Replacement Immigration. Part Two: The Colonisation of the UK

By Simon Elmer

4. Debunking Reality

The management of the response to the Southport murders I looked at in Part One of this article, largely by the same political organisations and media companies that turned the vote of 20 percent of the UK electorate into the extremist government of Keir Starmer, is not the only way in which resistance to the United Nations policy of ‘Replacement Migration’ published in 2000 is being managed in the UK. In March 2024, Volker Turk,  the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, described the Great Replacement as a ‘conspiracy theory’, as ‘delusional’, as ‘racist’, as a ‘war on woke’, a ‘war on inclusion’ and — setting the template for Starmer’s persecution of the British people opposing its enforcement — as directly influencing ‘perpetrators of violence’. This is the sort of rhetoric we’re used to hearing from middle-class students on Socialist Workers Party-organised demonstrations holding pre-fabricated placards proclaiming ‘Refugees welcome’. That it is being repeated by such a senior jurist at the United Nations is an indicator of how forcefully the globalists flooding our country with millions of immigrants from non-European countries want to crush any resistance.

But these accusations — they don’t deserve the description of arguments — are arrived at by more discursive procedures in the universities from which so many of the acolytes of woke are drawn, and in which they are indoctrinated into compliance with the policies and programmes of the globalists who, for this reason and others we saw most clearly manifested under lockdown, invest millions in UK universities and other institutions of higher learning. If international financial institutions, development banks and multinational corporations capitalise the movement of immigrants from country to country to meet global supply chains, and transnational technocracies of world government like the UN, EC and WEF create the policies that override the sovereignty of nation states over their own borders, academia has no less a role to play in indoctrinating the populations of the host nations into embracing replacement immigration, and they do so, primarily, by denying its existence.

There’s a noticeable consistency in how the denunciations of what is homogenised as a single theory called the ‘Great Replacement’ on the websites of campaign groups, newspapers, universities, journals, the British Broadcasting Corporation and the United Nations go about reducing it to a conspiracy theory of far-Right White nationalists and racists, with whom anyone opposed to mass immigration in any degree or for any reason is immediately equated. To do so, they all employ practices of critical theory widely but inaccurately called ‘postmodernism’, which takes, as the object of its knowledge, not the events that historical records claim to document but, instead, the discursive procedures and institutional frameworks within which those histories are written. With specific reference to the work of the French philosopher and historian of ideas, Michel Foucault, this has come to be called, largely through the appropriation and dumbing down of his work in US academia, ‘discourse theory’. The basic premise of this Americanised interpretation of French critical thought is that our perception of reality is a product of power, and that reality, therefore, can be refashioned through challenging, overthrowing and replacing the discursive structures and institutional frameworks through which power is given legitimacy and agency.

This is only a brief summary of an immensely complex body of thought and the history of its appropriation, but one of its least expected outcomes is that procedures of critical analysis have been turned into the tools of an Orwellian thought-police trained in our institutions of higher learning and employed in our educational, cultural, entertainment and propaganda industries. Much like the Red Guards of the Chinese Cultural Revolution, these youthful ideologues employ the new technologies of surveillance by which they have been raised under the Fourth Industrial Revolution to identify and punish apostasy and non-compliance with the new orthodoxies of thought in the political economy of stakeholder capitalism.

It’s part of the ideological inversion implemented under forty-five years of neoliberalism that the critical theories of the 1960s and 1970s, which sought to expose and challenge the mechanisms of power, have been transformed into the means by which power is further entrenched and defended from criticism (feminism into transgenderism, post-structuralism into censorship of hate-speech, post-colonialism into critical race theory, socialism into woke). And it is as such that the discursive procedures of discourse theory have been applied — more accurately, misapplied — to what it reductively constitutes as a homogeneous body of theories called the Great Replacement.

This process of reduction generally starts with the figure of Renaud Camus, the French author of the 2011 book, Le Grand Remplacement, which apparently popularised the term, and which is itself placed within a history of what are retrospectively defined as ‘far-Right theories’ supposedly going back to the Nineteenth Century. In the UK, in particular, the now widely reviled name of Enoch Powell is cited as a contributor to these theories, most specifically with the speech he gave in April 1968 to the Conservative Party, in which he warned about the effects on British society of allowing 50,000 immigrants every year into the UK:

‘For reasons which they could not comprehend, and in pursuance of a decision by default, on which they were never consulted, they found themselves made strangers in their own country. They found their wives unable to obtain hospital beds in childbirth, their children unable to obtain school places, their homes and neighbourhoods changed beyond recognition, their plans and prospects for the future defeated; at work they found that employers hesitated to apply to the immigrant worker the standards of discipline and competence required of the native-born worker; they began to hear, as time went by, more and more voices which told them that they were now the unwanted.’

Powell delivered the speech as part of his argument against Parliament passing the Race Relations Act 1968, which made it illegal to refuse housing, employment or public services to someone on the grounds of their colour, race, ethnicity or national origins. Subsequently televised and published in the UK press, Powell’s assessment was agreed with by 75 percent of the British public in an opinion poll conducted later that month. Despite this, Powell was sacked as Shadow Secretary for State for Defence for a speech that, in the words of Edward Heath, the Leader of the Conservative Party, was ‘inflammatory and liable to damage race relations’, and subsequently ostracised from UK politics. This is the exactly the same reason the police forces and councils of Rotherham, Rochdale and dozens of other English towns and cities gave for covering up the grooming, rape, trafficking and torture of hundreds of thousands of English girls by the Muslim rape network. But it’s an indication of how far back the policy of mass immigration goes that, in 2016, the Chairman of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, Trevor Phillips, himself the children of Guyanese immigrants, wrote of Powell’s fate in the Telegraph: 

‘Everyone in British public life learnt the lesson: adopt any strategy possible to avoid saying anything about race, ethnicity (and latterly religion and belief) that is not anodyne and platitudinous.’

It is because, like many others, I am not willing to repeat these anodyne platitudes, which woke has formalised into a system of unthinking obedience that has brought the UK to where it is now in relation to replacement immigration and many other aspects of the Great Reset, that I dare to quote this passage from Powell’s text. I would guess that, even after the ensuing half a century of indoctrination and censorship, not 75 percent of the British public anymore but at least that percentage of the White working class would recognise themselves today in his description.

It should be apparent to anyone who applies the actual practices of critical thought to understanding the world that, rather than rebutting the reality of replacement immigration with data on the numbers of immigrants (proving, for example, that they are not replacing the populations of the host nation) and their economic and social impact (proving that immigrants make a net contribution to the economy of the host nation, do not increase its crime rates and increase its cultural richness) — all of which would require the sort of empirical research I have conducted in my book, which shows the exact opposite is true — the Great Replacement theory is, instead, dismissed with an apparently inexhaustible range of epithets: not only conspiracist, far-Right and White nationalist but also Islamophobic, anti-Semitic, Nazi, etc.

Even that is not enough, as these dismissals— which have come to be accepted, without question, as the definitive ‘debunking’ of whatever reality there might be to replacement immigration — also argue that the Great Replacement conspiracy theory is to blame for various acts of mass shootings, invariably in the USA, including the El Paso shooting in 2019, the Buffalo shooting in 2019 and the Jackson shooting in 2023. However, the USA had 656 such mass shooting events in 2023 alone, and presumably not all of them were of immigrants or motivated by the Great Replacement conspiracy theory. On the basis of this spurious connection, and with a swiftness of judgement we’ve become accustomed to by the pathologisation of dissent under lockdown, anyone ‘believing’ in the Great Replacement conspiracy theory — for it is part of this debunking that it remains at the level of faith and abjures verification by facts — is diagnosed as being vulnerable loners, typically single men, working-class, White, who have been ‘radicalised’ by a secret, never-defined but all-powerful far-Right.

Finally, and apparently closing the matter as worthy of further consideration by enlightened liberal minds, this conspiracy theory is linked with the names of the conservative political commentator, Tucker Carlson, in the US and, in this country, Tommy Robinson. Most damning of all, as if scaring children with bedtime stories designed to shame middle-class liberals into silence, the Great Replacement is linked with the bête noire of the Left, US President Donald Trump.

Amid the remarkable homogeneity of the numerous and official attempts at debunking the Great Replacement, however, what is universally lacking is any consideration of whether this conspiracy theory contains any purchase on the world of reality that still exists beyond the manipulation of our perception of it by the media and other instruments of ideology. Like so much of the critical theory that emerged out of the 1960s and 1970s, the analysis of how discourse distorts and constructs our perception of reality has come, instead, to substitute for the analysis of that reality. In place of which, students at these universities, readers of these websites, audiences at these protests, citizens of Western nation states, are all invited, entreated, bullied and shamed into joining a consensus of opinion about the reality of the world according to the principles of identity politics.

What is at stake in that consensus, which once accepted is adhered to and proclaimed with the fanaticism of religious dogma, is no longer the empirically verifiable facts about the truth or falsehood of replacement immigration, but, instead, whether one chooses to believe those facts. Perhaps more accurately — because those facts are never presented, let alone rebutted, in the ‘debunking’ of the Great Replacement conspiracy theory — what is being observed and recorded by the apparatuses of the surveillance state is whether one chooses to know these facts. Indoctrinated by the dogma of identity politics, according to which something is true only insofar as it conforms to the principles of woke, even those facts that may, on occasion — for example, in my book — slip through the net of censorship and ideology are then dismissed as ‘racist’, ‘far-Right’, etc. In this way, reality itself is embraced or dismissed according to whether it conforms to or contradicts the ideology of the indoctrinated. The signs declaring ‘Refugees welcome’, ‘Stand up to racism’, ‘Stop the far right’, ‘Say yes to diversity’, ‘Say no to Islamophobia’, ‘Black lives matter’, are not political slogans. Rather, they are declarations of an ideologically-compliant reality that have been placed in the hands, mouths and minds of their proclaimers by the manufacturers of woke.

The ‘New Normal’ that I discuss in chapter one of my book, in which the United Nations and its 193 member states will all speak with one voice, the populations of nation states will be monitored and measured for compliance with that voice, and common standards and principles of behaviour are written into the laws of those states, is not a code of conduct to which we will be expected to adhere. The New Normal is a declaration of the reality in which we are, already, being forced to live. What is being replaced is not only the native populations of the host nations of replacement immigration; it is the reality of the world we once inhabited.

5. The Colonisation of the UK

For those of us who have watched the resistible rise of Keir Starmer, he was always going to implement the next phase of the Great Rest, with the use of facial recognition technology by UK police already rolled out, a system of digital identity announced in the King’s Speech, and lockdowns for civil unrest proposed by the government’s advisor on political violence and disruption. As the UK’s former Director of Public Prosecutions, Starmer has been picked to oversee the final transformation of the UK into the totalitarian state to which we’ve been stumbling, blindly, since March 2020. We’ve been waiting for this for five years since our servile compliance with the illegal removal of the rights and freedoms of the UK population under lockdown. The frog is nearly boiled. The response of the British people to the murders in Southport and the rapes in Ballymena were, perhaps, the sudden realisation that the water is simmering nicely on the fire and the lid has just been placed on the pot.

But however this ends, Britain will never be the same again. No working-class White child will be able to walk the streets of British cities alone. No White girl has been able to do so for some time. We have invited foreign peoples into our home, elected their clerics into power, spread their ideology in our culture, normalised its replacement of our values, covered up their crimes, and accused anyone who has dared to observe what is happening — let alone protest against it — of racism. We are a nation divided by immigration, and as the Deputy Prime Minister made clear by abandoning plans to prioritise housing those who have lived in the UK for ten years over housing recent immigrants in the UK’s social housing, the division is a hierarchy, with the White British working class — as always — on the bottom rung of the ladder. The ladder, however, is getting longer. The middle rungs are being removed. Immigrants are on a higher rung, but it’s still nowhere near the middle; while those at the top have disappeared into their ivory towers, and there’s a line of police and maybe more between them and the rest of us.

Already, in 2019/20, before the huge rise in immigrants from sub-Saharan Africa I looked at in chapter one of my book, 48 percent of Black people in the UK lived in social housing; 8 percent of social housing was being let to Black tenants, double their proportion of the population, and 7 percent of the new social housing being built. 10 percent of the roughly 10,000 new social housing properties being built in England per year are going to tenants born overseas. 72 percent of Somalis, nearly half of whom are economically inactive, live in social housing. In the 2021 Census, 20 percent of social housing in England had a head of household who was born overseas. In London, that figure more than doubles to 47.6 percent. An astonishing 10 per cent of social housing in England and 17.5 percent of that in London had a head of household that had arrived here since 2021. 

This is a measure of both how many immigrants the UK has taken in the last four years and the burden they are placing on social services paid for by the people they are replacing. Incredibly, of the 793,000 residential properties for social rent in London in 2022, under our Pakistani Muslim Mayor, Sadiq Khan, some 377,000 had a head of household who was born in a different country, and 183,000, 23 percent, by a head of household who had entered the UK since 2021. These figures, however, only apply to the head of household, not to the actual number of foreign-born nationals living in UK’s social housing, or those immigrants living in social housing but not listed as the head of the household on the Census, or, in far greater number, second-generation immigrants born in the UK and living in social housing. So the actual percentage of the UK’s social housing occupied by immigrants and their children will be considerably higher than these already incredible figures.

And yet, in 2024 in England alone, 324,990 households are registered as homeless. 117,450 households, including 151,630 children, are living in temporary accommodation, up 12.3 percent on the previous year, and the highest number since records began in 1998. Between April 2023 and March 2024, 11,993 people were counted sleeping rough on London’s streets. And yet still the immigrants keep coming. And why wouldn’t they?

In 2021, across England and Wales, foreign nationals were more likely (18 percent) to live in UK social housing than people born in the UK (17 percent). Similarly, the percentage of non-EU immigrants that have been living in the UK for more than five years and are claiming benefits (28 percent) is higher than the percentage of UK nationals (25 percent). As with crime rates, those immigrants with access to social housing in England and Wales is determined by the countries from where they came. 72 percent of people born in Somalia, 41 percent of those born in the Caribbean, 37 percent of those born in Ghana, 36 percent of those born in Afghanistan and 34 percent of those born in Bangladesh are living in UK social housing, and 42 percent of all of those born in Africa. In comparison, just 16.8 percent of people born in the UK were living in the UK’s social housing.

Back in the year 2000, in an article that today wouldn’t get anywhere near the editor’s desk of The Guardian, it was predicted that the White population of the UK would be a minority by the end of the century. It’s telling that, already, the author reported that ‘the demographer who made the calculation wished to remain anonymous for fear of accusations of racism’. Twenty-four years later there is no longer fear of such an accusation but rather absolute certainty. But we know, now, that this was a conservative estimate, based on net immigration of 185,000 in 1999. In 2023, net immigration was 685,000, and at current rates, according to a recent report, the White British will be a minority in our own country by 2060.

In response, we can point, with the finger of the politically-correct Left, at law-abiding, hard-working migrant workers, blame the criminality and unemployment of those who aren’t on the economic conditions from which they came, cite examples of White grooming gangs operating in the UK, and deny any connection between the actions of those who happen to be Muslim and the ‘real message’ of the Qur’an. But none of that makes the tax burden on the British people any less, the suppression of the wages of the working class any less impoverishing, the lack of social housing for British people any less of a scandal, the crime rates in the UK any lower, local authorities and police covering up decades of the mass rape of underage girls any less of a betrayal, or the incompatibility of Islam with Western liberalism any less obvious to those who have to live with ghettos of immigrants growing larger and larger in the working-class communities of Britain, and the Muslim-run councils and Muslim MPs they elect to office.

We can speak from the ivory tower of anarchism about the imminence of a revolution for which there is absolutely no evidence, but which is always brewing in its fantasy of a united struggle of natives and immigrants against our common enemy, the global elite and the puppets they have installed in our government, and repeat over and over that we are being played against each other by the deep state. But this ignores the very real experience of the working class, which I have documented in my book, which is not a product of far-Right propaganda, or racism, or Islamophobia, and which is anything but one of unity with immigrants. It is, to the contrary, the experience of being replaced by immigrants, economically, culturally and physically, at the hands of the UK state to which they pay their taxes, and on the direction of a transnational system of governance from which they tried to take back control of their country in 2016, and which is subjecting them, through the legislative authority of successive UK governments, to a programme of economic immiseration, homelessness, rising crime, two-tier policing and unrelenting attacks on their history, culture, race and values.

And we can even repeat blanket statements about the crimes of British colonialism, conclude that all White people are racist, and declare, in an ecstasy of self-loathing, that the British had it coming, and the sins of Empire should be visited on its impoverished children, as if it was the working class of Britain that inherited the booty of Western imperialism in Africa, India, China and the Caribbean as much as in Iraq, Libya, Syria and the Ukraine. But this is the ahistorical erasure of class by the middle-class ideology of woke, according to which the British working-class who can’t get a job or housing or medical care in their own country are guilty, from the moment they are born to the moment they die, of ‘White privilege’.

In 2024, 7.9 million working-age adults, 1.92 million pensioners and 4.5 million children were living in poverty in the UK, 69 per cent of the latter in working families. The majority of these — not the percentage of them that are ethnic minorities, which is the exclusive focus of data on ethnicity and poverty in the UK, but the total number of people — were White British, over 7.5 million out of 14.35 million, living in poverty in the sixth largest economy in the world. A decade ago, only 24.6 percent of White British boys who were eligible for Free School Meals (FSM) at the age of 15 — one of the euphemistic recognitions of the working class the UK government permits — achieved five good GCSEs (A-C), compared to a national average of 58.8 percent, and to 40.3 percent of Black boys also in receipt of Free School Meals. In 2021/22, just 13.4 percent of White boys eligible for FSM went on to Higher Education, the lowest of any ethnic category, compared with 18 percent of FSM-eligible Black boys.

Even across the classes, White students were the least likely to progress to Higher Education by the age of 19 at 41.8 percent, compared to 51.5 percent for Mixed-race, 63.5 percent for Black, 67.8 percent for Asian and 83.8 percent for Chinese pupils. Unfortunately, being White and working class is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010, which only prevents discrimination in the UK on the basis of your age, disability, marriage status, religion, sex, sexuality, what sex you believe you are and your race — unless, that is, you’re White, in which case you are, by definition, a racist, and undeserving of protection from discrimination.

Immigrants aren’t responsible for this. Drawn as they are and increasingly will be from the working class of impoverished countries, on average they live in even greater poverty than White people, although not the White working class. But as the statistics on social housing and benefits show — and to these could be added equivalent data on diminishing access to healthcare and the decline in the standard of living — their migration here in numbers intended to replace the British people in our own country is part of this programme of immiseration and colonisation.

Try trumpeting the benefits of ‘diversity’ to the working-class children of Rotherham, Rochdale and the dozens of other towns in the Muslim rape gang network, to the women raped by the refugees the Left welcomed here as the children of Southport struggled for their lives in hospital, to the British youths who can’t a get a job in their own country under racist diversity quotas and programmes of positive discrimination because of the colour of their skin, to the freezing pensioners and homeless of Britain who watch as the homes their taxes paid for are handed to immigrants who have contributed, and will contribute, nothing to this country, in order to fill the pockets of the globalists who sent them here. 

Look at the online footage of machete-wielding gangs of Black and Asian kids terrorising English seaside communities; of mobs of Asian, Middle-Eastern and African Muslims shouting the Takbir at lines of police; of imams leading armed gangs of the same under the protection of the British police; of hooded and masked Muslims taking over the streets of British towns unopposed by our police; of the same stopping and attacking cars driven by White people; of Muslim men attacking transport police for daring to impose the same security measures on them as they do on the British people; of Black and Asian immigrants on scooters snatching bags and phones from people on London’s streets; of gangs of the same fighting on our streets with knives and worse; of immigrants using the public transport and streets of Britain as a toilet; of the same openly stealing from British shops because they know they can do so with impunity; of imams declaring that they do not recognise British law or values and commanding their followers to live under Sharia Law; of Muslims blocking roads and taking over public squares in mass prayers; of groups of topless Muslim men beating their chests in bizarre religious rituals outside the Houses of Parliament — look at all this and tell me that this is evidence of an immigration policy that has successfully integrated immigrants into the UK, or has any intention of doing so in the future.

It’s impossible to come to any other conclusion than that the West — which for so long has straddled the world, for good and for bad — is a civilisation in rapid decline. We only have to look at our utter subservience to the ideology of woke, a cancer eating at the heart of the West, or at our gullibility for the frauds perpetrated against us over the last five years under the guise of unending ‘crises’, or at how readily and eagerly we have been taught to hate ourselves, our history and our culture, to know that we are nearing our end as the dominant civilisation on this planet. As with the fall of Rome, billions will rejoice at our downfall. Millions already are. And many of them are living among us. Our leaders plan to rule over the ruins, the lords of low-skilled and impoverished Asian and African populations imported into Europe, much as they once did over the colonised peoples of Empire. The British working class, if they aren’t already, are destined for second-class citizenship in this New World Order, just as Indians, Chinese, Africans and other conquered people once were in their own countries under British rule.

If we don’t think it can happen again and happen to us, simply because our skin is white, we haven’t been paying attention to our own history. We are being conquered in our own country; and just as the leaders of colonised countries once did with the British Empire, it is our rulers who are opening the doors to our conquerors, and multinational corporations that are cutting the business deals by which our standard of living will be pushed lower and our political sovereignty dismantled. Colonialism has taken different forms today than it had under the British Empire, but we should never forget that it was the kings of what are now Dahomey, Ghana, Yoruba and Nigeria who sold African slaves to European traders; that is was the East India Company, which at its peak was the largest corporation in the world with its own private army, that turned India into a colony of the British Crown; or that the UK used Indian soldiers under British officers to police colonies such as Hong Kong and suppress native uprisings like the Boxer Rebellion in China. History shows that soldiers are more willing to brutalise civilians in their own country when they are of a different race, ethnicity or religion; and for all our supposed allegiance to multiculturalism, the demonstrations across England last summer showed that little has changed, except who is being brutalised and who is doing the suppressing.

In truth, the UK lost its sovereignty as a nation state years ago, in 1993, when Parliament passed the European Communities (Amendment) Act 1993, which bound us to the unregulated movement of people, goods, services and capital within the European Union. Or before that, in 1985, when the Schengen Agreement opened the UK’s borders to the 22 member states of the newly-formed European Union. Or before that, when Parliament passed the European Communities Act 1972 that subordinated Parliament to EU law. Or, even before that, when we welcomed the US military onto UK soil during the Second World War — an occupation it has never relinquished, with 9,700 US Air Force personnel deployed in the UK and a further 57,000 across Europe today — and then, in 1945, joined the United Nations, an organisation dedicated to dismantling the nation state. Like most political revolutions, the globalist coup has been a long time in preparation, but the closer it comes to completion the faster it moves. That time is now.

As I show in my book, it is these transnational technocracies that dictate our immigration policy and, in doing so, have allowed the corporate sector lobbying them to take control of our borders and, indeed, of our sovereignty as a nation. We saw this demonstrated conclusively under lockdown, when our freedoms and rights were dictated by agencies of the UN like the World Health Organization, despite having no democratic mandate over the UK electorate. But Britain today, and the even worse Britain that awaits us in the future, is what a conquered state looks like.
Simon Elmer is the author of The Great Replacement: Conspiracy Theory or Immigration Policy? (2024), from which this article is taken. His recent books include Architecture is Always Political: A Communist History (2024), The Great Reset: Biopolitics for Stakeholder Capitalism (2023), and The Road to Fascism: For a Critique of the Global Biosecurity State (2022).