Subj : Great Replacement Theory
To   : Boraxman
From : Kaelon
Date : Sun May 29 2022 18:11:35

  Re: Great Replacement Theory
  By: Boraxman to Kaelon on Sun May 29 2022 04:52 pm

 > Agreed, and we are still yet to come to terms with the blowback.  The ruling
 > classes need for power, expansion and prestige in the long run seems zero
 > sum. Thank you for the recommendation, and despite my objections against a
 > system of one one free flow of people, that doesn't also come with a
 > blindness to problems that "we" have created, and the follies and blowback
 > from our own (speaking for the modern Wests here), misadventures and crimes.
 > There are many on the right who want to shut down any recognition or
 > reconciliation, which is not something I subscribe to.  While I personally
 > (and most others) are not personally guilty, we need to acknowledge the
 > flaws in our own systems, which still exist to a large degree.  We are STILL
 > imperialistic and supremacist, still plundering the 'global south', but
 > doing it in a different manner so we can pretend we are no longer racist or
 > unenlightened.

I think that if you are proposing creating a new state, one organized around racial principles, you have to contend with the very "recognition and reconciliation" that you cite that many on the Right are unwilling to contend with.  Without this, much of what you aspire to create - a mono-racial or mono-cultural state - is reliant upon the moral rights of the people who have been exploited to create it (such as the aboriginal peoples of Australia).  There is also the inconvenient truth that, both culturally and racially, virtually all peoples in the world are now diverse, and so, you would be imprinting some sort of new or fictitious identity.  This is not without complication, or eventual exposure.

 > But, this reckoning should not come at a demographic costs.  Such costs are
 > permanent, long lasting and punitive on future generations, and unlike many
 > who wax lyrical about a future "mixed" world, I think such fantasies are
 > folly, and mostly deleterious.  It is one thing to ask a people to
 > rightfully compensate those who have been wronged, but I beleive, quite
 > firmly, that the primary motives for demographic change are 1) exploitation
 > of the population as "human capital" and 2) a desire for revenge, or "an eye
 > for an eye".

I would agree that migration policies stem from the need for demographic change, but I disagree that there is some sort of grand racialist conspiracy the likes of which "Great Replacement" theory (a la Renaud and the like) is at work here.  It's far simpler: countries, as modern nation-states, succeed or fail largely due to geopolitical factors, namely, the land on which people inhabit, and the people themselves.  It comes down to raw resources and sheer numbers.  The Third Reich might have triumphed in the Second World War, had it not been vastly outnumbered by the Soviet Russians, who were able to sacrifice over 100 million people to defeat them.  It is also for this very reason why countries like Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Denmark, have no valid recourse given their limited geopolitical constraints, other than to be the pawns of greater powers.

_____
-=: Kaelon :=-

---
 þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

.