With respect, I disagree with the sentiment of this article.
You critique ethno-nationalists for wanting a ‘return to the past’; essentially for wanting ethnic integrity within our historic homelands. You make this seem unreasonable, because of the scale and scope of international migration post WW2.
And I would agree that this - and the length of time spent in our countries by *some* migrant groups - is a challenge.
But I feel like you’ve accepted ongoing migration to (historically) white countries too readily. We often hear civnats saying ‘Australia was built by migrants..’ or other platitudes. And yes, there’s a grain of truth to that. But, simply because something was healthy at one point in history doesn’t mean it’s going to remain healthy in perpetuity.
An infant on the mother’s breast is healthy and appropriate. But by the time the child is older, breastfeeding becomes less healthy.. and more like an abnormal behaviour.
Greg Johnson used to say that if people moved to Western countries, they can equally move out. It might take decades. Not all will leave, and some will have integrated through intermarriage in a way that makes remigration less socially desirable.
These truths do not, to my mind, require the acceptance of our ongoing demographic replacement. We need to be imaginative. We need to be realistic. We don’t need purity spiralling *or* fatalism. And we need strategies for the short term, while we live in imperfect societies - created by a post-national financial class for its own benefit.
This reply isn’t rigorous; it is a performance of rigour, One that mistakes wordplay for weight & drapes old resentments in the garments of reason. To speak of “ethnic integrity” in historic homelands is to already concede to Sir Kenaz’s frame: the illusion that history was ever pure, static, or unmolested. Civilizations rise & fall not because they fail to police their bloodlines, but because they mistake stasis for survival. What you call “ongoing demographic Replacement” is neither new nor exceptional; it is the same churn of peoples, faiths, & forms that has buried every empire & every age, including your own (i.e. of the Faustian West & Europa).
The breastfeeding metaphor betrays the childishness at work here. This isn't analysis but regression, a clinging to infantile images to make sense of civilizational collapse. The invocation of Greg Johnson’s “they can equally move out” is equally hollow, for it imagines history as a chessboard where pawns can be moved back to their starting squares. But history isn’t reversible; it is decay, transformation, & entropy. To imagine a polite & systematic “remigration” overseen by bureaucrats in suits is to fantasize about order while ignoring the reality of disorder that underlies all endings.
A harsher truth intrudes, therefore: civilizational Time doesn’t bend back toward purity but slides forward into rot, mixture, & collapse. The “short-term strategies” on offer aren’t strategies but coping rituals, distractions from the recognition that "the game" has already been lost. There will be no return, no correction, no careful & calm reversal. There is only the long defeat, punctuated by spasms of violence, until the soil itself swallows what once called itself a people. To pretend otherwise is to mistake sentiment for steel.
With respect, I disagree with the sentiment of this article.
You critique ethno-nationalists for wanting a ‘return to the past’; essentially for wanting ethnic integrity within our historic homelands. You make this seem unreasonable, because of the scale and scope of international migration post WW2.
And I would agree that this - and the length of time spent in our countries by *some* migrant groups - is a challenge.
But I feel like you’ve accepted ongoing migration to (historically) white countries too readily. We often hear civnats saying ‘Australia was built by migrants..’ or other platitudes. And yes, there’s a grain of truth to that. But, simply because something was healthy at one point in history doesn’t mean it’s going to remain healthy in perpetuity.
An infant on the mother’s breast is healthy and appropriate. But by the time the child is older, breastfeeding becomes less healthy.. and more like an abnormal behaviour.
Greg Johnson used to say that if people moved to Western countries, they can equally move out. It might take decades. Not all will leave, and some will have integrated through intermarriage in a way that makes remigration less socially desirable.
These truths do not, to my mind, require the acceptance of our ongoing demographic replacement. We need to be imaginative. We need to be realistic. We don’t need purity spiralling *or* fatalism. And we need strategies for the short term, while we live in imperfect societies - created by a post-national financial class for its own benefit.
This reply isn’t rigorous; it is a performance of rigour, One that mistakes wordplay for weight & drapes old resentments in the garments of reason. To speak of “ethnic integrity” in historic homelands is to already concede to Sir Kenaz’s frame: the illusion that history was ever pure, static, or unmolested. Civilizations rise & fall not because they fail to police their bloodlines, but because they mistake stasis for survival. What you call “ongoing demographic Replacement” is neither new nor exceptional; it is the same churn of peoples, faiths, & forms that has buried every empire & every age, including your own (i.e. of the Faustian West & Europa).
The breastfeeding metaphor betrays the childishness at work here. This isn't analysis but regression, a clinging to infantile images to make sense of civilizational collapse. The invocation of Greg Johnson’s “they can equally move out” is equally hollow, for it imagines history as a chessboard where pawns can be moved back to their starting squares. But history isn’t reversible; it is decay, transformation, & entropy. To imagine a polite & systematic “remigration” overseen by bureaucrats in suits is to fantasize about order while ignoring the reality of disorder that underlies all endings.
A harsher truth intrudes, therefore: civilizational Time doesn’t bend back toward purity but slides forward into rot, mixture, & collapse. The “short-term strategies” on offer aren’t strategies but coping rituals, distractions from the recognition that "the game" has already been lost. There will be no return, no correction, no careful & calm reversal. There is only the long defeat, punctuated by spasms of violence, until the soil itself swallows what once called itself a people. To pretend otherwise is to mistake sentiment for steel.