The Great Replacement

Source: Infogalactic.

The Great Replacement is the original name for White Replacement Theory (WRT). I suspect that leftists made up the term WRT formulaically: “The right accuses us of CRT; well then, let us accuse the right of WRT.”

I suspect this because — as the progenitor of the topic (Renaud Camus) has said — the Great Replacement is not a concept, it is a phenomenon.

I don’t know if there is a conspiracy of global elites, deep state rulers or brown supremacists to accomplish the Great Replacement, but I do know that demographic replacement is a fact of life. The question is, How should we think about it?

My view: We should acknowledge that changing the racial/ethnic characteristics of a society must have consequences that deserve discussion. Further, we shouldn’t let big concepts (or ideology) dictate our eye-to-eye relationships.

30 thoughts on “The Great Replacement

  1. How quaint. So WRT is actually a phony left wing concept derived from French elite culture.. Goes hand in hand with the CRT lies of Paul and Adam who think my source for the definition of CRT, encyclopedia Britannica, is somehow controlled by Fox News. Rolling my eyes at the sheer stupidity of left wingers.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. How quaint?

      Replacement theory is not an invention of the left. We try to point out its pernicious impact. That is very different.

      As for your definition of CRT and the Encyclopedia Britannica that is not the problem. The problem is that you people are constantly claiming that CRT is being taught in our public schools. It is NOT. THAT claim is nonsense IF you use the EB definition. You don’t. Your understanding of CRT is so distorted that any piece of history that you people think is “divisive” becomes “CRT.”

      By the way, America does not have a monopoly on racist crackpots. Referring to Renaud Camus as representative of “French elite culture” would, I think, be offensive to most French people.

      Liked by 1 person

        1. Interesting link.

          Also interesting is that the writer is an Australian teacher. The article references the American debates on race, but it also indicates that the study of racial bias in a culture is universal. Or at least in such nations that have had a history of racial divides. Divides that may have arisen in earlier days when White supremacy was a given.

          Every immigrant group that has come here over the centuries were treated as less than equal or a threat to White, European and Christian culture. It seems the ones who have suffered the longest are the most identifiable by skin color or facial features. Add in the ones who did not assimilate because of cultural, language or religious differences.

          Intermarriage blurs the lines eventually. An O’Hara marrying a Giovanni after the initial familial suspicions fade are easily assimilated. Racial intermarriage was illegal until 1960 or so. It was a cultural prohibition as well, enforced by violence.

          To this day, Black-White couples are still rare, though less so.

          How this has been maintained for 150 years since emancipation and then still 50 years since Civil Rights legislation is both curious and perhaps indicative of a built in bias. We generally accept immigrants over time, even with huge differences in culture and religion. Yet the descendants of slaves, effectively an immigrant surge since 1965 when citizenship was granted, are still part of racial strife in a land with lofty claims about all men created equal.

          CRT may be uncomfortable and in some versions a bit lopsided, but to deny racial bias is to deny reality, in my WASP view.

          Liked by 2 people

        2. Some some obscure Australian right-wing magazine is the reason you are calling me a liar? Your source explicitly claims that it is right and ALL of the following are wrong. . .

          New York Times
          The Guardian

          There follows a lot of claims that even though CRT is NOT taught some of its tenets are. The author then lists a bunch of topics which are NOT tenets of CRT and which are not actually taught.

          Give me a break.

          Liked by 1 person

    2. I never said the Britannica was controlled by Fox News. I tried to explain that your comprehension of what you read is controlled by Fox News and the like. And also clouded by your hatred for the other.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Oh please. You always try to dismiss facts presented to you over and over by falsely claiming someone else just hates black people. I have provided you with the link to CRT in EB numerous times and only now you claim I can’t comprehend it correctly?? Laughable nonsense!! You are just trying some blanket juvenile attempt at gas lighting….again. Doesn’t work amigo, grow up.


        1. The “facts’ that I dismiss are never actually factual. As far as saying just Black people are in your list of hated individuals, I covered the gamut by using the word “other”. Again, you fail to comprehend what you read. Blind, stupid, or unable toc actaully comprehend? Which is it?

          If you have a problem with comprehending facts, that is your problem not mine.

          And your childish (AGAIN!) attack on me is proof of who the real child is in this conversation.

          Liked by 1 person

  2. What are those “consequences” deserving of discussion?

    “Further, we shouldn’t let big concepts (or ideology) dictate our eye-to-eye relationships.”
    Absolutely laudable and correct. We should all try to be civil and friendly with other people.

    But we all need to take it one step further – reject leaders, media figures and politicians who would exploit ethnic differences among people for political power or advertising dollars.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. RE: “What are those ‘consequences’ deserving of discussion?”

      I don’t have any particular consequences in mind, but a hypothetical might involve public education. A curriculum that works well for one demographic mix of races/ethnicities may not work as well for another.


      1. “A curriculum that works well for one demographic mix of races/ethnicities may not work as well for another.”

        That is not a great example.

        Public schools have always served the role of the melting pot in our society by providing a shared learning, social and athletic experience for kids from diverse backgrounds. That helps build social cohesion. Schools tailoring their offerings to favor one group over another would not serve that worthy goal.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. “Public schools have always served the role of the melting pot in our society by providing a shared learning, social and athletic experience for kids from diverse backgrounds.”

          ALWAYS? Even into the 60’s Virginia had a big issue with “massive resistance”. Yeah, ALWAYS.

          Liked by 1 person

      2. RE: “That is not a great example.”

        I chose it because there are people who claim, for example, that math is racist.

        That aside, I do not believe that “social cohesion” is a legitimate function for public schools to perform.


        1. And why is encouraging social cohesion NOT a legitimate function? Many people trace the beginning of our current divisions the rise of “Christian Nationalism” to the white flight from public schools after Brown V BOE.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. RE: “And why is encouraging social cohesion NOT a legitimate function?”

            I’m fine with encouraging. I’m not fine with creating. The mission of schools is to educate, not indoctrinate.


          2. Now you are making a distinction without a difference.

            The United States of America is almost unique in the world in the way that we try to have a nation of patriotic citizens that is NOT based on any one race, ethnicity, or culture. Public schools have played a vital role in achieving that. Whether they “encourage” or “create” social cohesion, it is an important and legitimate function, IMHO.

            Liked by 1 person

        2. “That aside, I do not believe that “social cohesion” is a legitimate function for public schools to perform”

          Sounds like, a new version of “separate, but equal” is what you are advocating for.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. RE: “Sounds like, a new version of ‘separate, but equal’ is what you are advocating for.”

            Not necessarily. I wrote, “A curriculum that works well for one demographic mix of races/ethnicities may not work as well for another.” I had in mind that the demographics of the student population in a given school may change over time such that curricular adjustments might favor better academic outcomes.


          2. I was CLEARLY referring to your “social cohesion” statement. And it still sounds like ‘separate, but equal”. Talking about whether a curriculum works for one demographic but not another is odd, in my view.

            Using my own personal experiences in a public high school in NW PA, I can honestly say that pretty much ALL demographic categories were present. Rich, poor, Black white, Asian, Catholic/Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist were all part of the community of that school. All were given the same opportunities, but there were advanced classes for those ready for them (Advanced Placement and Honors) as well as general studies. All were given the opportunity to shine and perform to the best of their abilities.

            As times change, the demographics for the school remained the same. However, curriculum development to better suit ALL students came to be.

            Another example of “social cohesion” can be found in the military. The mix of young men and women volunteering come from all parts of society. All of those diverse individuals come to understand the necessities of working with people who are, in some cases, quite different from them or any one the grew up with or around.

            Liked by 1 person

          3. RE: “I was CLEARLY referring to your ‘social cohesion’ statement.”

            Not clearly enough, obviously.


  3. That the US is experiencing a demographic shift is not in question. Declining birth rates are a result of greater rights and options for women (recent news notwithstanding). You see it in all developed countries. Where it gets sticky is when savvy opportunists or simply bigots present it as “replacement” and start making a political movement out of it. That’s how you get a dangerous fascist movement.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. In a country that was founded by immigrants, populated by immigrants, built by immigrants and sustained by immigrants, a movement for some kind of “purity” based on European chauvinism is a bit strange, ridiculous and downright ugly.

      But here we are. Gangs on standby for a one term, disgraced president, a major political party holding a conference in an autocratic country, still recounting an election from 18 months ago because of nonsensical conspiracies and investigating an attack on the Capitol by thousands of cult members.

      Alice and the Tea Party redux.

      Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s