The Mechanics of Population Exchange

The following essay by Christian Zeitz and Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff was originally written in German, and has been kindly translated into English by JLH.

The Mechanics of Population Exchange

by Christian Zeitz and Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

By and large, public discussions about the background and causes of the so-called refugee crisis in Europe have awakened false perceptions. Even before the great onrush of so-called refugees the summer of 2015, there was the idea that Europe could be duty-bound to open all borders uncontrolled and grant mass immigrants an unrestricted claim to European hospitality — the minorities program of left-extremists of the “No borders” and “Refugees welcome” faction. Powerful, virtually physical pressure was created by dramatic pictures of desperate families at border fences and doomed passengers in overfilled rubber rafts, and this caused a psychic tipping in much of the population. In a frantic blend of sympathy and fear at the uncontrollable, actual and potential violence of fast-approaching immigrant armies, the majority population began reluctantly to accept the lasting residency and need for support of great masses of culture-alien immigrants.

After the first long while and the attempts by states to create the structures and wherewithal of so-called integration, the situation took on an initial appearance of normality. The mood of the people of Germany and Austria began to change when phenomena that had long been warned against became valid for the public on New Year’s Eve, 2015-2016. Rapes and other sexual assaults, enormous financial expenditures for first responders, permanent accommodations and attempts at so-called integration were from this time on not forbidden topics. After the original, publicly-regulated helpful hands euphoria, reactions from skepticism to rejection began to spread in social discourse. With every media report of sexual attacks, crimes concerning property and actions democratizing a lack of desire to integrate, passive resistance began to form in much of the population. Doubt about the general manageability articulated at first by such politicians as are called in public discourse “xenophobes” and “racists” began in the second half of 2016 to become a common public tendency.

Although the relevant studies and analyses during the crisis and up to date proceed on the assumption that the number of those wanting to emigrate from the African continent and the Near East is in the area of the upper double-digit millions, the stream of refugees has seemed to decrease markedly at this time. In the meantime, political discourse in Europe with regard to new arrivals is almost exclusively of “family reunification.” So has the refugee crisis been handled? Can this discussion politically return to the accustomed agenda? The facts say otherwise.

From the point of view of European elites, 2017 was a pivotal year. And a hurdle that absolutely had to be cleared. Decisive elections could have had the potential of drastically changing the political landscape: Holland, France, Germany, Austria — the political resistance was well positioned and posed a great danger to the protagonists of the “welcoming culture.” The elites’ language and political marketing had to adapt to this danger. Accordingly, it became acceptable to entertain ideas of limiting immigration, for security and defense of national boundaries, and requiring the acquisition of Western cultural standards by the welcomed “new citizens.” All the campaigns in the above-mentioned countries were characterized by placation, supposed self-criticism and involvement in the “justified fears” of the populace. And all of these campaigns had succeeded with these ideas.

Now that supposed normality seems to have found its way back into the political reality of European countries, the elites can get back to work on their long-term plans undisturbed. What are these plans? Answering this question requires an explanation of the apparent contradiction between the claims of the mass phenomena of millions of willing immigrants and the present slackening of the actual flow of immigrants. The only logical explanation for this phenomenon is that the political elites themselves are able to open and close the floodgates more or less as they please. This accords completely with the general statements of the elites’ representatives. Migration [they say] is in general unavoidable, unless its causes are eliminated. Causes listed are a multitude of universal problems, which are described in public discourse as downright apocalyptic: permanent martial conflicts and other violent crises, impoverishment, lack of means to earn a living, mass unemployment, cultural regression, universal injustice and the effects of climate change. On the other side of the scale, it is constantly maintained that an influx of workers to European societies threatened with extinction is absolutely necessary.

“Migration is without any alternative; it’s smart to manage it,” is the title of the programmatic article which multi-millionaire and “global philanthropist” George Soros professed as a guiding maxim in the summer of 2016. The thrust of his thinking converges exactly with the concepts of the operators of a European superstate. They are aware that reaching their goal of a “United States of Europe” means no more national borders and replacement of the national states by a pan-European people. Replacement of peoples, a multicultural society and the goals of a globalized world in which a limited number of players make this planet’s decisions are complementary elements of the same agenda. This agenda is the one the elites are applying to the pressure points in the flooding of Europe by culturally alien multitudes.

(Click to enlarge)

This analysis does not contradict the fact that Islam and its violent, expansionist claim represent a unique force. All connoisseurs of the Islamic teachings know that “emigration” is a variation of jihad, and under certain conditions a duty for Muslims. So it is not surprising that the two driving forces of massive folk migration and the resultant replacement of peoples — Islam and culturally socialist globalism — work together so effectively and converge tactically on the political plane.

32 thoughts on “The Mechanics of Population Exchange

  1. I doubt the Eloi can be saved by their elite leaders. Social breakdown and a bloodbath is more likely.

    • The elite leaders don’t want to save the Eloi, do they? They want to replace us. They are working, to put it simply, against us, and we are not – not en masse, anyway – resisting.

      • you are multiplying entities beyond necessity.

        Western elites are, in present, dominated by instinctive nihilist oligarchy class.

        when it is merged with government and big business corruption and violent mafia within police and beyond, – that will degenerate into fascism.

        add imperial obsession, will get something like Russia.
        add Corbyn, will get Venezuela.
        add Islam, will get something like Pakistan.

        either is bad.
        but elites themselves are passive, they simply wait which type of totalitarian ideology will dominate.

        the only solution is to support the political/social movement that would defend
        – individual freedoms,
        – unity of law,
        – separation of powers,
        – government transparency,
        – fair political choice/procedures, and
        – secularism

        the major agenda of such party should be – to “de-postmodernize” and eventually re-humanize/re-democratize elites.
        not hopeless, I believe.

        • Secularism is one of the tactics used by the elites to break down social barriers to mass integration (after all, every culture is important and meaningful). Societies need founding ethos on which they are built. Depending on belief, those same ethos determine how functional those societies are. Pick your poison, the time has come for you to choose.

          • secularism as a component of that “founding ethos”, what is the problem?

            “globalism” is hard to implement in practice, but I don’t care. if it opposes Islam, totalitarianism, and archaics, – I am for such globalism.

      • I have trouble accepting this argument – and I despise the ‘elite’ as much as anyone else does – because were this population replacement to succeed, there would be no-one left to fix the elite’s (for example) central heating.

  2. This article talks of elites and “culturally socialist globalism” (what is this apart from an undefined pejorative?) instead of ruling classes and economic growth/profit.

    Is this because the authors have a great faith in capitalism as such, avoiding any “communistic” mention of “class” in favour of “elite”, preferring Capital however to respect races and borders as time goes by and profits fall as markets dwindle? It seems so.

    So, as often with Alt Right analyses it is short on economics and long on culture, and it fails to address:

    1.why the same mendacious EU and US media that preach compassion and empathy to “refugees” warmonger 24/7/365 against Russia and China cf. Russiagate, with their growing and potentially fissiparous Muslim populations, often on the same news page. Now why is that?
    2. why the “elites” have been describing ageing populations in the EU for years and how they intend to remedy them. The article does not contain the word demography or demographic.
    3. the degree to which EU decisionmakers are acting in what they see as EU interests or the degree in which they are conscious and/or paid-off traitors to the benefit of US foreign policy. Paul Craig Roberts, high US Treasury official under Reagan, writes he has verbal evidence of the latter dating back to 1960.

      • @AY: alright, call economics political economy instead, it doesn’t bother me.

        Before 1900 or so nobody split economics from politics in the way it is currently done so as to persuade us it is an “objective science” , so you are correct to that extent.

        But logistics is a means to an end, hence a tool, and not an end.

        And what is “instinctive” about nihilism and why and what is the difference between elite and oligarchy according to you?

        You drop the definite article in English as many Russians do, but imply that Russia is imperially obsessed? how does that add up?

        Because like Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov said, I apologise to the USA for having my country so close to all its military bases.

        • “elite” implies intellectual/moral leadership.
          “oligarchy” is simply high caste on power ladder.

          by citing old horse Lavrov, you demonstrate the very same imperial paranoia.
          s it from RT?

          American bases are there not to endanger Russia but to preserve security of naval trade communications, to keep world order – in particular, to fill supermarkets near your place, by this god-blessed cheap stuff.
          otherwise, you will need to make it all yourself… but we do prefer it to be made by some unnamed Chinese children far away, right? 🙂

  3. Delectable Lie: a liberal repudiation of multiculturalism – Second Edition, by Salim Mansur

    “My point is that although multiculturalism once seemed a very good idea, at least to politicians and others smitten with the ambition for unity, it is increasingly shown to be a lie ─ a delectable lie, perhaps, yet a lie nevertheless ─ that is destructive of the West’s liberal democratic heritage, tradition, and values based on individual rights and freedoms. This could have been foretold, as indeed those philosophers and historians of ideas who viewed freedom as immeasurably more important than equality in the development of the West did foretell. They admonished people against the temptation to abridge freedom in pursuit of equality.”

    Well worth going to the link and reading the rest of the comment

    • To give a bit more background Mansur.
      From the reviews and interviews section.

      “In an age of ideological conformity such as ours, it takes courage to speak against the prevailing orthodoxy. This is a courageous book. Professor Mansur exposes how multiculturalism corrodes the values and traditions that sustain Canada as a liberal democratic order. The result is a book to galvanize Canadians against the apostles of extremist progressivism.”

      Robert Sibley, Ottawa Citizen and adjunct professor in political science at Carleton University

      There are a number of reviews that cut to the chase.

      Then there are the amazon 4 -5* reviews

    • Explains the duty of ‘cultural jihad’.

      Modern Day Trojan Horse: Al-Hijra, the Islamic Doctrine of Immigration, Accepting Freedom or Imposing Islam?
      by Sam Solomon (Author),‎ E. Al Maqdisi (Author),
      “The first fundamental principle for the creation of a successfully visible Islamic society is to be separate and distinct..”

      Some good back ground in the reviews in understanding the muslims duties in immigration.

    • Absolutely amazing policy diversity wonk

      focused on analyzing the experiences of stigmatized groups and how the environments in which they live are feeding their responses to the ethnoracial exclusion they encounter. So the place of diversity in my work would be to consider how cultural repertoires that sustain diversity – whether multiculturalist repertoires or republican repertoires – enable some responses more than others. And I’m interested in power relationships and status differences between groups. Perhaps I would focus less on diversity than on unequal positions or closure, which I would approach through the Blumerian concept of “sense of group positioning”. Because I am primarily a sociologist of inequality, my own interests would be to look at how various experiences of inequality are found in culturally differentiated populations. The questions I would be asking would concern not only perceived relative status, but also how people understand similarities and differences between groups with the focus on, for instance, symbolic and moral boundaries.

      Yet the effect of the Max Planck Institute for the Study of Religious and Ethnic Diversity goes around the world.


      Diversity is not enough.! !
      Spoonley’s “keep the doors open” message in New Zealand, describes Spoonley as a distinguished professor, and also as an immigration expert. Massey University Professor Spoonley, “pro vice-chancellor – College of Humanities and Social Sciences.”

      “In ways that were hard to predict, we have become not just diverse, but “superdiverse” .
      Nice word but what it does mean?

      Superdiversity is a term coined by a friend of mine, Steve Vertovec​, who is a director at the Max Planck Institute in Germany, to signal countries and especially cities that exceeded a threshold of 25 per cent of a population from minority, ethnic and immigrant communities.”

      [The full title of the German institute Spoonley refers to is: the Max Planck Institute for the Study of Religious and Ethnic Diversity. Spoonley is a senior visiting fellow at the institute. Could Spoonley’s views on multiculturism have similar origins to Frau Merkel’s? ]

      That 25% diversity can be hidden as it does not cover the ones born in the country, after settlement.

      So we have much to look forward to, super diverse, and yet their is no discussion with in a countries own population. No debate, no election, no mandate, yet it is done, and even further unspecified goals. No discussion about health, housing, education, funding, social welfare, etc.
      Scientists gone mad with their guinea pigs. ! !

      • Sorry I missed the NZ Spoonley “superdiversity” link.
        New Zealand has pushed through [25%] that. In Auckland, it goes up to 39 per cent. Include the children of immigrants and Auckland is at an amazing 56 per cent………
        [Akl]just behind Toronto, which is the popular example of a diverse city. The top two are Dubai and Brussels, because of large temporary workforces. [I do not think the many in Brussels, see themselves as temporary]…..

        …..Australia, Canada and New Zealand normally set immigration targets at 1 per cent of the population, but New Zealand is at 1.6 per cent now and Canada and Australia are not even reaching 1 per cent…..
        …..are big numbers and we should be having a proper, grown-up discussion about immigration levels and diversity……
        …..[missed opportunity] to talk deeply about our identity and multiculturalism. Spoonley agrees with that.

        “We’re a very different country now and I’m not sure many of us know how best to express that country.” [Is he saying it is too late? and is secretly pleased with that?]

        These mad scientists do not even know what the ingredients are that they are mixing into a brew.! !

  4. Deport,,deport, all this savages, just look at this picture, , make me sick , this coming to Europe living from our tax money , ..

      • I want to vomit. As a white female this is anathema to me. Where have decency, morals, loyalty to one’s ingroup and common restraint gone. I am disgusted and outraged. What a despicable example of womanhood. Am not that old, btw. Was raised by a grandmother who instilled values in me.

      • So without speculating on the living arrangement I have to wonder about something. The lady is serving chicken sausage and is forgoing her Christmas wine but they are all celebrating Christmas. I suppose they could participate in Christmas with their own beliefs. I bet Easter is a different story.

  5. How any sane person could “revert” to Islam beats me? There is nothing graceful or gracious about it: inhuman primitive and base. A real world manifestation of BORG. Chthonic.

    • Islam is the ideal mechanism to reject humanity in the Middle Ages.

      Whenever a big slaughter comes, the humanitarian and pacifist mood of the majority is powerless against the puppeteers.
      We live in an artificial world, tovarisch )

  6. When push comes to shove, we’re as much in the fog at the European leaders/elites as we ever were.

    We can talk about multiculturalism, replacing the aging population with fresh, young Middle East and sub-Saharan African and Pakistani stock, but even a rudimentary knowledge of biology and history will show that to be unworkable. The elite have a vested interest in the structures and systems that keep them wealthy and powerful, and the mass migrations will totally destroy those structures and systems.

    Even the Saudis, the quintessential top-down system of wealth and privilege, is now literally shaking down its wealthy elite.

    This article argues the European elites are intelligent enough and cognizant enough that they consciously manipulate the flow of refugees, slowing them up when the pressure is temporarily too great. But, I wonder why elites of great power and wealth would deliberately throw themselves into a system which will likely destroy them. I have no answer, except to observe that all speculation on the motives of the traitor elites is likely wrong and not useful. However, their actions are quite clear, and can serve as a basis for resistance, if the population is so inclined.

    • I believe Juri Bezmenov has quite the answers you are looking for: Useful idiots are useful only up to a certain point, then they are killed: All of them. The reasons being one: They know too much, and two: They are useful only for the destabilisation process. They are not particularly useful once you start building ‘the glorious communist future’.

      Juri said the useful idiots realize they’ve been had only too late in the process.

    • “..all speculation on the motives of the traitor elites is likely wrong and not useful..”

      I agree with that.
      behavior of elites is contradictory, – they are in reaction mode all the time.
      partly that is because postmodernism is convenient to justify inaction.
      partly, just bad luck with leaders.

      at least two recent developments are encouraging – Kurz in Austria and people in USA who are behind (some of the) Trump’s activity.

    • No. I don’t think it was published anywhere. As far as I know, it was just written and then sent to us for translation.

  7. The great migration and population replacement of Europe has a few serious flaws.

    Most of the gimmiegrants that have arrived in Europe are not only unemployable, except the most menial of jobs. Those menial jobs will be soon done by robotics. Also, the people that engineered this migration/disaster didn’t factor in that the IQ of most sub-Saharan Africans. So these people score around 68 points; we would call that retarded.

    Therefore these migrants are not going to contribute to any country they end up in. They will be on welfare all their lives. The ever-shrinking number of productive people (taxpayers) in Europe along with the high birth rates of the migrants means that demographically, economies will collapse as the welfare bill takes all of the GDP of a country. Once this happens there will be a brutal civilian war as the embittered and beaten-down taxpayers will figure they have nothing left to lose.

    If the population does end up being replaced and there is a ‘white genocide’ all the skills, innovations, and inventions that have advanced our societies will be lost. They cannot be brought back.

    People may say that the Chinese will carry on with the inventions etc… But there has not been a huge number of inventors from China in the past 200 years or more. They are not innovators as such, they are very good at copying things as are the Indians and the Japanese.

    For these so-called Elites who will be small in number, they will never be able to control the muslim populations, if they stay on the path of Islamizing of the West. AKA as jihad.

    If there is such a plot to replace the populations of Europe and the West, then they will wilfully destroy Western civilsation. And this ends up being a cosmic comedy of errors by the politicians over the past 30 years who are only focused on the short-term
    gains (for themselves). Then it is time to for the electorate to put up candidates with integrity (be a change wouldn’t it). Either way, I am not feeling that optimistic about the future of Western civilization.

  8. Practically speaking, the present polices are/will have the effect of brain drain of like countries of Germany. They will emigrate, as has happened.

Comments are closed.