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.
Worth repeating: “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.”
Also worth repeating: “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.”
While I have never met either Jordan or yourself in person, I have great respect for both of you based on your writings over the last year and a bit. I appreciate both of you, not because I agree with everything you both write, but because I agree with most of it and gain much from the insights and viewpoints — to say nothing of the exposition of interesting facts — you both provide your readership. Which is to say, it's ALL grist for the mind-mill. And along with the wheat, there will always be some chaff, however much or little that me be. And that's fine and to be expected. Because, in the end it is we, and we alone, who make up our minds, regardless of what others may think.
My general view on this phenomenon of mass immigration from “economically disadvantaged” countries is (for what it's worth and however simplistic it may be), that it's strictly in service of the “Owners and Controllers of Global Financial Capital” in two glaring respects: first, it provides OCGFC with cheap labour and a constant downward pressure on wages; secondly, it serves as one of OCGFC's classic tactics for the purpose of divide-and-rule.
I agree with this perspective. What else would be for? For the benefit of the economically disadvantaged people whose countries have often been ravaged by globalist policies designed to disadvantage them?
So far, it seems like your critique is mostly in good faith, although I guess you take a few unnecessary swipes at me. That’s fine with me, though because it seems like you intend to present a thoughtful, intelligent critique of Great Replacement theory. I welcome this. I will reiterate, as I did in my preamble to Jordan's article, that I do not agree with everything that Jordan said.
My goal was to break the ice about a topic that makes a lot of people uncomfortable, myself included.
I published Jordan’s piece, as well as another piece by Simon Elmer, in an attempt to talk about how the immigration policies of western “liberal democracies” seem to be part of a “divide-and-rule” strategy. I don’t think that you're naïve enough to believe that demographics are negligible factors in politics. Hopefully you will see fit to address Aristotle’s argument about why tyrants prefer foreigners!
One thing I would appreciate, is if you could situate yourself a bit. Where do you live? I don’t claim to be able to speak intelligently about what’s going on in Europe, but in Canada, Trudeau’s liberals have launched a bizarre propaganda campaign which I have called Canada’s Cultural Revolution. This campaign has involved a campaign of historical revisionism seemingly calculated to make Euro-Canadians hate themselves. It certainly worked on me for awhile, and I am still working at unlearning what I call “white self-hate racism”. In Canada the word “white” has, in many contexts, become a pejorative term. When the Freedom Convoy was occupying my hometown of Ottawa, some people seemed to think that the fact that a majority of protesters were white was proof the protests themselves were somehow racist. Well, Canada’s still a majority white country. Is it racist to say that? That was one point at which it became obvious how anti-racism is being used to delegitimize meaningful political action.
It’s evident by now that a lot of people have had enough of postmodern politics which use mystifying terms like “whiteness” to delegitimize activism undertaken by people who look like me.
Speaking of which, you use the term “whiteness” several times in your article, and I’d like to ask you to clarify what exactly you mean by it. For instance, you accuse of Jordan of viewing “Western Culture” and “Western Civilization” as “an integral component of whiteness and therefore a Good Thing to be defended at all costs”. What does such a claim even mean? What is “whiteness”? Could you define that term, please?
I welcome your critique, and look forward to future instalments of your series, but if you think that Nevermore fails to identify the ruling class as the problem, you surely aren’t very familiar with our work.
I’m sure @Jordan Henderson can speak for himself, but the part of his critique that I find most compelling is the ruling class is weaponizing immigration (as well as sensitivities around race and gender) as a way of achieving its goals, which presumably involve creating a docile, exploitable population that it is capable of molding to suit its own ends.
At the end of the day, I am for a pluralistic, multi-ethnic revolutionary movement that is capable of resisting the ruling class. And I think I speak for a lot of people when I say that we’re sick of the racist anti-racism of the woke era. We’re sick of the guilt trips, and we’re sick of people acting that we’ve committed some kind of sin by being born into a white body.
To quote the great anarcho-punk band Crass,
“If you care to take a closer look at the way things really stand
You'd see we're all just niggers to the rulers of this land.”
In your preamble you said that you don’t agree with everything that Henderson says, but you didn’t state what you disagreed with. I call that trying to have your cake and eat it. If you post something on your site, own it, or don’t post it.
No I’m not naïve enough to believe that demographics are negligible factors in politics. The focus of my argument is HOW you deal with it. Do you identify the ultimate cause of it or do you engage in strawmanning and scapegoating groups and issues that aren’t related?
No, I don’t see fit to address Aristotle’s argument about why tyrants prefer foreigners. We should be addressing the tyrant, not Aristotle’s argument about tyrants. The ‘foreigners’ in the context of the Great Replacement argument aren’t foreigners. They’re first, second and third generation immigrants. They regard themselves as citizens and most of them are. So Aristotle’s argument doesn’t transfer very well to the situation in the West today. To the extent that immigrants do not have legal status, then they are foreigners. But you’ve just labelled nearly everyone in the West who happens to be non-White as a “foreigner”. How do you think this would go down in France where the vast majority of people of North African descent have been there for literally generations. Do you not see the sweeping ‘foreigner’ label as problematic?
Asking me to “situate” myself because of all the nasty things that are going on in Canada is not relevant to the whole debate. Neither your preamble to Henderson’s piece nor Henderson’s piece itself dealt with “Canada’s Cultural Revolution” or all the “bizarre propaganda campaigns” going on in Canada, and therefore nor did I. By bringing them in here, you’ve gone off-piste.
I’m sorry that you’ve are going through a process of unlearning “white self-hate racism”. The whole point of my piece was simply this: how does it help to dredge up interracial crime, religions you don’t like, the people running Hollywood etc. I can’t see how non-whites or Islam caused your “white self-hate racism”. Is it possible for you to deal with your psychological self-hate issues without scapegoating and strawmanning?
You ask me if it’s racist to say “Canada’s still a majority white country”. This is an absurd question. Of course it’s not racist to say that. Did I say that it was racist to say such a thing?!
Whiteness is not a mystifying term, as you claim. It is in fact so basic as to be self-explanatory. It just means BEING WHITE. You and your fellow replacementers are the ones banging on about WHITE people being replaced as a demographic. You are the ones who are positing that WHITE people are disappearing. So if WHITE people are decreasing in numbers, society will be less WHITE, ergo there will be less WHITENESS. Why are you trying to pretend that you don’t understand the meaning of very basic words?
It’s not that you or Henderson failed to identify the ruling class as the problem. Rather, it was mentioned once (or possibly twice) and therefore very superficially. The whole emphasis of the piece was on what I called the strawmen.
If the ruling class is weaponising immigration, Henderson’s and your response to it is precisely where they want you to go – strawmanning and scapegoating immigrants instead of working with them to defeat the RULING CLASS!
You’re sick of guilt trips – fine. Get psychological help for your guilt without engaging in irrelevant side-swipes about Black crime statistics, ethnocentrism, religion etc etc. Get on a couch with a professional. You’re displaying the exact trait that I accuse replacementers of – you don’t seem to be able to stick to the issue. You’re missing the point. That’s your real psychological issue.
“Guilt trips” and your psychological condition in a strict sense aren’t relevant to a Great Replacement and to the critique I offered of it. But it is very telling that you feel it necessary to share this with me. It confirms, for me, that replacementers are not coming from good places – fear, guilt etc. I would also add that the only way someone could be made to feel guilty about being white is if they had a strong emotional attachment to being white in the first place. It’s a physical characteristic. I’ve got big ears and no-one’s going to make me feel guilty about it because the size of my ears aren’t important to me. There is so much meaning wrapped up in being white (whiteness!!) that it can be used as a manipulative weapon against you. Again, that’s for you to deal with in your own time, but if you bring it to the Replacement debate, you get what Henderson delivered – not very nice stuff about non-white groups.
Okay... fair enough... I'll try to stick to the point... but what is the main point of your series so far? You seem to be making a number of different points, but you don't disagree that there is a very meaningful demographic shift happening in western European countries, as well as Canada and the U.S.
I think that one relevant question (which I hope is on point) is to understand WHY this is happening... Well, partly it's obviously for economic reasons. But are there political motives as well? Is the end result of the Great Reset a kind of global monoculture where everyone speaks the same language, uses the metric system, etc...? Because I think the answer might be maybe. If you look at the projected loss of linguistic diversity projected over the next century, it seems like things are moving in the direction of far fewer distinct cultures on planet Earth. Now, you might argue that this is the result of technological change and/or a kind of organic globalization that is happening just because that's the way that the proverbial cookie happens to be crumbling.
Another way to look at things to take seriously the possibility that these things are happening because certain ultra-powerful people want them to be happening.
Simon Elmer has probably done more to answer this question that anyone else, and his conclusions are alarming.
A major point of my series is to say, have your Great Replacement theory if you want, but don't strawman, scapegoat and generally malign groups who are just a as much of a pawn in this game as everyone else. That's why I spent most of it deconstructing the strawmen. If you can accept that they ARE strawmen, that opens the doors to clearer thinking to answer the questions you ask: what the hell are they trying to do.
I genuinely find it hard to accept that a white ruling class, however mad, would want to make themselves a minority in their own backyard. Which is why I say GR is possible but improbable. A useful side-effect of high immigration levels is to act as a smokescreen for all the shit they're doing. It allows them to throw up scapegoats for the problems they are causing. They would much rather have people kicking immigrants than kicking them. And that's exactly what's happening, from where I'm sitting.
The global monoculture has been furthered more by the export of Western corporatist values, culture, and technology to the non-Western world than by immigration into the West.
I've read enough of Elmer's stuff to know I don't need to see any more. He is bitter and vengeful towards the wrong targets and it really disturbs me that people can think that what he writes is ok.
I haven't read Elmer's work but I did read the piece by Crow\Jordan.
I appreciate your intention of bringing more clarity on the subject, though I think you my misjudge both Crow and Jordan. I did however have my own doubts about the assessments Jordan made, even though I believe he made them with the best intentions.
And you are right that the situation is not the same in America or present day Europe as it was in Aristotle's Greece.
American Indians are not "foreigners" or recent immigrants. Black people were brought over centuries ago in the slave trade. A third of the United States was purchased or annexed from Mexico, and thus Hispanic. "Whites" (i.e. Anglos) WERE the foreigners, the invaders.
Yeah, thanks for this balance. Jordan actually sent me a very polite note and seems to want to engage. I think there's a lot of emotional stuff attached to all of this and I'm not immune to it. For me it's a case of - when is the human race ever going to put all this race stuff behind us?!
You might be interested in reading this truly brilliant piece that goes into exactly why the things you describe are being done. See specifically chapter 3, points 2 and 4, and especially point 6 in that chapter
I set my face against moral relativism! This philosophy is very insidious. It is essentially a moral deception, since morality itself is a process of determining what is good and not good; what is life-affirming and what is not. If everything is neither good nor bad, then morality is thrown out the window, and anything can be justified.
When I first started writing, I gave my first piece to RL to give it a wider airing. It was a piece bashing the mainstream left on their disgusting response to covid and I thought that the best place to try to embarrass them was in a publication that was on the left, but had taken an anti-lockdown, anti-vaxx (ergo good) position on the whole scam. Since that time (early 2021 if memory serves me correctly), I have established a good relationship with them. We have a tacit agreement that they just pull my pieces onto their site if they like them. We discuss issues, I attend their events and I regard them as friends, basically. I have been published on TCW but we parted ways after the great Zio schism of 7/10/23. I've submitted my writing to other places but no takers. So I'm just trying to build my Substack.
"The Great Change in Skin Complexion of Europeans" - that bit made me laugh out loud. Really looking forward to part two.
Worth repeating: “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.”
Also worth repeating: “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.”
While I have never met either Jordan or yourself in person, I have great respect for both of you based on your writings over the last year and a bit. I appreciate both of you, not because I agree with everything you both write, but because I agree with most of it and gain much from the insights and viewpoints — to say nothing of the exposition of interesting facts — you both provide your readership. Which is to say, it's ALL grist for the mind-mill. And along with the wheat, there will always be some chaff, however much or little that me be. And that's fine and to be expected. Because, in the end it is we, and we alone, who make up our minds, regardless of what others may think.
My general view on this phenomenon of mass immigration from “economically disadvantaged” countries is (for what it's worth and however simplistic it may be), that it's strictly in service of the “Owners and Controllers of Global Financial Capital” in two glaring respects: first, it provides OCGFC with cheap labour and a constant downward pressure on wages; secondly, it serves as one of OCGFC's classic tactics for the purpose of divide-and-rule.
I agree with this perspective. What else would be for? For the benefit of the economically disadvantaged people whose countries have often been ravaged by globalist policies designed to disadvantage them?
Indeed (assuming, that is, that "it" is MIA between "would" and "be").
Hey! Thanks for writing this, Rusere. I welcome
So far, it seems like your critique is mostly in good faith, although I guess you take a few unnecessary swipes at me. That’s fine with me, though because it seems like you intend to present a thoughtful, intelligent critique of Great Replacement theory. I welcome this. I will reiterate, as I did in my preamble to Jordan's article, that I do not agree with everything that Jordan said.
My goal was to break the ice about a topic that makes a lot of people uncomfortable, myself included.
I published Jordan’s piece, as well as another piece by Simon Elmer, in an attempt to talk about how the immigration policies of western “liberal democracies” seem to be part of a “divide-and-rule” strategy. I don’t think that you're naïve enough to believe that demographics are negligible factors in politics. Hopefully you will see fit to address Aristotle’s argument about why tyrants prefer foreigners!
One thing I would appreciate, is if you could situate yourself a bit. Where do you live? I don’t claim to be able to speak intelligently about what’s going on in Europe, but in Canada, Trudeau’s liberals have launched a bizarre propaganda campaign which I have called Canada’s Cultural Revolution. This campaign has involved a campaign of historical revisionism seemingly calculated to make Euro-Canadians hate themselves. It certainly worked on me for awhile, and I am still working at unlearning what I call “white self-hate racism”. In Canada the word “white” has, in many contexts, become a pejorative term. When the Freedom Convoy was occupying my hometown of Ottawa, some people seemed to think that the fact that a majority of protesters were white was proof the protests themselves were somehow racist. Well, Canada’s still a majority white country. Is it racist to say that? That was one point at which it became obvious how anti-racism is being used to delegitimize meaningful political action.
It’s evident by now that a lot of people have had enough of postmodern politics which use mystifying terms like “whiteness” to delegitimize activism undertaken by people who look like me.
Speaking of which, you use the term “whiteness” several times in your article, and I’d like to ask you to clarify what exactly you mean by it. For instance, you accuse of Jordan of viewing “Western Culture” and “Western Civilization” as “an integral component of whiteness and therefore a Good Thing to be defended at all costs”. What does such a claim even mean? What is “whiteness”? Could you define that term, please?
I welcome your critique, and look forward to future instalments of your series, but if you think that Nevermore fails to identify the ruling class as the problem, you surely aren’t very familiar with our work.
I’m sure @Jordan Henderson can speak for himself, but the part of his critique that I find most compelling is the ruling class is weaponizing immigration (as well as sensitivities around race and gender) as a way of achieving its goals, which presumably involve creating a docile, exploitable population that it is capable of molding to suit its own ends.
At the end of the day, I am for a pluralistic, multi-ethnic revolutionary movement that is capable of resisting the ruling class. And I think I speak for a lot of people when I say that we’re sick of the racist anti-racism of the woke era. We’re sick of the guilt trips, and we’re sick of people acting that we’ve committed some kind of sin by being born into a white body.
To quote the great anarcho-punk band Crass,
“If you care to take a closer look at the way things really stand
You'd see we're all just niggers to the rulers of this land.”
If you're interested in my critique of Canada's Cultural Revolution, I direct you to this piece: https://nevermoremedia.substack.com/p/canadas-cultural-revolution-a-shame?utm_source=publication-search
In your preamble you said that you don’t agree with everything that Henderson says, but you didn’t state what you disagreed with. I call that trying to have your cake and eat it. If you post something on your site, own it, or don’t post it.
No I’m not naïve enough to believe that demographics are negligible factors in politics. The focus of my argument is HOW you deal with it. Do you identify the ultimate cause of it or do you engage in strawmanning and scapegoating groups and issues that aren’t related?
No, I don’t see fit to address Aristotle’s argument about why tyrants prefer foreigners. We should be addressing the tyrant, not Aristotle’s argument about tyrants. The ‘foreigners’ in the context of the Great Replacement argument aren’t foreigners. They’re first, second and third generation immigrants. They regard themselves as citizens and most of them are. So Aristotle’s argument doesn’t transfer very well to the situation in the West today. To the extent that immigrants do not have legal status, then they are foreigners. But you’ve just labelled nearly everyone in the West who happens to be non-White as a “foreigner”. How do you think this would go down in France where the vast majority of people of North African descent have been there for literally generations. Do you not see the sweeping ‘foreigner’ label as problematic?
Asking me to “situate” myself because of all the nasty things that are going on in Canada is not relevant to the whole debate. Neither your preamble to Henderson’s piece nor Henderson’s piece itself dealt with “Canada’s Cultural Revolution” or all the “bizarre propaganda campaigns” going on in Canada, and therefore nor did I. By bringing them in here, you’ve gone off-piste.
I’m sorry that you’ve are going through a process of unlearning “white self-hate racism”. The whole point of my piece was simply this: how does it help to dredge up interracial crime, religions you don’t like, the people running Hollywood etc. I can’t see how non-whites or Islam caused your “white self-hate racism”. Is it possible for you to deal with your psychological self-hate issues without scapegoating and strawmanning?
You ask me if it’s racist to say “Canada’s still a majority white country”. This is an absurd question. Of course it’s not racist to say that. Did I say that it was racist to say such a thing?!
Whiteness is not a mystifying term, as you claim. It is in fact so basic as to be self-explanatory. It just means BEING WHITE. You and your fellow replacementers are the ones banging on about WHITE people being replaced as a demographic. You are the ones who are positing that WHITE people are disappearing. So if WHITE people are decreasing in numbers, society will be less WHITE, ergo there will be less WHITENESS. Why are you trying to pretend that you don’t understand the meaning of very basic words?
It’s not that you or Henderson failed to identify the ruling class as the problem. Rather, it was mentioned once (or possibly twice) and therefore very superficially. The whole emphasis of the piece was on what I called the strawmen.
If the ruling class is weaponising immigration, Henderson’s and your response to it is precisely where they want you to go – strawmanning and scapegoating immigrants instead of working with them to defeat the RULING CLASS!
You’re sick of guilt trips – fine. Get psychological help for your guilt without engaging in irrelevant side-swipes about Black crime statistics, ethnocentrism, religion etc etc. Get on a couch with a professional. You’re displaying the exact trait that I accuse replacementers of – you don’t seem to be able to stick to the issue. You’re missing the point. That’s your real psychological issue.
“Guilt trips” and your psychological condition in a strict sense aren’t relevant to a Great Replacement and to the critique I offered of it. But it is very telling that you feel it necessary to share this with me. It confirms, for me, that replacementers are not coming from good places – fear, guilt etc. I would also add that the only way someone could be made to feel guilty about being white is if they had a strong emotional attachment to being white in the first place. It’s a physical characteristic. I’ve got big ears and no-one’s going to make me feel guilty about it because the size of my ears aren’t important to me. There is so much meaning wrapped up in being white (whiteness!!) that it can be used as a manipulative weapon against you. Again, that’s for you to deal with in your own time, but if you bring it to the Replacement debate, you get what Henderson delivered – not very nice stuff about non-white groups.
Okay... fair enough... I'll try to stick to the point... but what is the main point of your series so far? You seem to be making a number of different points, but you don't disagree that there is a very meaningful demographic shift happening in western European countries, as well as Canada and the U.S.
I think that one relevant question (which I hope is on point) is to understand WHY this is happening... Well, partly it's obviously for economic reasons. But are there political motives as well? Is the end result of the Great Reset a kind of global monoculture where everyone speaks the same language, uses the metric system, etc...? Because I think the answer might be maybe. If you look at the projected loss of linguistic diversity projected over the next century, it seems like things are moving in the direction of far fewer distinct cultures on planet Earth. Now, you might argue that this is the result of technological change and/or a kind of organic globalization that is happening just because that's the way that the proverbial cookie happens to be crumbling.
Another way to look at things to take seriously the possibility that these things are happening because certain ultra-powerful people want them to be happening.
Simon Elmer has probably done more to answer this question that anyone else, and his conclusions are alarming.
A major point of my series is to say, have your Great Replacement theory if you want, but don't strawman, scapegoat and generally malign groups who are just a as much of a pawn in this game as everyone else. That's why I spent most of it deconstructing the strawmen. If you can accept that they ARE strawmen, that opens the doors to clearer thinking to answer the questions you ask: what the hell are they trying to do.
I genuinely find it hard to accept that a white ruling class, however mad, would want to make themselves a minority in their own backyard. Which is why I say GR is possible but improbable. A useful side-effect of high immigration levels is to act as a smokescreen for all the shit they're doing. It allows them to throw up scapegoats for the problems they are causing. They would much rather have people kicking immigrants than kicking them. And that's exactly what's happening, from where I'm sitting.
The global monoculture has been furthered more by the export of Western corporatist values, culture, and technology to the non-Western world than by immigration into the West.
I've read enough of Elmer's stuff to know I don't need to see any more. He is bitter and vengeful towards the wrong targets and it really disturbs me that people can think that what he writes is ok.
I haven't read Elmer's work but I did read the piece by Crow\Jordan.
I appreciate your intention of bringing more clarity on the subject, though I think you my misjudge both Crow and Jordan. I did however have my own doubts about the assessments Jordan made, even though I believe he made them with the best intentions.
And you are right that the situation is not the same in America or present day Europe as it was in Aristotle's Greece.
American Indians are not "foreigners" or recent immigrants. Black people were brought over centuries ago in the slave trade. A third of the United States was purchased or annexed from Mexico, and thus Hispanic. "Whites" (i.e. Anglos) WERE the foreigners, the invaders.
Yeah, thanks for this balance. Jordan actually sent me a very polite note and seems to want to engage. I think there's a lot of emotional stuff attached to all of this and I'm not immune to it. For me it's a case of - when is the human race ever going to put all this race stuff behind us?!
You might be interested in reading this truly brilliant piece that goes into exactly why the things you describe are being done. See specifically chapter 3, points 2 and 4, and especially point 6 in that chapter
https://johnspritzler.substack.com/p/i-found-it-the-misplaced-owners-manual
Thank you. I've started following Spritzler and I like the cut of his jib so far. So I will definitely have a look at this.
Great writing as usual! Western civilization seems to be adrift. Is this the natural evolution of moral relativism?
I set my face against moral relativism! This philosophy is very insidious. It is essentially a moral deception, since morality itself is a process of determining what is good and not good; what is life-affirming and what is not. If everything is neither good nor bad, then morality is thrown out the window, and anything can be justified.
Food for thought! Thanks for replying. Out of curiosity why do you publish on both Real Left and A Plague on Both Our Houses?
When I first started writing, I gave my first piece to RL to give it a wider airing. It was a piece bashing the mainstream left on their disgusting response to covid and I thought that the best place to try to embarrass them was in a publication that was on the left, but had taken an anti-lockdown, anti-vaxx (ergo good) position on the whole scam. Since that time (early 2021 if memory serves me correctly), I have established a good relationship with them. We have a tacit agreement that they just pull my pieces onto their site if they like them. We discuss issues, I attend their events and I regard them as friends, basically. I have been published on TCW but we parted ways after the great Zio schism of 7/10/23. I've submitted my writing to other places but no takers. So I'm just trying to build my Substack.
Nice list of institutions products of Western civilizatin in the footnote.
Perhaps we could also include Roman, Commercial and Maritime Law.