The Great Replacement: An Introductory Course

When I started watching the first of the two videos below, I thought of titling this post “Counterjihad 101”. However, these clips are about so much more than the jihad — they address the instrumentalization of Islamic Jihad in the service of the destruction of traditional Western nation-states. We (and by “we”, I mean all Europeans and the descendants of the European diaspora) are being intentionally subjected to an invasion from the (mostly Muslim) Third World, which will replace us, or dilute us through miscegenation (such a politically incorrect word!) so that we will no longer exist as distinct peoples.

When I encountered the second video, however, I realized how well it dovetails with the first, even though it approaches the topic from a very different angle.

I invite you to watch both of them, and see how they arrive at such similar conclusions from their different perspectives.

N.B.: I don’t know anything about the Scandza Forum, but I assume — based upon some of the people who support it, and the sufferers from the Screaming Nazi Heeber-Jeebers who decry it — that some of the organizers and speakers are “white nationalists” who believe doubleplus ungood things. But I don’t care — what the speaker featured here says is right on the money. I don’t disagree with anything he says.

The first video was recorded when Rasmus Paludan, the founder and leader of the Stram Kurs (Hard Line) party in Denmark, visited Washington DC last month. He interviewed Maj. (ret.) Stephen Coughlin, the author of Catastrophic Failure: Blindfolding America in the Face of Jihad, about what is happening now in Europe and the USA:

The process of settlement is a “Civilization-Jihadist Process” with all the word means. The Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and “sabotaging” its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.Explanatory Memorandum of the Muslim Brotherhood, 1991

Both men agree that the Jihad is being exploited by the Powers That Be to enforce the Narrative and deconstruct the native populations of Western nations. The discussion presents a useful compare-and-contrast between what is happening in the USA and what is happening in Denmark:

The second video, also recorded last month, shows Mark Collett speaking at the Scandza Forum in Copenhagen:

Beginning from their disparate points of view, all three men arrive at exactly the same place.

Hat tips: For Coughlin-Paludan, Vlad Tepes; for Scandza, WRSA.

16 thoughts on “The Great Replacement: An Introductory Course

  1. The worst part is knowing too much, so I am not really surprised.

    Watched the first video, and in knowing Stephen Coughlin, always enjoyed how he puts things very rationally.
    Some great principles easily explained, and how we in a way we must also seek and master the ways to be very rational in the push back.

    Good to see the examples and the steadiness in explaining the connections.

    The 2nd video, is bringing the terms that I know and how they are used, sort of subconsciously know, and he articulates so sharpening the definitions.

    Knowledge like this, then also allows one to more clearly explain to others, and importantly, to counter point bureaucracies, politicians, academia, media, not that I am into all of that, but that counter understanding deepens discussions with others.

    Only thing is, so many things to take aboard, into one’s very being, and the feeling of so little time. Still it means that we can take a stand when and where need be.
    Things may not be as fast as WW2, but bear in mind it took a few years before it became the “end of the beginning and the beginning of the end” to eventual part triumph.

    Thanks Baron. Also enjoyed your “Brazil Portugese guy” interview and the series of Rasmus interviews.

  2. Let me take the tact of responding to the Coughlin interview first, and the Collett talk in a separate comment.

    Coughlin said the purpose of the leaders who brought in hoards of Muslims was exactly to destroy the Western civilization. I think this is correct: when the first waves of migrants came in around 2015, the excuse could be made they leaders were genuinely expecting the refugees to be grateful and to eventually assimilate. The evidence is absolutely in by now: the refugees are crime-ridden, disruptive, and lethal to any sort of ordered society. The response of the leaders is to prosecute anyone who notices this fact publicly. The fact that they continued massive immigration and clamp down on any factual observations absolutely proves they intended the consequences.

    This raises two related but separate questions:
    1) Why does the leadership hold the objective of destroying Western civilization;
    2) Why is the leadership willing to partner with the Muslims, which will carry them to the goal of destroying civilization much faster, but which will inevitably destroy the leaders? The Muslims will absolutely not share power, and that’s obvious.

    The answer to the first question is that the advocates of the destruction of Western civilization are not simply destroyers. They are Utopians, who have an end-of-days vision for the world, and who see established society and its traditions and laws as a barrier to establishing the millennial vision.

    Several months ago on Gates of Vienna, we had an exchange on cultural Marxism as embodied in the Frankfurt School. The School was founded by Marxists who expected the workers to flock to Marxism after the horrors of World War I. The failure of their expectation led them to conclude that it was the culture and society of the nations that kept the workers from turning wholesale to Marxism. Therefore, before the Marxist vision could be implemented, it was necessary to destroy the root of the resistance: culture, traditions and the feelings of identification with a particular group, religion, or society.

    Given the Marxist commitment of the European, and Canadian, leaders, it is not at all surprising they would be acting to destroy the culture and society of their countries.

    The second question is more difficult. The leaders wholeheartedly accept the help of Muslims, although the leaders must realize the Muslims will kill them once the country and its legal and political structures are destroyed. The only principle I can think of is the concept of altruism, as developed by Ayn Rand, specifically in her magnum opus “Atlas Shrugged”. Altruism, as Rand defined it, was the compulsion to interfere with the lives of others in a way you rationalize as beneficial to them, at the cost of your own well-being. In other words, the altruist will help you whether or not you want him to, and even if it destroys the altruist in the process.

    The altruist sees nothing wrong in accumulating wealth and power on the road to destroying his beneficiaries and himself.

    What can be done about the tsunami of destruction? It seems to me the most potent action people can take is to maintain and strengthen their social and cultural ties, specifically, an actual network of trusted people and relationships. During the Obama administration, working-class whites (and not so white) responded to black crime by moving to suburbs. The Obama Justice Department then required any housing developments in suburbs to provide low-cost, subsidized (black and immigrant) housing. They were not about to allow people to define their own surroundings.

    In the current news, you can see in real time, the hysteria associated with even the slightest trace of white identity. Not white supremacism, or exclusion of non-whites, but only the mention of white identity. The impetus behind the hysteria is the push to prevent people from forming any stable social bonds.

    So, a long term approach is to plot ways of increasing social bonds and allowing people to control their associations. The most “woke” person in the world, acting alone, will not be able to affect events. Conversely, publicizing this sort of organizing and making “in your face” gestures will simply get the authorities down on you. The idea is to walk away from, rather than towards, open confrontations with the Marxists and the Muslims.

    I can give a lot of references and links to a lot of videos supporting my points, but I choose to write a comment rather than a dissertation. I can provide more if someone wants to engage further on that.

  3. I couldn’t get into the first video. Rasmus is far too smart for Coughlin, or perhaps I should say that Coughlin is not smart enough to follow Rasmus’ line of thought. It was laborious.

    • And Muslims are extremely aggressive about their plans. You should see some of the tweets I get. “We’re here, and there’s nothing you can do about it” and that sort of thing. They’re being VERY explicit about their goals.

  4. Alright. I watched the whole thing and it was worth it. (Don’t bother posting my previous reply.)
    The most interesting thing for me was the point that “hate speech” laws prosecute what you think, and more specifically, what others have interpreted you to have said. Coughlin also makes the best case yet for why this is happening–to make us subjects rather than citizens.

    • The second video which I only just finished viewing was positively riveting. Collett is a great orator, and his speech, though simple on the surface, was quite profound.

Comments are closed.