The New White Man’s Burden

Liberalism as the Cause of and Solution to the Great Replacement

Our article The Third World is Going to Cop It was the overture to the major demographic story of the 21st century: that liberalism is pushing down birth rates in the developing world at a catastrophic rate. Since then, a trickle of mainstream attention has started seeping out of the cracks in elites’ hopes.¹ Our betters are coming to see that their salvation in the form of Africans flooding native Europeans out of existence may not come to pass. We are still in the denial stage. This article will clarify what’s driving this change.

Liberalism operates according to the logic of universalism, which recognizes no borders and can tolerate nothing that is not itself—it’s fundamentally a form of entropy. Liberalism has also become more and not less consistent over time, and as it has grown more consistent it has grown more maladaptive, shedding its stabilizing elements as the sheer universalizing logic of the system takes over. The hysteria over Trump—where every stabilizing or “reactionary” element, however mild, was evidence of a Fourth Reich just around the corner—ensured that the system could not cool off even for one second. There are no brakes on this train.

There have been earlier versions of this universalism such as the white man’s burden. This was a racially conscious—and therefore incoherent—universalism, but the core idea was indeed universal: we, the superior white man, owe a duty to all. Inherent in this was a shrill progressivism (“we are more evolved”), and along with the kind of inessentialism of a lovestruck teenage girl (“we can fix them”), this produced an egalitarian drive that said “we must lift up the world to our superior level”. The white man’s burden has never really gone away,² but was only sublimated, made socially acceptable.

The white man’s burden is no longer about liberating Ahmed from his heathen religion, but from his homophobia. The old white man’s burden offends liberals by saying the quiet part out loud: that brown people need to be lifted out of inferiority. The new, improved model ministers to the old white saviour complex while accommodating the perfect equality that all universalism tends toward—it pushes the racially conscious elements down below the threshold of consciousness. The result is an anti-colonialism far worse than the misguided 19th century colonialism, which at least lifted Ahmed out of poverty. Now it just stamps out his social defenses and ethnic integrity, offering nothing in return—all in the name of freeing him from whiteness.

The focus of progressives has shifted in recent years from importing the third world to enforcing the LGBTBBQP+ agenda.³ Racial justice is still a live issue, but the focus is now not so much on importing the Bantu tribesman as on liberating him from the oppressive sexual manners of colonialism—it has the same energy as the White Rajahs liberating indigenous Borneans from their headhunting lifestyle in the 19th century. But there is a difference between the old and new white man’s burdens, and this difference is the story of the 21st century—the old burden was an expression of white chauvinism but undermined white ethnic interests; the new burden is an expression of white guilt but serves those interests. Let us give some examples.