I recently came across an article by the professional anti-racist Tim Wise (half-Jewish), who has made a lucrative career for himself through a lifetime of blaming Whites for the problems of people of color. I wanted however to salute him for a suggestion of his in a recent article.
The article discusses the causes of the Great Replacement – a term coined by the French identitarian writer Renaud Camus and which has since become well-known worldwide. Wise is honest enough to distinguish between two meanings of the Great Replacement. The first concerns the reality of demographic change in Western societies, with historically unprecedented decline of the White populations to minorityhood:
It is a theory central to white nationalist thinking in the modern era, which holds that non-whites and Muslims are reproducing at rates that will, along with immigration, eventually overrun white, Christian societies.
I add that Western identitarians oppose immigration and are concerned about non-European births for the same reasons Israeli patriots oppose non-Jewish immigration and are trying (increasingly successfully) to outbreed the native Arabs.
The second possible meaning of the Great Replacement entails intent:
This same thinking, which often dovetails with the theory that there is a conspiracy to “genocide” whites, orchestrated by Jews and other “globalists,” has been cited by white supremacists around the world in various forms. It was the basis for the chants of “You will not replace us,” and “Jews will not replace us,” which featured prominently in the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville in August 2017.
The question of intent is more complex and debatable than that of sociological change and I do not want to get into that here (on which, I invite the reader to consult the works of Kevin MacDonald or simply consult the positions on immigration of any major “antiracist” lobby group).
Wise then reaches out to the Alt-Right by proposing a solution to reduce non-White birth rates (his bolding):
Of course, what is most ironic about white nationalist paranoia concerning the “Great Replacement” is that the differential birth rates between women of color and whites, which they find so calamitous, are entirely a function of the very inequalities the far-right demands be kept in place. How? Simple: birth rates are driven principally by educational levels for women. . . .
Meaning, if the right is so worried about “replacement” due to birth rates, there is a simple answer: a massive investment in opportunities for women of color for schooling and jobs, globally.
Wise emphasizes: “It’s the birthrates, it’s the birthrates, it’s the birthrates.” In this, Wise is dead right. Is he aware of what Steve Sailer has called “The World’s Most Important Graph,” the United Nations’ demographic projections which predict Africa’s population will explode to over 4 billion this century? Certainly, French President Emmanuel Macron seems aware of this reality, repeatedly arguing that African women must massively reduce their fertility, otherwise Europe’s “migration crisis” will never become manageable.
Wise’s presentation of the situation is obviously very one-sided and partial. In fact, if Western nations gad simply had governments which wished to maintain the local ethnic/racial majority – as the Israeli government does, working to maintain a permanent Jewish majority – then this would have been easy to achieve, regardless of people of color’s relative poverty or birth rates.
Having said that, the most basic means we have to reduce demographic pressures weighing on the Western world is indeed through the kinds of measures Wise prescribes: mass female education (family planning), contraception, and easy access to abortion throughout the Third World and above all Sub-Saharan Africa, whose demographic transition is catastrophically lagging relative to the rest of the world.
Whether simple enrichment would solve the issue, as Wise claims, seems questionable. After all, the migrants tend not to come from the poorest countries, but from middle-income nations where people have the means to come into contact with the West and intimately realize how poor they are in comparison.
Within the West, there is only a partial correlation between poverty and fertility. In America, Blacks are significantly poorer than Hispanics, but their fertility rate is lower than Hispanics and only slightly higher than non-Hispanic Whites. (Blacks indeed have made no economic progress relative to other racial groups, despite decades of haranguing and attempted social-engineering by the federal government, influential institutions, and well-remunerated professional activists like Tim Wise).
The abandonment of adaptive Third-World traditional values, which typically favor patriarchy and large families, seems more important than economic wealth as such.
Wise then goes on to argue that the “far-right” would never be willing to promote education and redistribution to women of color, because the far-right is too attached to its wealth and privilege. This may, in a sense, be true for the Big Business “right” represented by Donald Trump and Jair Bolsonaro. But this strikes me as wildly out of touch concerning both the fascist and/or racialist Old Right, which often had real spiritual and ecological sensibilities, and the new generation of identitarians. Put simply, the far-right rejects purely economic materialist motives. Personally, I would be more than willing for Westerners to pay higher taxes or live more frugal lives, if this were necessary to preserve our nations’ ethnic, cultural, and genetic identities.
It’s not about demographic numbers, because that part could be addressed by producing greater equality. Inequality is what drives the very phenomenon they now fear. But they can’t give up inequality because they are dependent on it for their own sense of importance. Inequality of opportunity is the only thing that allows them to remain on top, and they know it. Forced to compete fairly and equitably against people of color and women of all colors, they realize they would often lose, so they prefer to rig the game.
The idea that “inequality of opportunity” is keeping Whites at the top of society strikes me as completely outdated and Wise really must know this. The truth is that Western societies are, if anything, those the most open to talent and energy, whatever one’s origins. Israel’s high-bourgeoisie is not full of gentiles, nor is Japan’s full of non-Japanese, but you’ll find Western societies’ highest economic elites have plenty of Jews and non-Whites, especially Asians.
Concerning the United States, one finds that Indians, East Asians, and Jews all significantly out-earn White gentiles. In the Ivy Leagues, as Ron Unz as very usefully documented, Jews and Asians are over-represented (Jews massively so) while White gentiles are massively under-represented.
Wise concludes his article with a threat:
They want power at the expense of everyone who isn’t white and male, and they are willing to use force, violence, and authoritarian means to maintain it.
We must commit to using our voices and the power of our global majority to deny it to them. Permanently.
What, exactly, does Tim Wise mean by this? How could the threat of White Male Authoritarianism be “permanently” solved? I bite my tongue, I do not wish to indulge in “conspiracy theories” . . .