The Great Replacement as a Crime (II. Defining It)

What is "the Great Replacement"?

(Note: this essay is part of a series.)

Percentage White population in various English cities

In defining the Great Replacement, the first thing to say is that the name is not exactly accurate, since the process is not so much replacement by other groups as absorption into them. However, the end result will be replacement of one group (“Norwedens”¹) with others, or possibly a novel amalgamation of all of them. Either way, the Norweden ethnic group will no longer exist.

Absorption is a known path to extinction, historically. When we speak of an “extinct” human group, we rarely mean that every member of it was killed. We mean that the group was absorbed into other groups. That process of absorption is not some benign augmentation of the original group, but its permanent exit from history.

How the process works in the case of the Great Replacement:

• it adds huge (unlimited) numbers of Bomalians to Norweden

• it lowers Norweden birthrates (due to diversity stress and other factors)

• it asks/enables/tempts/incentivises/shames Norwedens to miscegenate with Bomalians

All of this is achieved with a very elaborate program of artificial conditions, spanning the legal, cultural, social and economic spheres. To my mind, these artificial conditions fall into four categories:

1. bring Bomalians into Norweden (mass immigration)

2. lower the Norweden birthrate

3. encourage Norwedens to miscegenate (race-mix) with Bomalians

4. suppress Norweden protest against all of this

Bizarrely, these artificial conditions have cropped up in every White country, and roughly at the same time (the decades after 1945). Each condition is not identical in every country, but the differences are trivial.

The four categories will be addressed separately.

Bringing Bomalians into Norweden

The immigration of today is historically unprecedented.

ChatGPT estimates that, in the 19th Century, around 50,000 non-white people immigrated to Britain. In the year ending June 2024, that number was 845,000. In just one single year, Britain experienced 17 times as much racial churn as in the entire 19th Century.

This is just one example, and of course ChatGPT is not the most reliable source, but it illustrates how craven it is to suggest that immigration today is remotely similar to any other time in Britain’s history. We are living through change that would have been unimaginable to our great-grandparents. Post-war migration represents a radical break from Britain’s past.

This is replicated across every country in Western Europe and the New World. Our fictitious example of Norweden will stand in for all of those countries.

How does such mass transfer of people happen?

An array of synchronised newspaper front pages, “making the case” for allowing massive numbers of Bomalians into Norweden based on the death of one boy. (The many Norwedens killed by Bomalians are of no importance.)

There are many ways, each relying on artificial conditions put in place either by the government, NGOs, academia, the media, or lobbying organisations.

• The creation of a massive network of NGOs and charities to funnel Bomalians into Norweden

• Many corporate and state initiatives help Bomalians to migrate to Norweden and to import their relatives, while laws enable this

• Government culture disincentivises deporting Bomalians even when this would be legally sound (eg. they are here illegally, they have committed crimes, etc.), partly by staffing the offices concerned with Bomalians.

• When courts are faced with an obvious case for deportation, the flimsiest excuse is used to let him stay

• Student visas are given out like confetti to Bomalians, even though the government knows full well that they will not leave after their visa expires. Universities are incentivised to give more places to Bomalians and fewer to Norwedens. Once a student is here, he is legally entitled to bring dependants over. Like him, they will probably never leave.

• When Bomalian “refugees” go on holiday to their “dangerous and war-torn” home country, the Norweden government does not deport them. News organisations try to “debunk” this scandal, but fail.

• Profit-seeking corporations are paid by the state (using Norwedens’ tax money) to house Bomalian refugees, including in private properties owned by the corporation. Entire hotels are also leased out for this purpose. Landlords and hoteliers are tempted by guarantees of long-term income (again on Norweden taxes) and will, to create the necessary space, evict Norweden tenants. (This raises rents and thus prevents Norwedens from ever getting on to the property ladder, making their lives precarious and further preventing them ever starting families.)

• The plight of Bomalian refugees is broadcast widely (while that of Norwedens murdered by Bomalians goes unspoken)

Lowering the Norweden birthrate

In today’s Norweden, there is hardly a social trend or fashionable cause that doesn’t contribute to lowering the native birthrate.

It is reduced first and foremost by the mass immigration itself, since that destroys cultural stability and increases stress, both of which cause high IQ people to have fewer children.

But on top of that are various artificial conditions which further reduce the Norweden birthrate. These conditions do not ostensibly “target” Norweden people so in theory they should affect all groups equally, but in practice their effect is almost exclusively on Norwedens. This is because Bomalians are “shielded” from them, either by hardline religion or low IQ (or both). “Counter-intuitive beliefs” are indigestible garbage for them, but irresistible poison for Norweden midwits.

• Norweden culture and identity are systematically denied while Bomalian culture and identity are celebrated. (Just look at this comment by a Guardian reader in 2015, saying “there is no such thing as English culture”. Where did he get that idea? Maybe from this Guardian article 11 years earlier, which says “what is English culture? I do not know what that is”, but it could be from any number of sources because the idea has been very fashionable among “the intelligentsia” for several decades now.)

• Norweden culture and identity are systematically demonised, leaving Norweden men unsure what they represent, what they should defend, how they should see themselves, etc. This in turn reduces their self-confidence, especially around women, while leaving Bomalian men unaffected.

  

• Paying for unproductive and often welfare-dependent Bomalians is done by taxing Norwedens more, leaving them with less money with which to have families

• Diversity drives mean that fewer Norweden men are able to build financial wealth that would make them attractive to Norweden women, thus reducing their birthrate, while that wealth will go to Bomalian men, thus increasing their birthrate (whether with Bomalian or Norweden women).

• Feminism means that Norweden women pursue career instead of motherhood, thus reducing their birthrate, while not reducing that of Bomalian women because they are largely impervious to feminism.

• Promotion of non-reproductive sexual lifestyles (eg. gay, lesbian, trans) similarly affects Norwedens far more than Bomalians, thereby reducing their birthrates (by pushing them away from heterosexual marriage) but not that of the Bomalians.

• Promotion of contraception and abortion detaches sex from the reproductive function, reducing the birthrate. (Again, Bomalians are unaffected.)

• Demonisation of the White race (White privilege, White fragility, White supremacism, etc.) discourages Norweden women from wanting to have children, certainly pure Norweden children who would elongate this “toxic legacy” of “Whiteness”.

• The creation of the “climate change” menace and its promulgation in media, workplaces and schools, with the possible “redemption” that you can help prevent climate change by not having children. As ever, Norwedens buy into the climate change scare while Bomalians are impervious.

• “Going childless” is advocated, especially for the educated middle-class Norweden. Again, Bomalians are impervious since they don’t read the Guardian or take degrees in Women’s Studies.

Encouraging Norwedens to miscegenate

Having placed Bomalians in their midst, in ever increasing numbers, the next step is to encourage Norwedens to miscegenate with them.

This is done via the young women of the Norweden group, since men, while naturally more sexually promiscuous than women, are instinctively concerned with group identity, while women are concerned specifically with the survival chances of their own children, which are determined by the strength of the father. Therefore, the survival of a group relies on its women remaining sexually loyal, not its men. It is women who, by their mating choices, decide which group will persist and which will perish.

Another reason to target young women with social conditioning is that men are less susceptible to it than women, especially young women, who are very conformist and will readily latch on to “fashionable” ideas.

Despite all of that, it must be stated that Norweden women remain very racially loyal even with all the propaganda targeting them and all the other artificial conditions that are in place to encourage their miscegenation.

• Celebration of miscegenation encourages Norweden women to miscegenate. (Again, Bomalian women are unaffected by this conditioning so will continue to reproduce with their own men, so the Bomalian birthrate will be unaffected.)

• Celebration of mixed-race babies as healthier, happier, and more intelligent and attractive

• Feminist messaging to discourage men from approaching women operates almost exclusively on Norweden men, leaving the field open for Bomalian men to approach Norweden women

• Bomalian men are encouraged to approach young Norweden women, who are conditioned (by media and education) to desire, encourage and accept those advances.

  

• It is systematically denied that the Norweden ethnic group even exists or that it is indigenous to its homeland. Therefore, there is nothing to preserve. There is only a fiction, which causes racism and therefore should be eradicated, and this can be done by Norweden women either not reproducing at all, or selecting Bomalian men.

  

• Shaming of Norweden people as “racist” for not wanting to miscegenate.

Suppressing Norweden protest

For decades, Norwedens have been aware of the above conditions. Some recognised the whole program, some only its more overt aspects. Some were angered by the many changes to everyday life caused by the presence of Bomalians, the gradual loss of familiarity. Others saw, early on, the long-term existential threat posed to Norweden. All of these things have been protested. The government and media have responded with various artificial conditions to silence, punish and undermine the protest.

• Any Norweden who voices concern about the future of his ethnic group is shamed, ruined, demonised, and punished in every possible way

• Government-funded organisations exist purely to do the above, and laws exist to facilitate it

• Knowing that the Norweden public vehemently want fewer Bomalians arriving each year, every political party campaigns for election on a promise to reduce the numbers, yet once in government they never do this, and usually increase the numbers. (A study could be done for every European country, contrasting the promises made by each governing party before being elected with what it did once in power. The examples would be as monotonous as numerous.)

• “Hate speech” laws prevent Norwedens complaining about any collective aspect of Bomalians. In theory these laws are reciprocal, but in practice they are virtually never used to punish Bomalian hatred/resentment of Norwedens.

• Laws prevent Norwedens discriminating against Bomalians in any way. In theory these laws are reciprocal, but in practice Bomalians get away with open discrimination against Norwedens. “Hate crimes” are committed by Norwedens but never to them.

• While Bomalian men approach their women, Norweden men are punished in every possible way for discouraging - and for wanting to discourage - such interactions, even though throughout all of history that would have been the natural male response to females being approached by outsider males. That natural response, incidentally, is not punished in Bomalian men when they protect their own women. Only Norweden men are expected to be okay with their women straying. The natural male response is understood and accepted in all groups except Norweden.

• Denial that Norwedens can be racially victimised weakens their social position while strengthening that of the Bomalians

• Disruption of Norweden tradition and social bonds further weakens their social position while strengthening that of the Bomalians

By 2015, these measures had created such an atmosphere of oppression and intimidation that ordinary Norwedens daren’t even complain about the huge influx into their country of Bomalians via the so-called “migrant crisis”, even though it was of unprecedented scale and was obviously manufactured, enabled and financed by their own government in collusion with NGOs and globalist institutions. It was a very clear injustice and deception, but hardly anyone dare say anything. The establishment had spent decades making sure of that with the above measures, and many more.

---

To summarise, the Great Replacement comprises not only the historically unprecedented levels of Bomalian immigration, but also the many artificial conditions which reshape Norweden society, lower native birthrates and encourage miscegenation. The Great Replacement is not just the presence of Bomalians in Norweden, but all these other conditions which “weaponise” that presence towards destruction of the Norweden ethnic group.

Ordinary Norwedens can see their culture and lifestyle and ethnic group disappearing. They can also see that this is not happening by accident, and that their government lies to them continually about it while doing nothing to stop it and everything to accelerate it. Ordinary Norwedens, when they dare to think about it, suspect that their kind has been targeted for an engineered extinction - what you might call a genocide.

1. See chapter 1 for an explanation of the terms “Norweden” and “Bomalian”.