Magdeburg, “the Great Replacement” & conspiracy theories: OffG’s informal debate with Simon Elmer
Catte Black
Just before Christmas the OffG eds (mainly myself) had what proved to be an interesting exchange with our erstwhile regular contributor Simon Elmer on X/Twitter. We think the discussion is quite relevant on many levels so we are reproducing it here. (NB – the exchange was public and can still be seen on X).
The discussion began when we posted the following…
To which Elmer replied thusly…
We had just turned down an article Elmer had sent to us on the subject of “replacement immigration”, and so we responded with the following…
He replied with…
More of this type of generic ad hominem was made, including a bizarre claim that he sent us the article to “test” us (hubris much?), but we won’t include any more. If you’re interested you can follow the thread here. However things became more interesting when “An Inquisitve Englishman” offered this observation…
To which Elmer responded…
OffG replied…
Elmer replied…
OffG replied…
Elmer did not reply to this, but he jumped back into the original thread to post this apparent non sequitur (there had been no previous discussion of what our readers believe)…
We replied…
Elmer responded..
Ok.We didn’t bother to remind Elmer we had read the article, which was how we knew we didn’t want to publish it, but we did take a careful look at the “solutions” he advocates, in case we had missed something important. His solutions consist solely of proposed legislation to be adopted in the event the ruling elites become sympathetic to Elmer’s point of view. You can read them here in full.
Having done due diligence we replied…
Simon did not reply to this post. So, we followed up with another question about his proposed solutions…
He has not replied to this either.
Instead he began posting seemingly random accusations and commentary to and about us which in no way were responses to anything we had actually said. For example…
We did point out to him that we have NEVER defended open borders or proclaimed “refugees welcome”, have NEVER expressed any opinion on the nature of Islam or made a priority of “defending” it.
However he either didn’t notice our replies, or – again – chose not to respond. If he should notice our replies or change his mind about responding, and if he can find any examples of us advocating for the things he claims we will of course give him space here on OffG to correct us.
That was essentially the conclusion of the discussion.
Why we think this exchange is worth repeating here is what it tells us about the utility of binary narratives to those who seek to control public opinion and discourse.
Such narratives are often intentionally created or at least encouraged, and tend to be tuned to specific fault lines and prejudices already present in society. They will often be built on and feed off very real or at least understandable fears and concerns.
I think their basic purpose is to limit acceptable debate to simple binary polarities which leave most important questions unanswered and ultimately forgotten. Like the impoverishment of language in 1984, it’s about narrowing discourse and thereby narrowing thought itself. Instead of analysis we are given a simple choice – on/off, yes/no, good/bad.
Is Trump a fascist or a hero? Was covid a bioweapon or a naturally occurring deadly plague? Is Russia good or evil? Do we deplore Islam as incompatible with British values or do we believe our borders should be wide wide open?
No middle ground please guys. No shades of meaning. Nuance is strictly for the uninitiated and morally questionable.
I think the final aim is to make us – all of us – more gullible, easier to bamboozle, confuse and control.
Does it work?
You must be the judge.
SUPPORT OFFGUARDIAN
If you enjoy OffG's content, please help us make our monthly fund-raising goal and keep the site alive.
For other ways to donate, including direct-transfer bank details click HERE.
His response appears to be a temper tantrum of a white supremacist blaming non-whites and Muslims for your rejection of him.
The drift towards which Elmer’s speeches risk degenerating has never convinced me, I have always felt something out of place. The problem of immigration is managed and created from above, it is neoliberism that uses human beings as goods, objects, moves them from their lands, after having expropriated them of their goods, after having erased their cultures, tortured and robbed with the wild privatizations of the IMF, after having destroyed every possibility of redemption through socialism, and then deports them en masse to societies that are in turn fragmented, where democracy has been eradicated at the root as the worst evil, according to absurd economic laws that do not take anyone into account except the financial advantages of a genocidal elite. Do a Marxist analysis, and find the culprit.
The capitalist is the guilty!?
All capitalists should be forced to give all their money to commies, who will administrate their money bags in a good way, and transfer a tiny part further to the poor and vulnerable, which the capitalists would never do no! https://avatars.mds.yandex.net/i?id=bc8b6f6bb031c92761eb6d9d0d67a441_l-5581167-images-thumbs&n=13
no, no, we need class struggle, a full-blown revolution, a revolution from below, we are billions. We need to expropriate them of the means of production. 5G is above all a weapon of war, a war against the peoples of the earth, and without artificial intelligence there is no power, we are defeated from the start. It is like gunpowder or the steam engine in other historical eras; it is a weapon of control. Without 5G and artificial intelligence and control of the media there is no longer even a class war, Marxianly speaking, in my opinion… The question is: who controls whom? For the moment it appears as a weapon of control of the minorities in power against the peoples of the world, and it is used as a weapon, by ultra-rich minorities to expropriate and control the majorities, eliminate them and suppress them… wherever you look, it is the ultra-liberal governments or the narrow elites who govern, in the, in the EU, but also in Russia and China. It is the same old story, who owns the means of production? Certainly not the people, not the people.
Writing this on New Year’s Eve, I intend to make it a resolution to stop reading OffGuardian (OG) in 2025. I’ve visited, read, commented and had one article published on this site since its inception, originally getting the link from Comment Is Free when The Guardian still had reader commentary. On the whole I think it has been a worthwhile project and I would commend Catte and Kit and the other people who make it happen, particularly, it has to be said, their coverage of the Covid episodes.
However, since around 2018 I have found my views increasingly divergent with the dwindling attempts at deeper analysis that are published on OG. I keep tuning in to read if there has been any change to the editorial line, and occasionally to ask the odd question or to leave a link to other perspectives that I regard basically as ignored above the line. It now feels like a bad habit that I need to ditch, and this episode with Elmer reads like a marker in that regard. Previous recent articles have been particularly irksome, to the point that I would say that there is a ‘digging in’ to try and defend indefensible positions in a behaviour that is reminiscent of Guardian liberals -the original focus of OG’s critique. The comment section at OG, once a truly educative place for me to visit I now have little interest in, as (with some notable exceptions) it consists of off topic comments, endlessly recycled bromides and rather ‘icky’ moderation.
I don’t subscribe to Elmer’s political framing (such as Woke is somehow ‘fascist’), but he does have a point in his criticism here I would say. There is something of a paradox whereby any political conversation is (by nature) a contest of opposing viewpoints, values or interests. To limit one’s penetration of controversies ‘because by taking a position one enters a realm of dichotomy’, and therefore ‘contribute to divided opinion’, would mean that all political positions are basically abandoned or rendered so inconsequential that they might as well be. To decry all dichotomies as either false or potentially/ probably false is, ultimately, to negate human value making. Some things are just bad. Generally we could all agree that supremacism is anti-social and unhelpful to humankind, yet when it comes to examining a subculture that is quite obviously supremacist in its ideology some baulk at the critique because it would mean being ‘divisive’. There is no way around this. This focus on narrative control, important though it is, when it becomes singular and exclusionary, leads us into a kind of conspiracism where the ‘they’ who write the narrative become elusive, unimportant even, so long as we are not falling into false dichotomies. People want to know who the ‘they’ are so that they can protect themselves from ‘them’. Political action, even the idealistic ‘forming of communities’, demands such plain speaking, such knowing the enemy.
I feel confident writing this because OG is hypocritical in the gap between its stated approach and its editorial reality. The strap line is ‘because facts really should be sacred’. No stone left unturned, no narrative left unquestioned, skepticism as the highest value. This is not manifest though in the choice of publications or the moderation of the comments. There are narratives that are absolutely central to the political order- one in particular that stands as a kind of pole star to almost all political orientation (from anarchist, to Marxist, to liberal and conservative) that remains unquestioned and defended here, even as millions online now basically don’t believe it anymore.
The repeated dogma that ‘Left-Right is entirely a false construct’ is another example. It would be fine to make this argument if you could be consistent : to avoiding all value assumptions in all that you write or publish. Arguably though this is just not possible, and much is put forward that covertly assumes Leftist values as accepted by the reader a priori. We see this here with Elmers piece, and in other news stories where you ignore the use of narrative control when it’s used to push Leftist agendas. You can’t have your cake and eat it. You cannot escape the contest of human values that is politics. The bombing of Gaza is not ‘just a narrative’, it is thousands of children being buried by rubble. You have to take a stand or you loose your humanity.
My political axiom has become this : The Left (and that includes the libertarian Left) do not understand or do not permit discussion of the true underlying problem. The Right have no solution. The Left see the world through a filter that compares the world to their ideal of how things should be. The Right see it more how it is, but their only proposal is a recourse to tradition and the past, they can only look backwards. We must however all move forwards.
Admin is aware it is pretty universally disliked. We are treated as second class citizens for doing our jobs. We’re called demeaning names (like ‘icky’) as well as prejudiced racial epithets. We’re downvoted in spiteful ways.
And in fairness no one really defends us. People rarely advocate for us. Despite admin pulling back and leaving as wide a birth as possible, the toxic culture continues. It’s basically bullying, let’s be honest. Lots of people band together here and bully admin. They chip in to keep admin down. They react the way bullies react when admin speaks up or dares stand its ground or fails to ‘know its place’.
Ever since Admin was at school, admin has hated and detested institutionalised bullying and exclusionary bullying and playground bullying. It’s undignified and diminishing for every single person complicit in it.
Admin guesses that not a few of you here also know something about bullying, and have experienced people stand by in silence as it happens, and Admin invites you to examine what role you want to play in that dynamic.
Tbh I agree with you in some respects, Turning Moment, sometimes the environment here is less than inspiring.
But here’s a chance for courageous protectors of truth and fairness out there, who perhaps feel silenced by this toxic culture, to have some satisfaction. You see, TM, you make a claim here, of ‘manifest’ bias from admin in how we moderate..
Well, here’s your podium, please, please, please present your evidence against admin. How is our moderation biased? Admin have a right to reply, of course. Let’s have it out.
Rather a fitting exit, TM. You can contribute something really useful to the community here, before you leave. A2
I’m not sure that you will resolve much by pleading victim status.
If you see yourself as defending free speech, then that is something to be proud of. You’ll be criticised for it, but freedom never was free.
There will always be people who presume the moral authority to silence others. These people must be resisted and, if you are doing that, good on you.
Do you disagree this can be an extremely toxic environment? It could easily be argued that gently admonishing admin for drawing attention to it is simply buying into that culture, although I’m sure that wasn’t your intention. Toxic bullying cultures are often extremely pervasive, and victim blaming is a well established method of subtly concealing and perpetuating such a culture.
We take our licks. We’re certainly not going soft, believe me, we’re not tearing up here. However, Admin is routinely victimised btl, and that’s just a fact. Admin are mocked, insulted, chided and spoken to with utter contempt daily, and the unwritten consensus appears to be we’re supposed to remain grateful and eager to serve none-the-less, lol. Yours is possibly the nicest non-brief interaction we’ve had over the entire Christmas period, however I would describe it as lukewarm, at best. I note you slightly condescend to explain our job, you gently admonish us for speaking plainly and any recognition of our hard work or achievements couldn’t be more qualified if you tried, placed behind a big fat ‘IF’ 😅
This is not Admin trying to give you a hard time personally, we’re just pointing out how deep an influence these abusive dynamics can have, and how destructive it can be for communication.
You know, increasingly it feels like admin just isn’t ’in the gang’, since no actual evidence or proper logical, constructive criticism ever seems to materialise,
Admin is extremely generous and fair, we give every POV a fair hearing, case in point.
That’s the situation as it stands. A2
I feel I have stumbled into an argument I wasn’t even aware of. I don’t have a problem with OffG at all. I think you’ve done a great job in keeping the channels as open as possible. As for “Turning Moment”, his entry above was one of those in which a whole dollop of fancy sounding rhetoric was getting stirred around, becoming increasingly pedantic until I started to wonder if this text was being generated by AI.
I admit to having made tacky comments on the pending issue but I only mention it now simply to alert OG to the fact that I have a comment waiting.
So I just want to make it clear that I think OG are doing a wonderful job and they should carry on. These days, it’s important just to keep channels of dialogue open.
As previously posted:
https://off-guardian.org/2024/08/15/stabbings-to-show-trials-9-simple-steps-to-criminalize-free-speech
Lost in a dark wood – Aug 18, 2024 10:02 AM
Delingpole has now placed his article behind the paywall – maybe because of the suggestion of Enoch being snared in a Kincora-esque trap.
—
At least there are now some people calling out Enoch Powell’s “Rivers of Blood” speech as a psyop.
https://delingpole.substack.com/p/rivers-of-blood-first-they-showed
Rivers of Blood: First They Showed Us Our Future; Then the Gaslighting Began…
James Delingpole
Aug 16, 2024
The ‘Rivers of Blood’ psyop was a key element in [a] brainwashing programme. . . . In order to achieve [their] goal, the Powers That Be first had to fake up the outrage and drama surrounding Powell’s speech, in much the same way that their modern equivalents did recently over those three children allegedly murdered by an immigrant in Southport. The corrupt media played a major part in this: so, for example, the Times – edited by the ineffably rank and compromised Cabal lackey William Rees Mogg – did its bit with an editorial declaring it ‘an evil speech’ and saying ‘This is the first time that a serious British politician has appealed to racial hatred in this direct way in our postwar history.’ And the tabloids did theirs by bigging up the supposed increase in racial hate incidents which had allegedly resulted from Powell’s speech.
—
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rivers_of_Blood_speech
The “Rivers of Blood” speech was made by British Member of Parliament (MP) Enoch Powell on 20 April 1968, to a meeting of the Conservative Political Centre in Birmingham, England. His speech made various remarks, which included strong criticism of significant Commonwealth immigration to the United Kingdom and the proposed Race Relations Act, which made it illegal to refuse housing, employment, or public services to a person on the grounds of colour, race, ethnic or national origins in the country. It became known as the “Rivers of Blood” speech, although Powell always referred to it as “the Birmingham speech”. The former name alludes to a prophecy from Virgil’s Aeneid which Powell (a classical scholar) quoted:
As I look ahead, I am filled with foreboding; like the Roman, I seem to see ‘the River Tiber foaming with much blood’.[1]
The speech caused a political storm, making Powell one of the most talked about and divisive politicians in the country; it led to his controversial dismissal from the Shadow Cabinet by Conservative Party Leader Edward Heath.[2] According to most accounts, the popularity of Powell’s perspective on immigration may have been a decisive factor in the Conservatives’ surprise victory in the 1970 general election, although he became one of the most persistent opponents of the subsequent Heath ministry.[2][3]
The Gallup Organization took an opinion poll at the end of April and found that 74 per cent agreed with what Powell had said in his speech;[26][27] 15 per cent disagreed. 69 per cent felt Heath was wrong to sack Powell and 20 per cent believed Heath was right. Before his speech Powell was favoured to replace Heath as Conservative leader by one per cent, with Reginald Maudling favoured by 20 per cent; after his speech 24 per cent favoured Powell and 18 per cent Maudling. 83 per cent now felt immigration should be restricted (75 per cent before the speech) and 65 per cent favoured anti-discrimination legislation.[28] According to George L. Bernstein, the speech made the British people think that Powell “was the first British politician who was actually listening to them”.[29]
—
Enoch Powell Responds to Being Called A Racist
The Dick Cavett Show
Jan 11, 2021
Live from London, British politician Enoch Powell responds to reports that claim him to be a racist.
Date aired – May 14th, 1971 – Enoch Powell and Jonathan Miller
https://www.perplexity.ai/search/has-sir-jonathan-wolfe-miller-DqpEemxkR7ad4.zIz5dLdg
Delingpole’s article:
https://web.archive.org/web/20240816181626/https://delingpole.substack.com/p/rivers-of-blood-first-they-showed
Enoch Powell – BBC Desert Island Discs 1989
The best I cant do is withdraw my energy and attention from the system. I’m not fighting for the rest of my life. I’m not going to be one of those people trying to get everyone to get on my bandwagon. My facebook feed is full of them. I’m withdrawing. I’m going in, I’m hanging with few. Things will go the way they go whether I scream or cry. I choose laughter and singing and dancing. We are all going to be dead soon. Your kids won’t thank you for your activism, but time spent with them.
ISLAM IS NOT A RACE!!!
That is quite dishonest given that Elmer’s entire article is about race, in that is he is claiming the white race is being intentionally genocided and he clearly frames the discussion of Islam as part of this problem. It is one reason he gives for why mass immigration of brown and non-white people to the UK is unacceptable.
Elmer himself presents Islam as an aspect of the racial problem he identifies.
I don’t care for Elmers’s Marxist analyses and previous complaints about “anti-termitism” (what a tool) but he is right if he claims that Islam itself is the problem, along with the other two Abrahamic narratives from which it derives- Iudaism (the master) and Christianity (the useful idiot slave).
The conflation of religion and culture with race is deliberate woke agenda and Off-G has fallen for it, hook line and sinker.
Racism is not OK because there is no superior race and nobody chose their skin colour or parents.
On the other hand, a total mockery, deconstruction, and philosophical destruction of religion is not only ethically fine but absolutely essential if humanity is to reclaim any freedom and spiritual sovereignty.
WAKE UP.
It’s pretty clear to me that Off-G’s biggest donors are American conservative christians, hence the continued sermons about the Magic Jw, and the total lack of articles against Abrahamic religion .
Seems like everyone with an axe to grind claims to know what we “really” stand for or who funds us. We have been identified as pro and anti-Moslem, pro and anti-Zionist, pro and anti-China, Leftist and “alt-right”, Russian trolls and NATO bots.
Maybe that speaks for the fact we try to follow facts rather than agendas and will offer up a range of opinions and rational interpretations for our readers?
We are not funded by any large donors or interest groups either. We get by on small donations from individual readers who value us enough to help us stay afloat. That’s our only source of income.
Happy New Year!
Happy new year. You or Sam previously (laughably) accused me of being a sock puppet account for NickM, and you always put people on “pending” forever as soon as they dare make any critique that does not quite align with yours or if they question your editorial choices.
Your Comments Policy is dishonest and should be replaced with a simple ” We don’t publish comments we don’t like for any reason”.
Cranky indeed.
Hmm why ever would you be placed on premod with this obvious grudge and fairly transparent mission to undermine trust here? It’s a mystery. Perhaps you’re regretting bowling in with this adversarial attitude? Well, never mind, you can always turn over a new leaf in 2025. It’s never too late to change.
And if we’ve removed anything of yours that wasn’t off-topic/off-loading bile like above, I’d be surprised. Admin takes our remit very seriously. However, we’re always happy to apologise if we’ve behaved hastily, so if you’re actually accusing us of censoring a meaningful POV (other than how rubbish offg perpetually is and how totally, organically angry you are about that), then please speak up and say. Here’s a chance to proper embarrass us.
Happy New Year, A2
“Islam itself is the problem” ehhhhh so?.
Would you be kind to tell us with what background you and Elmer can claim such a tremendous arrogance toward not only Islam but also 90% of the planet’s population who have a spiritual culture?
Even Sovjet had to go back to some spiritual root and reinvent themselves as Russia with Orthodox Christianity in order to get smiles on their previous atheist stone faces.
Let us hear your and Elmer’s comments about CIA and MI6’s training and funding of ISIS Islamic society de-stabilisation warriors.
I anticipate CIA and MI6 they are no problems but religion, priests and worshippers must bear all guilt yes?
Off-G will not allow the answers to your questions here, clearly
Au contraire, Offg wants you to conduct a quality discussion and answer a direct question. Or would you prefer to just moan and deflect in this rather uninspiring way? Come, come. A2
You have scientism, or the religion of ‘yourself’ to turn to.
American ‘conservative Chistians’ are by default zionists, by the way.
Perhaps the weirdest line in a weird post.
Islam is not incompatible with “British values” whatever those are (ask Roger Waters?), it is incompatible with humanity, along with the rest of the Abrahamic poison.
“The Great Replacement” always comes with blame the jws crap.
The whole thing is a psyop which appears when the polotricks goes left to right.
anytime after a banking bailout or recession, then immigrant crossing the atlantic ocean in a rubber dingy videos/photoshopped photos appear, then the everything is blame the jws crap, then poverty porn, then moslem terrorist headhunters who isolated during covid , then the suspect crime videos of no go areas go viral and the 1000’s of christian conversion videos.
Simon wrote an article for the site called the holo**** industry and then retracted the article when mental online as 3 comments disagreed with the history back story hoax.
O.G given this more light and more promotion then Simon deserved.
White and black masonic checker board of divided and conquer.
As a general rule we all should discuss only the case and never any person personally.
Correct gramma in public is neutral. We say Sir, Madame, You in plural, it.
Not the boxer but his boxing performance, not the musician but the music, not the journalist but the news, not the Prince but his public work, etc.
However, if someone starts up to be personal in public, it leaves it difficult for the said public to leave this unanswered.
I see this discussion as George Carlin labelled it: “These self-important self-righteous Liberals whose only worry is they might be personally inconvenienced”.
So Elmer is pessed because we didnt ate it all up, ohh dear ohh dear. Here is George Carlin when he is the best of the good. https://youtu.be/BB0aFPXr4n4 Global Warming.
The Discourse of Voluntry Servitude – written 1549
Place on one side fifty thousand armed men, and on the other the same number; let them join in battle, one side fighting to retain its liberty, the other to take it away; to which would you, at a guess, promise victory? Which men do you think would march more gallantly to combat — those who anticipate as a reward for their suffering the maintenance of their freedom, or those who cannot expect any other prize for the blows exchanged than the enslavement of others? One side will have before its eyes the blessings of the past and the hope of similar joy in the future; their thoughts will dwell less on the comparatively brief pain of battle than on what they may have to endure forever, they, their children, and all their posterity. The other side has nothing to inspire it with courage except the weak urge of greed, which fades before danger and which can never be so keen, it seems to me, that it will not be dismayed by the least drop of blood from wounds. Consider the justly famous battles of Miltiades, Leonidas, Themistocles, still fresh today in recorded history and in the minds of men as if they had occurred but yesterday, battles fought in Greece for the welfare of the Greeks and as an example to the world. What power do you think gave to such a mere handful of men not the strength but the courage to withstand the attack of a fleet so vast that even the seas were burdened, and to defeat the armies of so many nations, armies so immense that their officers alone outnumbered the entire Greek force? What was it but the fact that in those glorious days this struggle represented not so much a fight of Greeks against Persians as a victory of liberty over domination, of freedom over greed?
Étienne de la Boétie
Interesting and provocative article on Renaud Camus and the “Great Replacement.”
Whichever side you take, much food for thought. A small taste:
And:
“You’ll own nothing, and you’ll be happy.” Likewise, you’ll be nothing, but happiness is not likely to play into things much.
https://www.amren.com/features/2024/12/renaud-camus-on-the-metaphysics-of-the-great-replacement/
De-racination is a key component in the de-moralisation of a society and we are all living it. I recently attended the Christmas party in a nursing home and the entertainment was in the main by the care/nursing staff who are all Indian – this is rural Wexford in ireland. It consisted of very suggestive Bollywood dancing to loud, hardcore trance music. There was another little bit of carols and singing along which was very traditional and lovely but the rest was, hard to describe really. I realised this is the wiping out of our culture, it wasn’t important what these old people would have known as Christmas, celebrating ‘diversity’ was more important. It made me sad that the old people were so generous with their smiles whilst looking confused. Our general goodness as ordinary decent people is what is being weaponised against us.
Ireland fought for freedom from the British empire who imported vast numbers of planters into the 6 counties.
Not only did this effect the culture and language of the indigenous population but also planted a time bomb as witnessed by the events since this happened.
Now, the Globalists are importing large numbers of new planters into Ireland.
Someone should mention the equivalent Elon Musk twitter spat scandalizing America right now
Sam Hyde on Musk’s replacism is funny and sounds like he’s read the Camus paper above:
https://youtu.be/kg8Eb03TSqQ
For some light, holiday reading, read the first 100 pages of the Koran. Pardon my “racism” but I found it disturbing. Judge for yourself.
If righteous judgement and vengeance is your gig, have a bash on the pentateuch. There is a sequel for next summer if you run out of rooneys.
To both of you guys: The Bible and Quran are written in symbolics and pictures.
One reason for this is to not throw pearls for swine, and the second reason is that the true pearls can only be interpreted and found by people with a heart.
So, you can choose between being a swine or being without a heart…………LOL.
I am duly patronised, thank you. Although I couldn’t find much esoteric allegory in Joshua for instance, oink oink.
Sure, there is some of that in the Quran, however it was also full of furious judgment and condemnation. There is little similarity between the Koran and the Gospels.
It’s also interesting to note that I have read widely on spiritual matters for many years and the Koran is rarely if ever quoted.
I have to admit I have not read much of the Koran. only refs, so I cant give you any respond on details here.
But our focus here is wrong.
The focus on religion or one particular religion is wrong, as the political falsehood and exploitation of both Islam, Christianity, Judaism, whatever, is to blame and is the reason why.
You should not blame the existence of ISIS on Islam, or Saudi hangings and culture on Islam, as both, as examples, are political constructions yes?
We should blame the political misuse and exploitation of religion instead.
All you guys who are so pessed on religion have nothing, I repeat nothing, to replace religion with.
Sovjet tried, but had to go back to the 10 Commandments to realise a Justice system. Russia is now building churches all over Russia.
Voluntary Democracy??? Dream on………………………LOL.
There is religion for a reason! So stop all the whining.
Off topic, but knowing how Radiohead’s Thom Yorke was getting gip from pro-Palestinians (i.e. anti-genocidists), I thought I’d check up on his twitter account. I found this:
I wonder what that’s all about?
Scrolling down I see our Thom linking to the plastic Leftie groove-mongers site Byline Times. The Byline drones are concerned about “libertarian” funding of “Evil Right Wing” “climate denialism”. And both the Byline bunkum and the linked articles from the Guardian feature the usual impenetrable wuffle de waffle with lots of tourette like explosions of “Right Wing” which have to be swam through to get to the real substance which is, of course, THE CLIMATE! Oh and also THE CLIMATE. And there’s even a bit about THE CLIMATE.
No mention of THE VIRUS or ANTI-TRANS HATE. But I daresay that’ll ooze up again sometime.
Thom is a Very Concerned Celeb!
When Elmer’s response goes vitriol defensive, it’s a sign of a problem. When he goes off topic, off fact, “can’t engage with anything we actually say”, it’s indicative of a worse problem. Psyop? Do people replicate psyop behavior and go haywire when their theories seem thwarted by logical and factual argument? I have run into this kookoo behavior on FaceBlock, where i am now technically banned from being. Generally these kinds of off-the-rails responses are done by conservatives or at minimum arguments on the right of me (almost everything). But it does draw attention to ideologically biased rigidity triggering rage expressed in personal mean denigration of the “opponent”. Conflict. False binaries seem the vehicle they use. If nothing else it is indicative of a less evolved intellectual capacity within Humanity that needs cultivation and healing.
OG’s responses are a main reason I check in here everyday. Rationality reigns over the reactive mind, fact takes precedent over conjecture and open minds wait to access the best available information assiduously sought after. Skepticism is integral to the above and something to be proud of, all the way around. Thank you Off-G!
The real “ Great Replacement” I felt was via the new accountancy AI and machine learning software to automate accounts which took many of our jobs.
Just look at the Supermarkets, Shopping malls, Council or Municipal offices, Schools, Colleges, Uni, Hospitals, or NHS econsult or 1 members of staff at the chemist due to automation,
No longer is a member of staff at the petrol station as it is all now centralized and cashless.
How many Graphic designers jobs have been lost due to AI Art generator.?
Update: it was not the immigrants that is stealing your jobs.
The real great replacement is A.I
Well, that smacks of being yet another false binary: either it’s AI, or it’s immigration. But both can have a negative impact on wages, can’t they?
In other news, the genocide continues:
https://caitlinjohnstone.com.au/2024/12/30/all-of-western-civilization-owns-this-genocide/
No, “all of Western civilization” does not own this horrific genocide. It is Israel, along with her despicable concubines in DC in London, that owns this — them and nobody else. This is why I have dropped so many Trotskyite anti-zionists: I am sick and tired of them accusing me and mine of running some ‘unsinkable aircraft carrier’ in the ME, when I never even get a vote on it. Every effing candidate is a Zionist in this country! It’s sickening … but that’s still not my fault
“evidence of your eyes” – It was not easy to find an un-blured/big pixeled video of this event. The one that I saw presented visual evidence to me of people being struck head on by a speeding vehicle and then, after it passed (over them? ), getting up and rushing away on their own two functioning legs.
“feel smug and superior” – not me! I find it terrifying to live in a world in which powerful persons can and do regularly stage (fake) events like this.Descartes only worried about “an” evil demon”; I gotta contended with, probably, many hundreds of them
Elmer’s Road to Fascism is a very fine book; I read it front to back and recommend it highly. Some famous fascists launched their programs with a (likely) staged event 2/27/1933. – it happens.
Solutions watch – UK Nomads https://youtu.be/JJmJT0XkurI?si=hI5wPeC3wsLiXDEZ
Meanwhile, while the plebs argue about minutiae, back at the ranch:
“This is the type of future planned by the International Criminal Banking and Corporate Cabal that includes BlackRock and the WEF where you will own nothing but be “happy” living as a slave. Digital ID and digital money along with the theft of all property including the air we breathe, the water we drink and the food we eat is well advanced. Read: The Great Taking by David Webb to understand how they have altered the UCC code to steal our investments in equities, bonds and real estate. And they now own and control just about all governments of the western world and beyond. Humanity is in an existential war for our very survival as a free people but few understand that there is even a war due to the power of mass propaganda which is pervasive. Almost every vital institution of governance and society has been infiltrated and subverted including the church, media and universities. Most people sense there is something very wrong but are unable to connect the dots as to who is driving the world towards a tyrannical New World Order.”
Whitney Webb BlackRock Exposed – LewRockwell
I propose a Faustian bargain regarding “replacement immigration.” Every Western nation agrees NEVER AGAIN to exploit the “Third World.” And, in exchange, “Third World” immigrants stop migrating to Western nations. Any takers?
Valid point
You know what, and this is just an opinion, which, frankly I have not seen explored anywhere – maybe what is ‘in action’ here is what I call the alternative media/ celebrity resistor theorum – ie folk who have always gone along with narrative, never been bothered at all by anything due to their perceived ‘social’ status as upper middle class/ middle class/carefree individuals whatever who suddenly were confronted with the COVID tyranny and thought – oh heck, there’s a problem here – and have sort in the best possible ways to realise what was happening, recognize they’ve been part of it and thought – oh heck, i don’t like this!!!
They went on twitter to voice their angst, used whatever talents and access they had in the media and descended upon us mere mortals with their infinite wisdom, historical references and political leanings as if this has been the first time they have seen tyranny. Looking at the innumerable platforms now available it looks very easy to become a citizen journalist, a desk, some radio equipment, smart phone and a computer and your set up – hell, there’s even disputes amongst them as to which is the ‘better’ equipment.
Then the prognostication ensues, after all these people are worthy. Podcasts start all over the place – have you been on one missus? Then the invites start and the routine appearances grow, they’re on rumble you know!! Have you seen so and so’s video, i’ll send it to you, they talk sense. Suddenly everyone is referring to so and so’s video or substack or tweet … and on it goes .. check out the article on off-guardian … 5 years of this and very little has been realistically achieved except some have ‘woken up’ How many times have people here been asked “when did you wake up then”?????
Can you see it yet? We’ve all got opinions and some have deftly been able to access social media to tell us. Resistor cults have developed – “I totally agree with Cliff High or James Delingpole or the Dollar Vigilante” and so it begins … the ‘resistance’ fights itself rather than the tyrants which of course makes it easy to be marginalised and ridiculed.
It’s far more difficult to become discerning. To read and learn from history as well as the present. To study and understand and see the patterns being woven. And it’s just as easy to say NO to them, in confidence, to sort the wheat from the chaff. To be as steadfast as the tyrants. Which is what we have to do to remain sane, human and true to ourselves. Celebrity resistors are everywhere and it’s also our task to see through them as well.
I hope i’ve explained this okay and maybe others can add to the notion in more coherent ways. Virgin resistors can be a real pain in the a**e, sometimes their energy is too much, their keeness to be part of ‘something’ becomes irresistable to them ………… i’ve saved this in case it goes in pending ….
An ex inteliigence guy Stephen Couglin, ‘Unconstrainded Analytics’ is his website, does a great job in showing how cognitive warfare is enacted, all of those ‘spats’ and ‘fights’ are the ‘bombs dropped from an over arching narrrative that is still ploughing on whilst we get caught in the bomb blast of a dlalectic.
sorry spelling mistake s/b Coughlin
thank you – really helpful insights there
Population replacement is very clearly happening. Proportion of the population of England and Wales identifying as English, Welsh, Scottish, Northern Irish or British:
1991 94.65%
2001 87.5%
2011 80.5%
2021 74.4%
With record recent immigration we’re probably now below 70%
Organised Muslim terrorism in the UK makes no sense as they’re winning politically and demograpically, so apart from a few mentally ill or drug-addled loners I reckon most are carried out or faked by the security services.
Link directly to this please. Thank you. Where were these statistics sampled? Urban? Rural? Mixed? Provide links to everything in future. A2
I’ve absolutely no idea how to link, but the years I used should make it obvious that these are census figures
I don’t know how to link but I can cut and paste.
From theONS Census 2021 website:
“As part of the “White” ethnic group, 74.4% (44.4 million) of the total population in England and Wales identified their ethnic group as “English, Welsh, Scottish, Northern Irish or British”, this is a continued decrease from 80.5% (45.1 million) in 2011, and from 87.5% (45.5 million) who identified this way in 2001.”
Not the words “continued decrease”
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/culturalidentity/ethnicity/bulletins/ethnicgroupenglandandwales/census2021#measuring-the-data
I found the census page by googling the text you provided. I can’T quite see the historical data as you laid it out, perhaps someone could link to that if they know where it is.
In future, if you can copy/paste text then you can copy/paste a url link. Please do in future, or your post may be removed by admin. Thank you. A2
EDITED
I didn’t think that was what “link” meant: I thought it was one highlighted word that took you to a place.
You’re not keen on me supplying some official government stats, are you?
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/culturalidentity/ethnicity/bulletins/ethnicgroupenglandandwales/census2021
Is that what you mean?
Yes, that’s exactly why I asked you to link to the source twice 🙄
Nope, you threatened to censor my accurate stats unless I jumped through ridiculous hoops.
It was obvious to anybody with a 3-figure IQ that I was using census stats, and that I would hardly lie because I could so very easily be found out.
Ridiculous hoops, linking to a source? 😅
Difficult to believe perhaps, but people do lie in such blatant ways. It’s remarkably effective, if it looks legit. It can even stay under the radar long enough to slide a forum.
More commonly people just quite innocently misremember. So we always ask for links. It’s considerate to others and helps keep things accurate.
Admin didn’t really appreciate being told you ‘don’t know how to link’ (I mean, c’mon dude), but other than this there’s really no vendetta against ONS stats or you. I suggest you dial that contempt and paranoia back to healthy levels.
Unless you are trying to rile things up here?
Of course you aren’t, let’s move on now. Thanks, A2
Exactly, that’s what it’s about: identity, not race. Brining in lots and lots of people into a country with which they do not feel any affiliation destroys the sense of community and belonging in that country. With people’s national identity taken away, alongside their religion and family values, the society becomes an easily malleable mass that the globalist elites desire. And they have for a long time, thus they’ve been working hard at destroying everything that the European nations were founded on. Mass migration, whether by design or otherwise, is part of that process.
You’ve made a logical leap there indicating bias. You assume that people with no affiliation with a country automatically compromise its moral integrity. Demonstrate this.
I’d add that much of the time immigrants to the UK are coming from countries more grounded in traditional values and morality than their host country. We must make sure we aren’t reasoning backwards and aren’t victims of confirmation bias. A2
Wow, a false dichotomy!
You think this is about whether or not immigrants have similar values to us?
Surely it’s about the fact that the globalists want to destroy the nation state (to facilitate a world government) and they think a good way is to flood the nations with immigrants who have no allegiance or empathy with their adopted state.
Your argument is circular. A2
No, it isn’t.
1) Globalists want to destroy nation states in order to facilitate a World Government. That’s the plan.
2) Flooding the nation to be destroyed with immiscible immigrants who have no affinity for it, and often, active antipathy for it, is one way to accomplish the plan.
To me it seems to go something like this:
1) globalists support immigration
How do you know that?
2) because immigration destroys nation states
How do you know that?
3) because (see 1)
Or it could go….
1) globalists support destroying nation states
How do you know that?
2) because immigration destroys nation states
How do you know that?
3) because… (see 1)
The globalists want a world government (and all of us who visit this site regularly know that’s true.) Dear Keir, for example, would rather plot against his own countryfolk with his globalist pals in Davos. Elon Musk is perfectly happy in suggesting that Americans will get short shrift in terms of jobs, because the rest of the world is just as entitled to them as Americans are; hell, they should be happy about it!
Globalists, definitionally, oppose nation states. We know the globalists want a world government because they regularly tell us so, and then act accordingly. As another example, here in the states, TPTB having been trying to ram through some provision that essentially makes us captive to the whims and desires of the WHO. After convid, all of should be aware of what a bad idea it is for any country to give up its own sovereignty. These globalist entities want nations to do just that, however, in nearly every particular.
Immigration is one tactic they use. For example, the right to “freedom of movement.” There is no corresponding right to not have people move over you. Do the peoples of the — entirely Western, formerly Christian — nations who are being overrun by immigrants have a say in who and how many get to come to their countries? They don’t really. Additionally, there’s more than one way to “do” immigration, and the PTB intentionally allow for and excuse the most egregiously disruptive forms of it, which always run in only one direction.
I’ve posted a link above to an article re: Renard Camus, who as you probably know, coined the term “Great Replacement, and which, regardless of which side you take on this issue, is full of food for thought.
If immigrants were directly responsible for 50% of additional social disruption/crime rate increase in high immigration countries, and if societal xenophobia influencing law enforcement institutions were responsible for the other 50% – which doesn’t seem that far-fetched to me – then the equation would balance out at zero, and you could equally well assert that the elites were weaponising domestic populations against themselves.
Ultimately this is why I think these arguments are essentially meaningless.
Hi Sam! You’re most likely referring to this sentence from my previous comment: ‘With people’s national identity taken away, alongside their religion and family values, the society becomes an easily malleable mass that the globalist elites desire.’ Perhaps I wasn’t clear enough. I meant that mass immigration undermines national identity, whereas the religion and family values had already been destroyed by years of malicious activity in media, education etc.
Agreed that the immigrants to countries like the UK have, on the whole, a stronger moral fabric than the locals (due to the very destruction of traditional values). After all, it is usually the Muslim parents who refuse to let their children participate in any LGBT-propaganda events at schools.
It is way more complicated, and would benefit from a longer explanation, but for now I will stop at this. Thanks for reading.
Not the least interesting aspect of these figures is that, although crime is overwhelmingly a product of poverty, Sweden (with a GDP per capita of $56,305 according to the World Bank), Germany ($52,746), France ($44,461) and the UK ($48,867) are all significantly wealthier than Poland ($22,113), Hungary ($22,147), Romania ($18,419) and Russia ($13,817); yet the latter’s crime rates (29.2, 32.8, 33.8 and 39.7 per 100,000 of the population) are all, except for Russia — and then only marginally compared to traditionally law-abiding Germany — lower than their wealthier neighbours (38.0, 46.9, 48.1 and 54.6). Is it a coincidence that ethnic homogeneity in the former countries (98.6, 93.5, 89.3 and 80.85 percent native) is also higher than the latter countries (71.3, 73.5, 80.4 and 76.9 percent)? Is there a causal connection between immigration and crime?
The Great Replacement: Immigration in the UK (Part Two: The Impact), Simon Elmer
This is the article in contention isn’t it? I have to say it’s a valid question, but if Elmer is hoping to infer anything beyond asking the question, or if he doesn’t follow this up with additional hard data backing this inference up, I strongly disagree with his reasoning and approach here.
Correlation doesn’t equal causation. It’s a very complex situation which mustn’t be over simplified – which ties directly into the point made in the article, above, since ‘binaries’ are the most simplified and potentially most misleading way to represent any complex issue. In reality, immigration could be directly connected, it could be tangentially connected, or it could be completely unconnected, and I think it’s very irresponsible to invite any premature conclusions. A2
If you do have a better model of causation than constant correlation, then I’d be very glad to hear it.
Is it constant correlation though?
I haven’t seen any research de facto linking immigration to social deterioration. It may seem common sense to assume it would, but it’s a complex topic, and I think due diligence demands more of us. I suggest a typical immigrant would find western countries very decadent, often coming from a much more traditional and/or religious country themselves. So at what point are immigrants turning toxic? Might it be due to intolerance and prejudice inherent in the system of Western countries, where a colonialist mindset has been normalised and practiced for hundreds of years, even to this day? Eg. Many people in the UK are fine bombing brown people, but they don’t want them here.
Do we base our views on reports in the MSM of stabbings and child trafficking rings and rape? Because I get the suspicion those stories are there to elicit just that reaction. Is the situation being presented accurately? It’s important to be extremely skeptical of MSM agendas.
Do we base our views on studies demonstrating that immigrants are bad for society? There must surely be many of these. Perhaps someone could link to some?
I’d like to see a study exploring the lasting effects of immigration. Do immigrants tend to follow security and better wages and, in which case, do they tend to linger or move on if security/wage levels drop? What legacy do they leave behind? Is it all bad, or a mixture of positive and negative? A2
Of course there is a causal connection between excess imigration, crime and poverty. If there are fewer jobs than people, [such as the UK since the 1970s], then you have poverty and crime. If this gives you cheap housing areas which are bought by landlords who fill it with more immigrants who are allowed in by the gov, then there is more poverty and crime. You can see it in every urban area in the UK where Sam hasn’t visited.
yes you right that the division bad good is polarising and a weapon for manupulating the people but sometimes you must choose as for the covid “vacines” for instance.
Immigrants if properly utilised are a resource.
Most have famines at home that they want to support so are good workers.
It is like being given some slaves to work for you so you don’t have to work yourself.
Only if Immigrants are not properly utilised are they a drain on resources.
Some say they are a way to keep wages low but if productive they should be a benefit to society. Could they be used as a voting block maybe but who is selected makes little difference.
Why anyone should worry that in generations time there are less light coloured people
baffles me.
“Why anyone should worry that in generations time there are less light coloured people
baffles me.”
No one gives a fuck about colour.
There was no terrorist.
There were no victims.
The video was a fast forward video to make it looks like an attack.
This was probably done during an exercise. (via rent a crowd)
The arrest was also fake. You don’t see the terrorist after the arrest….
I have a lot of time for Simon Elmer. He is prepared to look at who is behind the immigration crisis without the knee-jerk reaction of calling everyone “racist”.
Many years ago, the Left used to care about working people. In the 1980’s, Kinnock made the political calculation that immigrants were a more reliable constituency than the working class, and ever since then the workers have been targets for both the Tories and Labour.
I think Off-G are wrong on this one. Elmer is prepared to go where few people are. I suspect that this is because he actually cares about working people.
You should at least have used a different name pal 😅
Why the heck can’t Elmer answer one straight question or even acknowledge what OG is saying? Did OG ever say “refugees welcome” or defend Islam? I don’t see them doing either. Elmer comes across as either trying to create a split or being totally irrational on this point.
I’m reminded of a quote by James Corbett; “If the medium is the message, the message of Twitter is I HATE YOU!”
I don’t inhabit the twittersphere but I have noticed how quickly discussions turn to arguments and finally to abuse in that particular medium.
I would recommend meeting Simon in person and speaking face to face. I’m sure you have more in common than that which divides you. Try not to take a person’s ideological beliefs as a personal attack on you.
Big love to you all!
The only one taking things personally looks to be Simon Elmer. OG was making reasonable points & Elmer ignored them all.
“Reasonable points” unfortunately are often in the eye of the beholder. Something is only reasonable within a wider context. If one party doesn’t accept the overarching ideas which subsume these particular points, then the points may not seem “reasonable” to that party.
So OG rejects ‘simple binary polarities’ as something wrong, ie. not right. Hmmm.
The editors of media outlets have a duty to their funders. In the case of OG, this means the readers. The aim is not only to inform but also to provoke thought. Would readers have appreciated Simon Elmer’s article? Would it have provoked lively discussion? Who can say? Editorial discretion is a can of worms. An area for endless discussion, no doubt. But rejection is often frustrating and can be hard to take. How you deal with it matters. Is venting your frustration (and anger) in public and getting personal the way to go about things?
Imagine calling yourself a journalist….
I got a memory and I also follow the basic festive calendar and this is entry level one in psyops.
The Christian Shill Alternative Conservative media sold all the below psyops as Moslems, Migrants, Terrorists and Real, basically regurgitating the MSM talking points as alternative.
Dec 22, 2024 — MAGDEBURG, Germany (AP) — Four women and a 9-year-old boy were killed and 200 people were injured when a man drove into a Christmas market …
Dec 22, 2023 — Video of the brutal attack shows the particularly vicious nature of the assault at C-Town Fresh Market off East Tremont Avenue
On 19 December 2016, a truck was deliberately driven into the Christmas market next to the Kaiser Wilhelm Memorial Church at Breitscheidplatz in Berlin
Jul 14, 2017 — On December 19th 2016, Anis Amri, a Tunisian citizen, hijacked a truck and crashed into a Christmas market at Breitscheid Platz in Berlin.
Jun 22, 2024 — Three people have died and 11 others have been injured after an attacker opened fire at a supermarket in Arkansas in the United States.
May 22, 2014 — Women attacked near Eastern Market, NoMa;
Mar 18, 2021 — A man is under arrest for unprovoked attacks on two elderly Asian victims near Market Street in San Francisco Wednesday,
May 15, 2024 — The woman was struck in the head repeatedly by a stranger inside Kansas Food Market in Potrero Hill,
Oct 2, 2018 — A 72-year-old woman was attacked Saturday afternoon in a Market Basket parking lot in Danvers, Massachusetts,
What puzzles me with these apparently regular German Christmas markets attacks are those unexplained, recurring flaws in security precautions. This last time the authorities of Magdeburg,
at least according to our Norwegian media, “left one passage open to allow for ambulances to enter”. Sounds reasonably enough, but if I were responsible for security, I think I would have said to myself: “Fine, but we will, just to be safe, block this passage with a solid SUV, which in case of an emergency will just back off and open the passage”. – Are we to believe such an elementary thought never crossed their mind?
As to “limiting acceptable debate to simple binary polarities”, Hannah Arendt’s words are worth repeating:
“The fallacy of such thinking begins with forcing the choices into mutually exclusive dilemmas; reality never presents us with anything so neat as premises for logical conclusions. The kind of thinking that presents both A and C as undesirable, therefore settles on B, hardly serves any other purpose than to divert the mind and blunt the judgment for the multitude of real possibilities”.
H.A. – Lying in Politics
Sometimes a binary, like a cigar, is just what it is. For instance, a woman riding a New York City subway is ipso facto “good.” Whereas hooligans setting her on fire are ipso facto “bad” – if the incident really happened.
Recently in PR China also many people were killed by cars driven into crowds.
Occam’s razor would point to lone wolf frustrated revenge/ suicidal / extremist Han Chinese or Muslims. That is why the former locked up the latter’s men in camps in Xinjiang.
Offgordian’s radar will point anywhere else, hence never any articles about the PRC or Muslim countries.
Interesting exchange, indeed… Including the comment section.
Food for thought.
Thanks to everyone involved and Happy New Year!
https://architectsforsocialhousing.co.uk/2024/10/02/the-great-replacement-immigration-to-the-uk-part-one/
It’s well worth reading.
If you like mouth-frothers so-called ‘argument.’ This is also gaining traction in France by writer Renaud Camus: le grand remplacement. Another racist pos.
Is it not a strange coincidence that every action required to ensure the survival of the white race is deemed ‘racist’?
There’s a loaded question. How do we define ‘white race’. Why do white people share this common interest, spanning so many different cultures and ethnicities and millions of square miles? Do we include browner mediterraneans? How do we define ‘survival’? What is the real extent of the threat? Is the white race really under threat, or is it feeling pushed out of urban areas in certain immigration bubbles which are actually fairly localised problems and barely in any danger of affecting the ‘white race’ as a whole in any shape or form? A2
Yes it’s shocking, but the truth is even worse. The whitehall scum always use ‘net migration’ as a fraud statistic instead of immigration. As if the wealthy pension draining energetic people leaving the disaster of the UK were comparable to the arrivals. In fact you should ADD the emmigrants to the immigrants to measure the damage caused.
I suspect the UK was sold basically to the WEF, arabs and chinese some time ago. Otherwise why the delberate vandalism? We need to have no secret courts or obscure unreported arbitration – no GATT, LOTIS, trilateral, TTIP, Bildeberg, ISDS, CETA, agenda 2030 etc
There is a link to the Elmer piece in the article, no need to add another
Your link is to part 4
It’s not well worth reading, it’s divisive repetitive lowest common denominator rubbish that might have made a good point if the author could avoid sounding like a queasy type who goes on too long about racial purity and starts to make his readers uncomfortable
“…and starts to make his readers uncomfortable.”
Well, he’s obviously made you uncomfortable. Other readers may have a different response.
Always in the crosshairs, it would seem the spooks got old simon.
Night night simon.
The Replacement Migration Agenda; a.k.a. “The Great Replacement”
https://press.un.org/en/2000/20000317.dev2234.doc.html
New Report on Replacement Migration Issued by UN Population Division
17 March 2000
Press Release
DEV/2234
POP/735
NEW YORK, 17 March (DESA) — The Population Division of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA) has released a new report titled Replacement Migration: Is it a Solution to Declining and Ageing Populations?. Replacement migration refers to the international migration that a country would need to prevent population decline and population ageing resulting from low fertility and mortality rates.
United Nations projections indicate that between 1995 and 2050, the population of Japan and virtually all countries of Europe will most likely decline. In a number of cases, including Estonia, Bulgaria and Italy, countries would lose between one quarter and one third of their population. Population ageing will be pervasive, bringing the median age of population to historically unprecedented high levels. For instance, in Italy, the median age will rise from 41 years in 2000 to 53 years in 2050. The potential support ratio — i.e., the number of persons of working age (15-64 years) per older person — will often be halved, from 4 or 5 to 2.
Focusing on these two striking and critical trends, the report examines in detail the case of eight low-fertility countries (France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, United Kingdom and United States) and two regions (Europe and the European Union). In each case, alternative scenarios for the period 1995-2050 are considered, highlighting the impact that various levels of immigration would have on population size and population ageing.
Major findings of this report include:
— In the next 50 years, the populations of most developed countries are projected to become smaller and older as a result of low fertility and increased longevity. In contrast, the population of the United States is projected to increase by almost a quarter. Among the countries studied in the report, Italy is projected to register the largest population decline in relative terms, losing 28 per cent of its population between 1995 and 2050, according to the United Nations medium variant projections. The population of the European Union, which in 1995 was larger than that of the United States by 105 million, in 2050, will become smaller by 18 million.
— Population decline is inevitable in the absence of replacement migration. Fertility may rebound in the coming decades, but few believe that it will recover sufficiently in most countries to reach replacement level in the foreseeable future.
— Some immigration is needed to prevent population decline in all countries and regions examined in the report. However, the level of immigration in relation to past experience varies greatly. For the European Union, a continuation of the immigration levels observed in the 1990s would roughly suffice to prevent total population from declining, while for Europe as a whole, immigration would need to double. The Republic of Korea would need a relatively modest net inflow of migrants — a major change, however, for a country which has been a net sender until now. Italy and Japan would need to register notable increases in net immigration. In contrast, France, the United Kingdom and the United States would be able to maintain their total population with fewer immigrants than observed in recent years.
— The numbers of immigrants needed to prevent the decline of the total population are considerably larger than those envisioned by the United Nations projections. The only exception is the United States.
— The numbers of immigrants needed to prevent declines in the working-age population are larger than those needed to prevent declines in total population. In some cases, such as the Republic of Korea, France, the United Kingdom or the United States, they are several times larger. If such flows were to occur, post-1995 immigrants and their descendants would represent a strikingly large share of the total population in 2050 — between 30 and 39 per cent in the case of Japan, Germany and Italy.
— Relative to their population size, Italy and Germany would need the largest number of migrants to maintain the size of their working-age populations. Italy would require 6,500 migrants per million inhabitants annually and Germany, 6,000. The United States would require the smallest number — 1,300 migrants per million inhabitants per year.
— The levels of migration needed to prevent population ageing are many times larger than the migration streams needed to prevent population decline. Maintaining potential support ratios would in all cases entail volumes of immigration entirely out of line with both past experience and reasonable expectations.
— In the absence of immigration, the potential support ratios could be maintained at current levels by increasing the upper limit of the working-age population to roughly 75 years of age.
— The new challenges of declining and ageing populations will require a comprehensive reassessment of many established policies and programmes, with a long-term perspective. Critical issues that need to be addressed include: (a) the appropriate ages for retirement; (b) the levels, types and nature of retirement and health care benefits for the elderly; (c) labour force participation; (d) the assessed amounts of contributions from workers and employers to support retirement and health care benefits for the elderly population; and (e) policies and programmes relating to international migration, in particular, replacement migration and the integration of large numbers of recent migrants and their descendants.
The report may be accessed on the internet site of the Population Division
[bad link]
Here instead:
https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/412547?v=pdf
Joins a long list of children, disappointed by what they received (or didn’t) at Christmas..
The “Communist in Hong Kong” does not convince in the way he argues…
But my eternal complaint about Offguardian remains that they eternally talk and complain about an “agenda” of some secret small powerful group without ever digging into who the group is and how they manage to control so much from their secrecy.
If such group exists (and it may), it must operate within a very sophisticated operation which exerts control over all (or most) governments, international media and education systems/academia everywhere. Why never investigate at least the HOW and the details of how the alleged power structure can work?
His and her name is Mammon.
He/she is a many headed Hydra, a smiling, charming assassin who wears a suit, is intolerant of dissent and impervious to criticism or the suffering of others.
The list is extensive and growing like an incurable Cancer on the face of the Earth.
Here’s some names and some agendas;
https://winteroak.org.uk/2024/12/30/keeping-it-in-the-deep-state-family/
Good link to critics unafraid of naming Z…. At OG, the evil buck usually stops with the Great Satan USA.
This puts in some names, the usual suspect last names, very good… but just HOW do these little groups manage to get so many to do as they wish without many of them even knowing?
The secret operation, what people call an unrealistic “conspiracy” so sophisticated that it could not even exist… how does it manage to actually exist?
Why do we never see any of this in Offguardian?
The division of labour, the power of money, constant hypnosis via conditioning through phrases (“conspiracy theory” etc.) and the fear of losing livelihoods pretty much covers it.
It’s spiritual. The evil one can orchestrate it all. If you only think and see in the material, it will never make sense (and indeed would not be possible).
wetiko
https://archive.org/details/wetiko-healing-the-mind-virus-that-plagues-our-world-by-paul-levy
“The love of money is the route to all evil !” … (anon) …
They dont have faces, they dont have names.
They were very young when traumatised, now the World
Is Their Oyster in which to battle Their Demons…
Control ! Control ! They must keep Control !!
Or Their festering festpool of supperating fears & anxieties
will suborn their Fragile. Brittle egos…
It’s not about You – or Me. Damage and miseries inflicted
upon Us – just Collateral Damage, a mere Side Effect of
Their Struggle to Control Their Demons…
Jesus begged “Father forgive them, They know not what They
do !”… I’m not Jesus – I dont have a Forgiving Heart…
The poem suggests their ends: control/power, for which the love of money is the means.
Releasing the demonic by giving over to the Father is not any personal attempt or attempt to forgive but the foregoing of a mind of accusation and condemnation by which a PERSONAL attempt to fight evil deceives and possesses the mind in grievance-driven vengeance.
All forgiveness is self-release.
Virtue cannot be credited by a PERSONAL extension of ‘magnanimity’ masked in claims of authority
The acts can them be seen for what they are instead of judgements of intentions assigned or projected to the othered.
Greed is the root of evil. This no less so for self-inflation in terms of seeking More over another’s Less. Fear of losing such a ‘self’ becomes justification for controls that attack & deny others.
The Father does Not condemn, attack, exclude or deny the Living.
An Innocence of being underlies all masking ‘personae’ – that casts out ‘beings’ as projections of conflicted ‘principle’.
The ‘struggle to control demonised and denied Self is ‘the ego’ of a split mind – where a conflicts are dissociated by masking over, projecting and attacking in the Other. Perhaps not immediately but waiting on the time & opportunity to release hate ‘justified and self vindicating’.
Good comment. A2
Maybe OG has analyzed Zionism and its very long and dirty history against western, Christian-heritage nations. Or maybe not, for some reason.
Hmm It sounds logical to me that “terrorists” are nothing but Imperial operatives. Cf Al Queda.
How many terror groups don’t enjoy Zionist/US funding?
Do we hear much about the ones that don’t?
Regarding the “Riots”
Ian thinks the riots were real. The BTL consensus is that they were fake (e.g. there’s general agreement with my comment below). I suspect that OffG is on the fence.
https://off-guardian.org/2024/10/09/the-armchair-rioters-part-1
Lost in a dark wood – Oct 10, 2024 8:23 AM
Other than perhaps in Belfast, where the indigenous working class united across the traditional divide, there were no such riots – neither armchair nor otherwise. Instead, there were a series of theatrical productions involving the police and teams of bussed-in crisis actors. It seems that a few locals got caught up in these pseudo-events – videoed lobbing a brick, pushing a flaming wheelie-bin, or passing something combustible to be thrown on a fire – but these were just useful idiots who got lured into a psyop.
But as we know, millions may get ‘lured into a psyop’. It’s a complex matter; some riots may be hybrids of reality and psyop; take J6 as a good example. What’s needed to ground arguments like this are failsafe criteria for differentiating between real and non-real events.
Oner of the most notable things about media narcissists is their need for an echo chamber. They rig their talk shows to have fawmimg asslickers on, they are not seriously challenged.
The simplest test of a false media is the levels of journalistic narcissists and attention seekers.
Cross network sharing the same story’s whilst proclaiming it organic and independent Listener funded LOL and different from MSM.
All the top 50 alternative shill outlets have links to mosad,cia,mi5/6.gchq,naval intelligence, dod the Christian / Catholicism Church and they dont even hide who they are.
Shame on the listener.
A simpler test for identifying real media may be the availability or not of the right to respond in a comments section like this one.
Here is a proposed action, albeit a legislative one:
https://matthewehret.substack.com/p/why-america-needs-to-break-wall-streets
And how does Matthew propose breaking Wall Street’s knees? Reinstatement of the Glass-Steagal Act. Can’t be done? It was passed originally in the midst of fascism, a world war, and an economic crisis similar to the present one.
His article is worth reading; he’s never either simplistic or binary.
That’d be a good start, but the ultimate goal must be to abolish the Fed. Until we stop paying the Wall Street Cartel interest on ‘our own’ currency, we will never get rid of them.
“The Great Replacement,” brought to you by the same Evil, Satanic, Globalist Pricks that brought you, most recently: “Covid.”
“Conspiracy Theories,” so called, by their creators and promoters. One of these “conspiracies” involves something that is actually self-evidently and obviously happening; the other, an illusion of something that supposedly happened. Can you discern? If you can see one, you are capable of seeing both?
As for Simon Elmer, (two first names, always a red flag) you need to get a thicker skin, fella.
An unsolvable problem, it seems.
I always find reading Simon Elmer to be worth the time. And his writing is not brief, he takes time to develop his arguments. Now, most of what is published on Off-G is short. For the last year or so I have found that maybe 50% of what I read on Off-G was not worth the time it took to read it.
You should have published his piece – you don’t need to protect me. If you really engaged with his work, I don’t think you’d be asking the questions you did. That’s my read on his curt responses. You are not taking his work seriously, why should he take you seriously?
I gather that Elmer wants to make a material difference. He’s not part of the global theory industry. What does one do? You use the tools that exist now, imperfect as they are, not as you wish them to be.
Contrast Elmer’s work with the idiotic series by Iain Davis you have published on a new sociopolitical order he calls Voluntaryism. It’s as if humans have never thought of organizing themselves in a manner that is not built on exploitation and violence. Finally, Davis, first in history to propose a better system!
Why is it idiotic? Beside the fact that he ignores the numerous examples in history he could draw from, the failures and success, he studiously ignores the small problem that it’s not for lack of good alternatives that we live in the world we do. It’s because the ruling classes use everything in their power (from propaganda, education, social engineering to subterfuge and actual violence on an individual to industrial scale) to make sure any challenge to their rule is dead on arrival. Voluntaryism will go nowhere because it’s implementation is based on a fantasy, like it fell out of the sky fully formed and without the reality of fierce opposition by the PTB.
Fantasy is clean, reality is messy.
Judging by the rest of the comments and the tone I don’t get why you have 25+ upvotes. Something is fishy. You’re just an old Marxist defending the irrational contradictory rambling of another old Marxist and upvoting yourself. Or maybe you’re Elmer himself. Or his mum.
Yes, very suss. Almost no one in the comments takes his line yet he gets more upvotes than any other comment? I downvoted though I don’t normally do that just to redress the balance. His point is also ridiculous
It was Elmer’s (apparent) Marxism that made him so significant since he was one of the very few on the Left that didn’t fall for the covid scam. Sadly it is also the case that decades of flabby identity politics, post modernism, and a general corrupting influence of affluent triumphalist capitalism has seriously damaged the critical faculties of most “Matxists”. And Elmer now shows his derangement.
Your post makes me realize how much OG privileges fantasy and theory over the reporting of messy reality. No articles describing life in and around the immigrant hotels, or working class experience in the woke NHS and police stations. Is this an old leftist bias toward intellectualism?
“It’s because the ruling classes use everything in their power (from propaganda, education, social engineering to subterfuge and actual violence on an individual to industrial scale) to make sure any challenge to their rule is dead on arrival.”
And your proposed solution?
Reform—presumably by magic incantation—the very same violent, propaganda ridden, educationally corrupted, socially engineered population control system the ruling class have imposed for their own benefit.
Unbelievably, you simultaneously concede that the reason the “ruling class” like the system you also favour is precisely because it enables them to “make sure any challenge to their rule is dead on arrival.”
Yet suggesting we don’t continue to use the ruling class’ oppressive system, and instead try to build something better absent any ruling class at all, you consider “idiotic.” To spice things up you then chuck in the straw man that I am the first in history to propose voluntaryism.
You then assert, for no discernible reason, that your determination to maintain reliance on the very system you recognise as oppressive, violent and destructive somehow illustrates your superior grasp of history and reality.
I don’t think so.
RE: “Reform—presumably by magic incantation…”
That’s projection on your part. I didn’t propose a “solution” in my comment.
RE: “…like the system you also favour…”
Again, this is projection on your part. I didn’t indicate a system I “favour”.
RE: “…I am the first in history to propose voluntaryism…”
That was sarcasm. There are many precedents you could have acknowledged and taken things from or criticized. I’ll just stick to the last 200 years of Western history (off the top of my head): The “Utopian Socialists” – movements led be people like Robert Owen, Charles Fourier and Henri de Saint-Simon. What did you did you admire in those attempts, what did you reject and why?
Those programs were actually tried. If we jump forward to 20th Century anarchist programs for a more just society maybe you looked at Murray Bookchin’s libertarian municipalism? What did you like about it, what did you reject and why? Then there’s Parecon, or participatory economics, an economic program proposed by Michael Albert and Robin Hahnel. Which of their ideas did you like? What did you reject and why?
The elephant in the room of course is actually existing socialism. We must ignore that it was the Soviets that in 20 years transformed a backward agrarian country into an industrial powerhouse that defeated the greatest war machine the world had ever seen with Nazi Germany. We must ignore that communist China lifted 800 million people out of poverty in about 40 years, something that no capitalist country has ever come close to in so short a time.
The only thing the Western left hates more than capitalism is actually existing socialism. This is not by accident.
In the post WWII period the capitalist ruling class realized that they couldn’t get rid of the left (primarily as the problems capitalism creates are not away), so they managed it. The CIA’s Thomas Braden proposed to promote and curate what he called a “compatible left.” That is a left that did not challenge the capitalist order. So the left and Western Marxism abandoned the working class, abandoned class analysis and class struggle, abandoned the fight against imperialism and abandoned proletarian revolution. Now what we have is petty bourgeois radicals who are completely disconnected from the working class whose main job is to secure their own class positions while they propose “solutions” that can never work in the real world.
There are those (in the West) that recognized this problem and wrote about it: Michael Parenti and Domenico Losurdo come to mind. To those that are interested in exploring what I am alluding to, about real solutions, I recommend as introduction, a short book by Carlos L. Garrido called “The Purity Fetish and the Crisis of Western Marxism.”
RE: “… that your determination to maintain reliance on the very system you recognise as oppressive…”
All that is presumed on you part; nowhere do I express that. All in all pretty intellectually dishonest Iain, you actually surprised me.
I am fully aware that I am going against the grain here…
Off the top of my head, the Utopian Socialists, who rejected the class struggle, gave rise the communitarianism (advocated by Etzioni et al) that underpins “Civil Society” proposed as one of the three limbs, alongside the public and private sectors, of the Stakeholder Capitalism model promoted by the WEF and their government partners.
As I suspect you have recognised, I have used some of Bookchin’s ideas especially his identification of “politics” as an individual morality. But again. like Etzioni, in my view Bookchin fails to appreciate how power is exercised by both the public state and the private estate working in partnership. His suggested decentralised confederalism has a lot going for it, but, absent recognition of how power manifests, his ideas, again, lend themselves perfectly to stakeholder capitalism.
Most importantly, like every critic of alleged “democracy” since Aristotle, Bookchin suggests “electing” representatives. As I have tried to stress in my voluntary democracy pieces, such minarchism will always enable corruption. Bookchin’s proposal, as I say, is perfect for exploitation by the stakeholder capitalists (public-private partnership). That is not his intention any more than it is Etzioni’s. It is just how oligarchs manipulate and always profit from ideologies.
Our task then, I suggest, is to create a system where oligarchy is impossible. Hence my suggested voluntary democracy.
With regard to participatory economics, much like the ideas of the Utopians and the Communitarians, anything that rejects the class struggle and assumes that a classless social or economic system can be achieved, absent any preceding class struggle, again overlooks how so-called state power—which I contend is actually exerted by a public-private partnership—operates. This, again, is why I have suggested voluntary democracy.
We cannot move to any kind of “real” power sharing society without first addressing how power manifests, beyond simple brute force. Any “planned economy” whether decentralised or not, will inevitably be corrupted by the planners and the behest of oligarchs. I recognise that Paracon seeks to remove the centralised “ownership” of resources form potential oligarchs but it is not “ownership” that is the issue. It is the centralised control of the “distribution” of resources that empowers oligarchs and it is easy to see how Paracon would be immensely appealing to enthusiastic tyrants.
The Chinese have certainly benefited from development but to argue that is a product of socialism is frankly ridiculous. China is undoubtedly a command economy but one that has benefited from enormous inward investment and technological transfers from global capitalists.
As for the often stated claim of lifting 800 million Chinese out of poverty we should also note that, as an emerging economy, the level at which absolute poverty is measured is higher than it would be in a developing economy. The NPC decided not to adopt that measure, so the 800 million claim is highly dubious. In terms of relative poverty and wealth distribution, the Great Hall has a higher percentage of billionaire “representatives” than any other “representative” governmental centre of power in the world. Some are definitely far more equal than others in China’s model of “socialism.”
This observation is not a criticism of socialism, but it is an acknowledgement of how public-private power actually functions. I would argue it works the same everywhere and it always has. No Supreme Leader or monarch has ever been able to hold power without a “respective” court of Princelings or entitled nobles backing up their rule.
Thanks for your recommended reading of “The Purity Fetish and the Crisis of Western Marxism.” I haven’t read it, but I will.
I do not accept your claim that I have relied upon “projection” in my response to you. You clearly stated why you consider my work on voluntaryism to be “idiotic.”
You succinctly listed your reasons in defence of making what you consider to be a “material difference” by using “the tools that exist.” You declared that voluntaryism “will go nowhere because it’s implementation is based on a fantasy.” Adding that “reality is messy.” I agree with you on the latter point btw.
That is a pretty robust defence of statism and comprehensive rejection of voluntaryism. To quote myself, it is self evident from your offered criticism that you argue for making a material difference by relying upon “the very system you recognise as oppressive.”
There is no “projection.” I have responded directly to your criticisms. It seems somewhat disingenuous of you to distance yourself from those criticisms now.
Your presentation of your volutarist proposal would be much stronger if you had addressed some of the precedents you do in your response to me.
However, you still have not addressed the “small problem” I raise in my original post. Let’s say you are able (not you personally) to establish a voluntarist “country” (for lack of a better term). How would you fend off on-going hybrid warfare by multiple capitalist countries? You not only have to deal with military encroachments from all sides, you have to deal with ideological warfare too. You will have people who become important voluntarist leaders who will betray voluntarism. (These are all things that Western imperialism does to countries trying to chart their own future.)
Yes, I know why you don’t address this issue: because the answer is unacceptable – only a state can do that.
Unless this new system can defend itself, it will not survive.
I don’t believe in the state. Rather I don’t know how you can defend yourself against sustained hybird warfare without one. If you come up with a way to do that, I am all for it. The question not asked is whose interests does the state serve?
bitcoin fixes this
I hope you can appreciate Tom that I have presented Voluntary Democracy merely as a proposed framework, outlining how a voluntaryist society could be “organised” and could “function.” As I mention a few times across the three pieces, I am sure I have overlooked many arguments. My hope is to start the conversation, and I genuinely thank you for taking the time to seriously engage with the ideas I have presented.
There is, of course, a lot more that needs to be discussed, and I may expand on the idea at some point. But the third essay is already very long and I have to stop somewhere. Maybe a book is necessary.
In part 3, which I know you have read, I do highlight that statists will attack, with hybrid and direct warfare and other forms of oppression, any emerging voluntary democracy. I stress that the NAP does not infer pacifism. Makhno’s Black Army were not pacifists, though I anticipate your reasonable response will be “look what happened to them?”
Anyway, I have already responded to some of your comments on Part 3, so will leave this thread and continue to discussion there, if that’s OK with you.
If we remove from a new society the “small problem” of defending itself from the forces that maintain the status quo, I don’t think we need any program or guide, people can figure it out themselves (yes I think they are smart enough). So, I maintain that defense is not an incidental problem to deal with ahead of time among many others, it is the PRIMARY PROBLEM! This is where we have a major disagreement.
If you cannot address this problem head on, then your voluntarist system is a dead end and therefore reinforces rather than seriously challenges the status quo.
As expected: pending. Off-Guardian is clearly pro Islame biased.
I’m pending too. It must be due to OffG’s “Zionism”!
Race points at biological features one is born with. People who have a Jewish mother (only) can call themselves Jews, so there should be some mitrochondial lineage. All other faiths are truly non biological but cultural, so learned after birth. It is true that particularly under Islam groups of parents / teachers indoctrinate their kids heavily from kindergarten onwards, but the same thing happens in atheist communist China.
Framing criticism of Islam as racism is a woke one trick pony that died.
Islam has been an aggressive ideology from the get go towards “kaffirs” and its own women and kids. The Moplah “rebellion” of 1921 was just one expression of that.
Anglo covert services have used that trait since a century to keep it colonies and now ex colonies divided -yes: birds of a feather. Importing many of this ideology into the EU looks like a deliberate attempt to to import divide and conquer into the Europe as to sap any local resistance to The Global state.
But Zionism never indoctrinates? I’d say that Zionism is the most violent of all ideologies since it is based on the ferociously paranoid proposition that “The Jews” are about to be wiped out and Zionists are therefore justified in any amount of murderous activity.
I’m pending. No doubt it was the “J” word.
You’ve had this explained to you in the past, haven’t you. A2
That’s just a Cohencidence…
There hadn’t been a sizeable terror attack in Europe, in the West, since the so-called pandemic started. That alone is reason enough to be skeptical. Domestic terrorism vanished along with the ‘emergency of climate change’, very remarkable. The latter reappeared after ‘covid’ was replaced with ‘Russia’ in 2022, again remarkable. But terrorism in the West remained absent until the attack in Magdeburg, which was the first of its kind in many years. Was it not? I might have missed something with so much going on.
Such attacks usually anger many white conservative people who then respond with fanatical anti-immigrant stances. And the usual suspects – ‘right-wing’ parties – will not pass up on the opportunity to say: ‘We told you so. And therefore vote for us’. It’s almost as if white non-muslim people are incapable of crime and murder and terror attacks because white people are so evolved and have such high standards. Which of course is not true. Not entirely at least.
One would think that dissidents (aware and unjabbed etc.) are not so easily triggered and angered. So… What happened to this particular man, mr. Elmer?
Excellent observation. Perhaps the terrorists were just too terrified of covid and climate change and Russia? Nah it’s obvious bollocks. The terror campaign is underlying and consistent. It’s just the rhetoric that changes.
Thanks. I think more people ought to think about it, my humble opinion.
Leafy suburb-dwelling “anti-racist” oikophobes, the pair of them, “fanatical (sic) anti-immigrant…white people are so evolved, have such high standards..”: Greenfield and George.. You would do well on Craig Murray’s blog.
Or merely two elements who have never experienced immivader competition for state school places, for public transport seats on their long commutes to work, for low-paid jobs, for places in public hospital queues, for affordable house rentals.
Btw the Magdeburg attack is nothing to do with terrorism per se, as the Saudi shrink who did it seems to have been a genuine nutter.
Which shows how he should never have been let into Germany at all, given that Riyadh has warned the German about him early on (yes I know Riyadh had their own fish to fry, as he is Shiite, and Sunni Riyadh has executed lots of Shiites over time).
Ethnic homogeneity and hence a reasonable level of willingness to be taxed so as to support underdogs has been the prerequisite for any welfare state post-1945. That is now being destroyed. T
I know that you don’t want an answer from me, but sadly you will get it. Not because I don’t like you, but because I like you. I don’t provide explanations and never try with people who I think are Antifa CIA warriors, shills and trolls. But this will be the last time, bc all of your thinking and arguments are too Antifa, too Rockefeller progressive, too CIA woke. And your first reaction is to discard everything as a result of the prejudice of the masses (white masses, not black or muslim of course).
Here is a very intelligent man https://bezlogo-com.translate.goog/2016/02/%d0%b8%d0%bc%d0%b8%d0%b3%d1%80%d0%b0%d1%86%d0%b8%d1%8f-%d0%b8%d0%bb%d0%b8-%d1%80%d0%b5%d0%b2%d0%be%d0%bb%d1%8e%d1%86%d0%b8%d1%8f.html?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp ,
a convinced anarchist who explains why anarchists should oppose the migration of foreigners to Bulgaria, imposed by the Imperial West. After explaining the moral part of the issue and why we have a duty to the “refugees”, since small Bulgaria is a member of NATO and we participate in the destruction of their countries, here we are not even talking about the “refugees” from Pakistan and India, the man justifies why it is much more important and moral to oppose.
“The second main aspect of the situation is related to certain utilitarian considerations. Let us say in advance a few things that characterize the situation in Bulgaria at the moment. The simple truth that everyone should recognize based on the existing data is that Bulgarian society, thought of as a socio-linguistic given, is disappearing. Reports on demographic trends and immigration processes in Bulgaria show this more than unequivocally. Key in this regard are the reports of the World Bank and the CIA, which, based on extrapolations of existing trends, predict that Bulgarians will be a minority in Bulgaria by 2050, and that around 2100-2150, the Bulgarian ethnicity will have practically disappeared as a significant group.
We have absolutely no reason to doubt either the data or the conclusions based on them. We can only add that at the moment Bulgarians exist as biomass – a group of people who do not have a common project for coexistence and, respectively, do not form a society, social cohesion is destroyed, social groups do not exist (including trade unions) and in short, we have just a collection of people who, deep down (and often not so deep down) in themselves, the main thing they want from life is to be somewhere else. Against this background, it is not surprising that we observe negative selection as a result of the mass emigration of Bulgarians to Western Europe and the USA, in which the human resource of our society has a decreasing potential.
It is very difficult to overestimate the significance of what has been said, so let us be very clear – Bulgaria as a cultural, social and linguistic entity is disappearing! And what is more – Bulgaria is a unique country in this respect. Currently, there is no society in the world that is melting at a rate comparable to ours (with the exception of some sinking islands from which the population is being evacuated) and there is no ethnic group that has a shorter predicted duration of existence. Bulgaria, dear readers, is absolutely unique in this respect – the low birth rate (on average 1.1 (I think it is 1.6 – Vanusha) children per Bulgarian family, while 2.2 children are needed to maintain a constant population of an ethnic group; the Bulgarian cultural and linguistic community has one of the lowest birth rates in the world!) and high emigration in combination with the initially not very numerous population of Bulgarians, turn us into the fastest disappearing community on the planet.
The reasons for this phenomenon are the subject of a separate analysis, but the fact remains, and it is that from a certain point of view, we are in a worse situation than the refugee/migrant communities that are going west. Libya, Iraq, Syria, Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco, etc., are not disappearing at such a pace, in fact most of these countries have positive growth despite all the tragedies that have been happening on their lands in the last 50 years or so (to which Western imperialism has made a huge contribution).”
So here you have it, Bulgaria will disappear in a few decades, but I think your British Britain is in almost the same trajectory. But you don’t bother at all about this, don’t you? How do you think this looks like? You don’t even know what British culture is? What Britain is? What white is, what is this all about, don’t you? And keeping your mouth shut is part of the Imperial agenda to erase Bulgaria from the face of the earth.
He explains why anarchists fighting imperial agendas will inevitably lead to a clash with the state.
“Taking a certain position on an important issue for society in no way implies collaboration with state institutions. On the contrary, the position can be argued and defended in opposition to the same. In fact, any principled position that is in the interest of society ultimately turns out to be harmful to the state and its institutions are not slow to demonstrate it through various repressive actions. In this sense, we have no reason to fear that by taking a certain position, we can unwittingly legitimize power – any position that is in the interest of society and that is maintained consistently and in principle will sooner or later lead to conflict with the institutions of power and their lackeys, and this will inevitably become obvious to society.”
Of course, you are blind to this repressive actions because you thought that the repressive actions of Keir Starmer were not against people opposing imperial immigration agenda, but some invented non issue about “immigration”, some binary psyops and some demented Tommy Robinson with your good Muslim fellows spreading bullshit about “dialectics” and “universal love”. How convenient.
My anarchist friend explains further:
“We can list hundreds of examples of conflicts between cultural Muslims and cultural Christians, but how many examples can we give of situations in which the two communities have ignored their differences in the name of a common class struggle? Do we have reason to believe that the situation will be different in Bulgaria? Do we get along with the Gypsies, have we integrated and educated them? Do the MRF and Ataka (these are “far right” parties, exploiting differences between Bulgarians and Gypsies – Vanusha) not exist? No, we have no reason to believe that the processes in our country will proceed differently. In fact, it will probably be worse for us, because at the moment Bulgarian society has much fewer resources to integrate a culture that is foreign to it compared to Western countries… Against this background, we must (with pain!) admit that from the point of view of the survival of Bulgarian culture and the necessary condition for it – the social revolution, we should be against accepting migrants from the Middle East, who are characterized by cultural features shaped by Islam. It’s not that these people have become accustomed to living in our dying society, on the contrary, they are striving to leave it as quickly as possible towards Germany (and rightly so!), but the fact is that the EU has requirements for all its members to accept “refugees” on a quota basis and the dialogue regarding this agreement is being conducted in Bulgarian society.”
So, how many examples do YOU have where immigrant workers and native workers united to fight a class war? None. Your only examples are Antifa NGOs and the fake Lefties, the only example where Whites support foreigners and no examples where foreigners support white working class. How do you imagine foreigners will support anti immigration of the natives? How many Muslims joined the “far right” in Britian against Starmer? How many examples do you have of your universal uniting and love to fight the elites? None.
You are experimenting with the masses with your “great reset” uniting non strategy when the only way this can end is Balkanization and ghettoization, British cultural and ethnic suicide. And bc Saudi Arabia and Qatar are brainwashing Muslims in Europe, you may end up as the Alawites in Syria. It seems that you never bothered to investigate Muslim terror sells, influence of the rich Gulf countries or impact on human rights and especially women. Support for Sharia is not a big secret among Muslims.
If all of the above is not clear enough, check again statistics on crime, rapes, terror, Muslims with Machete and the plummeting white birth rates.
Great Britain is A Theme Park…
Do like the poms, turn Bulgaria into A Theme Park,
package its Culture and sell to tourists.
Everyone Loves A Spectacle…
Another example are the Turkish immigrants to Germany since the 1960s. Of all the immigrant groups that have settled in Germany over the past several decades (leaving the more recent influx of mainly Muslim immigrants invited to Germany via the country’s open border policy aside) the Turks are the only group that have not assimilated, have performed poorly in the education system, are still mostly out of (legitimate) work, have lived on social security payments over generations, and are disproportionately represented in crime statistics.
Muslim immigrants to western countries actually hate Westerners, and it’s hard to understand why, if they are truly fleeing political persecution or the terrors of war, they don’t emigrate to other wealthier Muslim countries where they’d be able to integrate more happily.
The Rotherham rapists originated from a very poor region of Pakistan. There is a similarity here:
The Turks were recruited into Germany as Gastarbeiter in the early 60s.
This was because the USA pressured its German vassal (against the written objections of the Economics Ministry) to do so.
The US at that time was worried that its Turkish vassal, a frontier state to the USSR and hosting US missiles and airbases, would suffer social upheaval of a Communist sort.
The way to take the pressure off the Ankara government was to export the social problem to Germany.
So the German Foreign Ministry won out over the Economics Ministry.
Yes! The problem always is their behaviour, not their religion. I was friends with an Iranian woman while living there. An entirely different mindset and level of refinement.
Be more precise, “Class” not Religion,
I suspect your Iranian friend/family had perhaps approved of the Shah because of him promoting female education and upward mobility along with torturing dissidents with his CIA-Mossad SAVAK,
But she/her parents fled the Islamic Republic of Khomeni and successors?
As she was on the liberal/atheist side of politics?
That is the tragedy, the Shah was great for many in the upper crust until 1979 but it has been the Islamists who brought electricity to rural areas.
Urban and urbane Turks form Istanbul visiting Germany express their astonishment at the SE Turkish, ie Anatolian Turks there, saying ” we never see those people back in Turkey”.