inventions, and society building.” [bold emphasis added] If, as Henderson asserts, White people are integral to Western civilisation, and Western civilisation is the cause of replacementism as I have logically argued, then it is reasonable to conclude that Western civilisation is in the process of replacing itself, or at least the major characteristic of Western civilisation to which it owes its character and essence – whiteness. Which is not exactly a civilised thing for Western civilisation to do.

The term given to the illness that causes a creature or human to eat itself is autocannibalism, a disturbing and fascinating phenomenon to explore from a psychoanalytical perspective. When an individual self-harms in this way, it can be attributed to a wide variety of personality and psychotic disorders. What does it mean when a whole society does it? I suppose to the extent that cultures self-destruct, this is a valid path of enquiry. If more psychologists could get their heads out of their arses and start shining a light on the frightening mess the West is in right now, we might hope to collectively withdraw from the abyss and gradually recover our senses.

At any rate, what this tells me is that we should be critically assessing culture, not giving it a get-out-of-jail card. When you consider the autocannibalistic insanity of Western civilisation deliberately replacing its native population, as posited by Great Replacement theory, Henderson’s wet-roads-cause-rain analysis, and then advocating “sticking up for whites” as a solution, simply doesn’t cut the intellectual mustard. It’s frankly puerile.

Because I am nothing if not generous, I’d like to offer replacementers some consolation in the event that Western civilisation eventually goes down the tubes. Plato, considered to be the godfather of Western thought, spent thirteen years studying in North Africa. It shouldn’t be too difficult for a bunch of replacementers skilled in the art of blaming to construct an argument for pinning the collapse all on Africa.

---

In Part II, I discuss some Great Replacement strawmen: Henderson’s discovery that the natives are revolting, interracial crime, and the you-know-who’s.

---

[i] Some of the ‘fruits’ of Western culture: the World Economic Forum; the World Health Organization; the Bank for International Settlements; the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; the United Nations; North Atlantic Treaty Organization; World Bank; International Monetary Fund; BlackRock; Vanguard; Quantitative Easing; Pfizer; Moderna; GAVI The Vaccine Alliance; Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI); Central Bank Digital Currencies; Digital ID, smart phones; the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA); 15-minute cities; Agenda 2030; technocracy; mRNA vaccines; the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (that effectively owns the WHO); the Bilderberg Group; the Council on Foreign Relations; Nazism; the Holocaust of WW2; Zionism; the Palestinian Holocaust.