Is Race Replacement Acceptable?

It goes without saying that I hope we can keep this thread free of hate. Emotional, or hateful responses to the subject of race are exactly what has kept it taboo. And in being taboo, an underbelly of anger has quietly grown, ready to explode in the coming years.

A recent article in the Daily Telegraph - Witnessing the live birth of gangland - states that:

In 2010, a quarter of births were to mothers born outside the UK, according to the ONS.

And that as a result...

we’re experiencing the biggest change in our demographic identity since the Anglo-Saxon invasions of the fifth century.

The common response of the pro-multicultural 'Liberal left' (argument (1) for the sake of this thread) is that Britain "has always been a nation of immigrants". Like the Nazis, this is a lie that extremists like to repeat in the hope that the less-educated will be taken in by it. However, England as a nation came into existence with the arrival of the Anglo-Saxons (and related tribes). As the Telegraph article points out...

Nothing like this has happened before. Please pay no attention next time a Left-wing historian pops up on TV to romanticise the arrival of the Normans, Huguenots, Eastern European Jews etc. These were significant influxes, but Great Britain has never been “a nation of immigrants”.

(though I would argue that 'Great Britain' is not in itself a nation but rather a collection of nations founded by slightly different peoples at different times).

The other two regular responses of the 'Liberal left', if they even admit the truth that England is not a nation of immigrants, are that:
(2) This is scaremongering. Britain has a healthy minority of immigrants that will never end up replacing the indigenous folk.
(3) That this is a good thing - the land and culture do not belong to the founding ethnic group(s).

However, argument (2) is brought into disrepute by the revelation that...

...within a few years, a quarter of young Britons will be black, Asian or of mixed race. In the capital, the total will be well over 50 per cent.

Argument (3) is really what this thread is about, for the evidence now shows arguments (1) and (2) to be well-and-truly discredited. So all we are really left with is the debate as to whether race-replacement is acceptable or not. It is well under way now in England and several European countries who since ancient-times have been comprised of European peoples. It is not over-exaggerating the situation to predict that in England, in just a few decades, the ethnic English are going to be a minority. Some extremists may claim that we deserve it for the misdemeanours of the British Empire. But even if we do deserve some kind of recompense (for the record, I believe not) then is the theft of the English peoples' homeland a reasonable price to pay?

The ironic thing is that many 'Liberal left' extremists would say that predominantly European peoples stole the Native American and Australian's homeland. I agree, and would not have been among those invaders who drove the natives to the edge of extinction. But where many would say those natives had every right to fight back (some even saying they still have a right to fight back now), they would scream bloody murder if a white European stood at his/her own border with a shotgun locked and loaded.

This isn't about hatred or superiority. It is purely and simply to do with the rights of each ethnic group in the world to survive. The English are coming into an era where we are in a fight for our very survival. Multiculturalists aren't true multiculturalists - I am! I want a world where every beautiful ancient culture, from the Dogon of Africa to the Sami of Lapland; the Aborigines of Australia to the Cherokee of America, is preserved and allowed its own space to thrive. Multiculturalists want a world where each of those cultures exists multiple times within multiple Continents, only in a watered-down version that is adapted to the Consumerist, 'Liberal' trappings of the modern, technological Western World.

It's not right!

reply to post by Cythraul


Good point about natives protecting their land; however the earth is not ours. It is bad enough that we choose to cut it up with invisible lines but to then deny part of the earth from someone with another skin colour is wrong in my opinion. Don’t forget all the Europeans who go live in Japan, Africa etc.

By the way I dont even think Indians were fighting to keep people out, but rather coexist.

reply to post by Cythraul


This is definitely an interesting issue. My emotional knee-jerk reaction favors efforts to maintain the ethnic status quo, but I can't back that up logically. There is nothing inherently wrong with the ethnic mixing, as far as I can see. I don't think that ethnicity really translates to a right to a particular place.

But, like I said, my emotional response to the issue doesn't agree with the logical response.

Do you, by chance, have a proposed "solution" to the ethnic replacement "problem?" Even if it is decided that it is an inherently negative process, I find it hard to imagine a good solution to the issue, at least not one that could be considered "ethical," or "politically correct."

Originally posted by OwenGP185
Don’t forget all the Europeans who go live in Japan, Africa etc.

- Where Europeans have pushed the indigenous peoples out to a large extent, I deplore it.
- In all other nations, such as Japan, the Europeans (and other immigrants) there comprise such a tiny overall percentage that there is no threat of race replacement.

It is not right whoever does it - whether it be white people doing it to Africans or Asians doing it to Europeans. But I am aware that the architects of mass-migration - the Globalist Oligarchs - are the ones to blame. Nevertheless, this thread poses a question specifically to all apologists of mass-immigration and multiculturalism. If we - all the freedom loving people of the World - can at least agree that race replacement is wrong, then we can tackle the root causes and instigators.

Some extremists may claim that we deserve it for the misdemeanours of the British Empire.

You have a whole lot of nerves with that statement. I cannot begin to express my disgust in the whole post. So, only "extremists" would go anywhere near addressing that part of the equation ?

Really ?

Well, paint me an extremist then. Because colonialism, or "the misdemeanors of the British Empire" as you call them, is the root cause of ALL the problems on this planet , race related and otherwise. Your title "Is Race Replacement Acceptable?". I wonder why you chose the word replacement as opposed to repatriation or immigration. This whole thing is very offensive.

And I have a question. Why is it so disturbing and alarming that a majority of the people are not white ? Why is that of such a concern to you ? You do realize whites only make up 8 percent of the planet and seeing as colonialism pretty much has taken everything on the planet, where the hell do you suppose people are going to go ? How many lands can you take from people before you run out of land to take from people ? Where do you expect the world to relocate ? Hmmmm ?

OUTER SPACE ?

Very offensive.

Originally posted by Cythraul

Originally posted by OwenGP185
Don’t forget all the Europeans who go live in Japan, Africa etc.

- Where Europeans have pushed the indigenous peoples out to a large extent, I deplore it.
- In all other nations, such as Japan, the Europeans (and other immigrants) there comprise such a tiny overall percentage that there is no threat of race replacement.

It is not right whoever does it - whether it be white people doing it to Africans or Asians doing it to Europeans. But I am aware that the architects of mass-migration - the Globalist Oligarchs - are the ones to blame. Nevertheless, this thread poses a question specifically to all apologists of mass-immigration and multiculturalism. If we - all the freedom loving people of the World - can at least agree that race replacement is wrong, then we can tackle the root causes and instigators.

Thats the thing, not everyone feels "race replacement" is wrong. I do understand what you are saying, maybe cultural replacment gives you more of a leg to stand on but pigmentation of the skin is as illogical and bloodz and cripz.

About the Europeans going to other countries, if we disallow other ethnicities in England then English should lead by example and ban English migrating to other countries. It is a two way street, there are also high populations of English in other countries.

Originally posted by backwardluminary
Do you, by chance, have a proposed "solution" to the ethnic replacement "problem?" Even if it is decided that it is an inherently negative process, I find it hard to imagine a good solution to the issue, at least not one that could be considered "ethical," or "politically correct."

edit on 28-8-2011 by backwardluminary because: Added last paragraph

Good question. I am, for the sake of simplicity, a Nationalist (though less interested in strict 'State' boundaries and more in tribal autonomy), and I argue with other Nationalists over the solution to race replacement. There are, unfortunately, many who see the only solution being forced repatriation. I wish no harm or suffering to anyone of any origin, so I don't support this idea.

I believe the key to it all is that mass-migration is not occurring naturally, but is rather encouraged by 'the elite', both directly and indirectly through programs of welfare, political correctness and the subversion of Third World countries. So as far as I'm concerned the solution involved attacking the root cause and the ideology itself which permits and encourages so-called multiculturalism. Most migrants are economic migrants. Remove immediate welfare, remove the political correctness which prevents natives even questioning the dispossession of their land, stop the wars and encourage the dominance of each native culture over imported ones. This should be enough to at least stem the flow and avoid large-scale cultural/racial conflict.

reply to post by Cythraul

If humans were born with no eyes, then people would be segregated by the sounds of their voices. It's a natural by-product of our more primitive past.
We're just going to have to overcome this, though, if we're to survive as a society.

I think what upsets people the most is the mixing of different cultures, not so much the skin-tone or the "race".

Nobody's going to say it (so I will), but people have a hard enough time co-existing with people of their own culture/race. They're not going to admit that, so they'll just say that they don't want to get along with other cultures and start pointing out thier flaws, which we all have, and use those as reasons to try and justify their "beliefs".

It's just easier that way.

Originally posted by OwenGP185
Thats the thing, not everyone feels "race replacement" is wrong.

As I am aware. That's what this thread is about. I can at least respect an ideological opponent who is open and honest about their support for race replacement (though I would question how anyone can not see such a view as extreme).

Originally posted by OwenGP185
About the Europeans going to other countries, if we disallow other ethnicities in England then English should lead by example and ban English migrating to other countries.

I take your point, but how can a nation possible prevent people from leaving? That is the most severe infringement of people's liberties. The onus should be on nations to bar incomers rather than out-goers. In my opinion, once an Englishmen abandons England for good, he/she has proven where their allegiances lie (or rather, where they do not lie) and are no longer England's responsibility. If no other country will take them in then good for them.

Originally posted by Cythraul

Originally posted by backwardluminary
Do you, by chance, have a proposed "solution" to the ethnic replacement "problem?" Even if it is decided that it is an inherently negative process, I find it hard to imagine a good solution to the issue, at least not one that could be considered "ethical," or "politically correct."

edit on 28-8-2011 by backwardluminary because: Added last paragraph

Good question. I am, for the sake of simplicity, a Nationalist (though less interested in strict 'State' boundaries and more in tribal autonomy), and I argue with other Nationalists over the solution to race replacement. There are, unfortunately, many who see the only solution being forced repatriation. I wish no harm or suffering to anyone of any origin, so I don't support this idea.

I believe the key to it all is that mass-migration is not occurring naturally, but is rather encouraged by 'the elite', both directly and indirectly through programs of welfare, political correctness and the subversion of Third World countries. So as far as I'm concerned the solution involved attacking the root cause and the ideology itself which permits and encourages so-called multiculturalism. Most migrants are economic migrants. Remove immediate welfare, remove the political correctness which prevents natives even questioning the dispossession of their land, stop the wars and encourage the dominance of each native culture over imported ones. This should be enough to at least stem the flow and avoid large-scale cultural/racial conflict.

Mass migration is as natural as nature gets, do you know birds fly across the world, animals tavel across the earth, humans also do and always have, after all, how did one species end up all over the world.

Originally posted by Taupin Desciple
...so they'll just say that they don't want to get along with other cultures and start pointing out thier flaws, which we all have, and use those as reasons to try and justify their "beliefs".

No-one's pointing out flaws. It is not necessary to deem foreign cultures or peoples as being flawed in any way in order to see the replacement of natives by them as horrendous. The ethnic groups of the world do not necessarily need to prove their worth to deserve preservation, in my opinion.

Originally posted by OwenGP185
Mass migration is as natural as nature gets, do you know birds fly across the world, animals tavel across the earth, humans also do and always have, after all, how did one species end up all over the world.

Then why...
1)...do 'Third World' continents generally remain as homogeneous as they were a century ago whilst 'First World' ones become altered beyond recognition?
2)...has England's transformation been largely post-WW2?

Answer: Welfare, political correctness, subversion of the native peoples and all the other means by which Western regimes have nurtured and encouraged mass-migration.

You talk about nature, but what's more natural than mass-migration is the desire to live amongst people similar to oneself - tribalism. This has been deliberately undermined.

Originally posted by OwenGP185
About the Europeans going to other countries, if we disallow other ethnicities in England then English should lead by example and ban English migrating to other countries.
I take your point, but how can a nation possible prevent people from leaving? That is the most severe infringement of people's liberties. The onus should be on nations to bar incomers rather than out-goers. In my opinion, once an Englishmen abandons England for good, he/she has proven where their allegiances lie (or rather, where they do not lie) and are no longer England's responsibility. If no other country will take them in then good for them.

That answer is the epitome of pure unadulterated hypocrisy.

I respect your thoughts and the fact you have put yourself across well compared to most I see on this subject. The earth is ever changing; land gets smaller and bigger over time. Throughout history humans have crossed borders and I do not think this will ever change. I don’t think we could ever say this or that race has no right being here when we have people going on holidays, living in other places. If you say a British who leaves is not anymore, then other ethnicities deserve that same perk.

Originally posted by skepticconwatcher
That answer is the epitome of pure unadulterated hypocrisy.

edit on 28-8-2011 by skepticconwatcher because: (no reason given)

So tell me that preventing citizens leaving a free country is as acceptable as preventing outsiders coming in!

How do we preserve liberty and heritage at the same time? Shoot!

Originally posted by OwenGP185
I respect your thoughts and the fact you have put yourself across well compared to most I see on this subject.

Thank you! I respect yours too, and understood when making this thread that there is no reconciling the disagreement between those who deem race replacement acceptable and those who don't. Saying something is inevitable is akin to saying it is acceptable, and I am glad you're able to stand by your belief that it is acceptable.

Britain is not a nation of slighlty different peoples, this is part of a long standing myth and part of the wider myth that we are a muticultural nation. We are made up of 4 distinctly different peoples, 3 of which have their own cultures. England is the odd one out and it is the original multicultural cesspool than has for centuries tried to force itself upon the rest of the nation with varying degrees of success. Now that they are starting to fail with each wanting to do their own thing and run their own affairs we see this push towards bombarding this small isle with every tom, dick and fred able to reach our shores and welcome them with open arms.

reply to post by Cythraul


Ahhh,

I just saw that you are from the UK. That explains it. Well, guess what ? I change everything I said and will just answer your post with this;

Too bad. Deal.

May the UK be FILLED to the BRIM with MULTICULTURALISM. May a sea of people of various hues of natural earth spread across the region with intermixing of ethnic groups until the entire lot is completely and utterly dominated by those of several backgrounds.May the UK exceed America in multiculturalism. May there be no segregated communities , but all living among each other.

That is my hope and my blessing for you.

I am done with this thread

Originally posted by Cythraul
It is not over-exaggerating the situation to predict that in England, in just a few decades, the ethnic English are going to be a minority. Some extremists may claim that we deserve it for the misdemeanours of the British Empire.

...misdemeanors?... ...are you intentionally minimalizing atrocities committed against non-whites by the white british empire?... ...you wouldnt do that, would you?...

Originally posted by Cythraul
But even if we do deserve some kind of recompense (for the record, I believe not) then is the theft of the English peoples' homeland a reasonable price to pay?

...that ol' karma, what an odd sense of justice she's got, huh?...

Originally posted by Cythraul
The English are coming into an era where we are in a fight for our very survival.

...awww, cry me a river, baby...

Originally posted by Cythraul
Multiculturalists aren't true multiculturalists - I am!

...even though you've attempted via later posts to soften the stance stated in your op - imo, you're not anything remotely close to a multi-culturalist... at best you're an isolationist with thinly veiled seperatist supremacist notions and a penchant for fantasy...

...blame liberals all you want - totally your call... elevate genocidal maniacs or minimize their evil all you want as well - again, totally your call - but - one day they'll come for you too, honey...