The Replacement Will Be Televised

Google’s infamous 2024 launch of its Gemini AI was merely another mile-marker in an accelerating erasure of whites, a disappearing act that highlights the death cult Democrats’ progressive priority of displacing, dispossessing and ultimately destroying white Americans  

“An unrelenting stream of immigration—Non-Stop! Non-Stop!—folks like me who are Caucasian, of European descent, for the first time in 2017 we will be an absolute minority in the United States of America. Fewer than 50-percent of people in America from then on will be white European stock. That’s not a bad thing, that’s the source of our strength!”

          — Joe Biden, February 17, 2015

By Mark Cromer

In 2015, then Vice President Joe Biden was a gleeful practitioner of an occult-like political ritual practiced by progressives that invokes the mass migration of Third World populations into the United States as a powerful source of innovation and inspiration that they claim serves as a vital infusion to an otherwise anemic America.

A decade later, it’s unclear if a former President-in-Name Only Joe Biden is still able to remember let alone truly comprehend the tens of millions of migrants he so jubilantly hailed as the vanguard of the relentless horde that will define a post-American United States. It’s also unclear, in this high summer of 2025, if Biden’s ghost ship of a body still possesses a wheelhouse that is able to cognitively grasp, if only for a fleeting moment, what he plainly decreed the vast migrant masses now garrisoned across the country are owed by Americans: everything.

“Look, they built the country,” Biden said of migrants during an interview with MSNBC on March 9, 2024, less than 48-hours after his State of the Union address, a bizarre affair where he had slurred and shouted his way through a withering hour-plus diatribe against the remnants of the legacy population in the former American construct.

But Biden’s final State of the Union address once again proved to be instructive.

Despite the utterly dreadful cognitive condition that a late-stage Biden manifested as the concealer that the ruling junta within the administration had applied wore away—the dead eyes, the waxen skin, the resting mouth mildly agape, the confused thoughts and the slurry speech that was often augmented with long bouts of shouting before a reverse Tourette syndrome kicked-in and he suddenly dropped into a creepy whisper of ‘No joke! No joke!’—a clear thread of ideological connective tissue running between the Democratic Party’s policy initiatives both past and present remained undiminished: a total commitment to the overrunning and then elimination of white people everywhere.

In the opening days of 2024, even decrepit Old Joe couldn’t escape, at least visually, the fruition of his wish dream.

When Google debuted its AI component Gemini early last year, users quickly learned that not only were America’s Founding Fathers black or brown, but that Vikings, European royalty and even German soldiers of the Wehrmacht were all non-white—at least according to the images Google’s AI was producing in response to user requests. The utter absurdity of those images was the most vivid distortion of historical fact that Google’s AI had been intentionally designed and programed to provide users, but perhaps even more instructive was Gemini’s production of images related to science, medicine, engineering, architecture, transportation and other features of cultural advancement.

In virtually every industry, field and sector, Google’s AI responded to user queries by producing images that featured humans of every race and ethnicity and of both genders with one glaring exception: the white male.

After many years of conceptualization, development, engineering, coding and tweaking, upon its debut Google’s Gemini AI system produced an instant mosaic of images capturing the world its creators have long desired: a world where whites in general and white males in particular have simply been erased and replaced.

They created a cyberplace where whites cease to exist.

In the annals of magic acts, the mass vanishing of white people from American commercial marketing and television advertisements in particular stands as one of the most stunning visual illusions ever accomplished. The racially diverse constellation of actors that had proportionally populated commercials up to May 25, 2020, effectively disappeared overnight seemingly by the sleight of an unseen hand, replaced with an equally talented cohort of thespians but one that left many white Americans with the very odd feeling that they’d magically woken up in Nigeria or perhaps the Congo.

In commercial after commercial, peddling everything from pizzas to portfolio managers, white Americans were instantaneously disappeared in a progressive rapture. Whites were replaced and then marginally returned to mostly fleeting background figures as black Americans were suddenly standing in the spotlight at a saturation level that would suggest they comprised 90% of the population of the United States—not the 13% of the population that blacks actually do.

In digital and print marketing campaigns launched by every type of business from banks and auto dealers to insurance companies and entertainment venues, whites weren’t ordered to the back of the bus as much as they appeared to be forced off it and then thrown under it.

And perhaps that was the point.

In 2023, Bloomberg reported (and celebrated) the correlation between disappearing whites in marketing and the sudden death syndrome whites experienced in the American job market. According to the financial news network, in 2021 the S&P 100 added more than 100,000 jobs to their rosters, with 94% of those positions being filled by ‘people of color.’ In very real terms and despite accounting for more than two-thirds of the entire American population, whites had only about a six-percent chance of being hired at these companies in 2021-22 and white males likely accounted for perhaps just one-percent of those hires.

Booz Allen Hamilton, a multi-billion dollar publicly-traded business intelligence company that’s headquartered in Virginia and has more than 30,000 employees deployed around the globe, was one of many major corporations that in 2020 swiftly began eliminating whites—and particularly white males—from its marketing and recruiting campaigns. While vanished completely from some recruiting images, in others a token residual white male was allowed to remain in the picture albeit literally standing behind a beaming vanguard of ‘people of color.’

The global outfit of corporate spooks and analysts embraced what’s known as ‘Decentering Whiteness’ in the parlance of the progressive cultists who practice the ritual subjugation and humiliation of whites. The term and its application as an exercise demonstrated in the summer of 2020 how deeply embedded progressive activists had become across critical sectors throughout the American enterprise and how deadly effective they were when ordered to activate their cells and launch their agitprop campaigns against whites.

While Penn & Teller may have been frozen in absolute awe at the sheer scale of the Occidental vanishing act, Rachel Dolezal and Robin DiAngelo undoubtedly shuddered with the longest orgasm they’ve ever experienced—a crescendo of pleasure waves that must remain ongoing as evermore whites, whether historical figures or popular fictional characters, are painted black while the people they reflect are eliminated from any relevant proportional public representation.

Considering that ethnic whites—people who identify as ‘white alone’ according to the U.S. Census Bureau—accounted for nearly two-thirds of all Americans in 2020, clocking in at more than 204 million people, from just a commercial marketing perspective it was surreal to see their presence across media platforms scrubbed away to essentially residual traces.

Sure, the central casting caricature of a bungling and befuddled white guy could still be glimpsed here and there, but mostly for the purpose of a situational goof and naturally at his expense in something akin to a minstrel show lampooning the ineptness of whites.

The Pentagon raced into the erasure of whites even faster than it has plunged the nation into the foreign wars it has started and lost over the past half-century.

While the United States Navy is approximately 70% white, with an overwhelming number of those enlistees being white males, anyone who saw the service’s recruiting campaigns emerging from 2020 would be led to believe that America’s mighty blue ocean fleets are comprised primarily of black men and women of various ethnicities.

And that was precisely the point.

If the Great White Vanishing was a surprise across American airwaves, cable lines and computer screens in 2020, the simultaneous sudden deaths of such popular television shows as Live PD and the always informative COPS was also a correlated jolt that suggested a powerful and calculated stagecraft was busily at work behind the scenes.

Along with syndicated televised fare like Bait Car, the very popular ‘actual reality’ shows had collectively cast a spotlight on street crime in the United States and provided unvarnished insights into the personal defilement, moral relativism, societal decay and cultural dysfunction that fuels it while also showcasing the police who, until then anyway, had been tasked by civil society with standing a post against it.

That these shows were also suddenly eighty-sixed from the airwaves was another omen that something rather ominous was afoot and there was a sense that the ghosting of whites across all advertising and marketing campaigns, the black-casting of white characters both real and imagined and the mass cancelation of law enforcement-based television was all interconnected by both purpose and execution.

Of course, a lot of strange things occurred in America 2020 and the denouement of whites on television was only one float in a very bizarre parade.

In the spring of 2020, a buffoonish charlatan in the White House was still peddling the First Act of a failed and flailing presidency as The Greatest Show on Earth even as much the nation was being devoured in highly coordinated, mass-scale terror attacks unleashed by the Democratic Party’s progressive shock troops that seized city centers, suburban streets and state highways in order to control movement and menace civic populations into submission, retreat and compliance.

The pandemic lockdowns were quickly supplemented by a national knockout game.

Across Democrat-controlled cities, entire blocks were set ablaze by radical leftwing goon squads as merchants were dragged from their stores to be brutally beaten and in some cases killed even as many police agencies stood idly by, suddenly more concerned with their paychecks and pensions than the fate of the citizenry they swore to protect.

In other instances that summer, ‘police’ in some jurisdictions literally knelt before the baying mob.

While the overall scenery was somewhat similar to the Rodney King riots that exploded in 1992—including the orgy of looting and a mass criminal rampage that the progressives’ media assets subsequently declared to be a righteous ‘uprising’—there were also substantive differences that could be glimpsed amid the flames that illuminated the summer of 2020.

In 1992, tens of thousands of state and federal combat troops were deployed by President George H. W. Bush relatively quickly to convulsing cities to stop the destruction and restore order. In the interim, Korean merchants in South-Central Los Angeles proved far less inclined to surrender their stores to the motorized battalions of gang members that descended on them; choosing instead to stand their ground, defend their property and bang it out with the hoodlums from the hood.

Aside from the video footage of LAPD officers batting .400 on a prostrate King, no other imagery emerged from the wanton destruction that swept across Los Angeles in 1992 would infuriate the progressive Left more than that of heavily armed merchants defending their livelihoods and their lives. Conversely, no other imagery from the riots delighted the progressive Left more than that of Damien ‘Football’ Williams dancing a jubilant jig around the body of Reginald Denny, who was pulled from his truck and savagely beaten in the street for being white in South-Central LA at the outset of the riots.

While conventional wisdom among the media’s talking heads in 2025 holds that the death of George Floyd triggered a long overdue ‘racial reckoning’ for America, as well as the Western world writ large, this estimation is largely another shot of the narrative narcotic administered by the progressive purveyors of the alternate history exercise of the 1619 Project and their ancillary operations that’s meant to calm or at least confuse the victim as to their true intent even if they no longer care to fully mask it.

Is it a matter of mere coincidence or the result of a carefully orchestrated conspiracy that within a year of launching the Great American White Out in 2020 the nation’s southern frontier was thrown open and an estimated 20 million to 25 million foreign nationals from all corners of the globe marched across it triumphantly to receive their free cell phones, airline tickets and housing vouchers?

As progressive cult cells began to hoist banners across America reading ‘Migrants Welcome!’ much in the manner that would greet a liberating army, Democrat operatives around the country moved quickly to garrison the tens of millions of ‘newcomers’ into  key regions where the fighting age, battle-hardened veterans of tribal wars around the world would to be useful on the streets in the years to come.

The vanishing of whites across all forms of media—unprecedented in its scope, scale and rapidity—that is being programmed in Hollywood, Silicon Valley and Madison Avenue is visual propaganda supporting the racial replacement of white America in a demographic re-landscaping that has been underway for decades and one that has now reached maximum velocity.

It’s also a weather balloon of sorts, one floated first in the popular media to gauge the atmospherics of white Americans as they are being disappeared in real time from public life and to determine whether resulting storms should be anticipated as the pogroms take clearer shape on the horizon and of what magnitude.

In various circles across the political-spectrum it has been dubbed: ‘The Great Replacement.’ Depending on who’s talking, the ‘great’ estimation either reflects the scale of the endeavor or the final results.

The progressive Left has become increasingly manic in recent years, toggling rapid-fire between celebrating their dark successes and fixating on the prospect that the legacy populations of the Western world are growing more cognizant (if only still marginally so) of the bitter fruit that mass immigration has delivered across their countries and their cultures. The orchestrated human tsunami has brought violent chaos, overwhelmed social services and severely diluted Western culture throughout the West and as awareness among whites in particular has risen, progressives have unleashed a series of narrative counterattacks in an all-hands effort to prevent or at least dilute any largescale grassroots reaction to the population replacement of the West in general and America in particular.

Thus so-called ‘Replacement Theory’ has been aggressively ascribed to the paranoid musings of a radical rightwing fringe by the progressive Left’s media assets, which expend considerable resources dismissing it as fiction intended to incite while simultaneously going all out to accelerate it in reality.

In 2022, The New York Times dispatched writer Jazmine Ulloa to Ohio to see what she might be able to do to better characterize whites as racists and more effectively damage the emerging Senate candidacy of JD Vance, the future Vice President and author of the bestselling Hillbilly Elegy who had turned his lament for the passing of a way of life and people into a political campaign focused on preserving what remains of it.

Across a lengthy report that hit all the heartbeats of the anti-white storyline The Times expected her to pound, Ulloa couldn’t risk being seen as remiss by not evoking-to-discredit the ongoing policy of replacement, though she waited surprisingly deep into her story before doing so, perhaps saving some heavy caliber ammunition for the closing barrage of damnation on whites.

“At least one ad warns of an ‘invasion’ and other carry echoes of the ‘great replacement’ trope,” Ulloa writes. “A racist conspiracy theory falsely contending that elites are using Black and brown immigrants to replace white people in the United States.”

Naturally, Ulloa doesn’t—or perhaps more accurately can’t—explain just why a theory positing the existence of a conspiracy among the ruling elites dedicated to reconfiguring the racial demographics of the United States (or any other nation, for that matter) is somehow a prima facie case of racism itself. Why can’t it be analyzed from both 30,000-feet and from on-the-ground developments, from data trendlines to anecdotal encounters?

Why is the concept of a massive racial relandscaping simply verboten to consider or discuss even as its expected outcome is now openly celebrated among certain quarters? Why can’t we divine a little more detail from Jimmy Fallon’s studio audience’s cheering when Fallon said whites had become a minority in California to Joe Biden’s programmed assessment that the less white America is the stronger it becomes?

Ulloa’s feature story offers no serious or hefty countervailing positions, obviously, though she does include some of the usual Republican suspects performing their ritual Ghost Dance by chanting they’re not racists for her and declaring once more they actually love mass legal immigration. So Ulloa performed as expected and as she was paid to do, which includes ignoring the rich irony of deriding whites’ escalating fears as racist paranoia in the very same article that uppercases ‘Blacks’ and lowercases ‘whites’—which is now The Times official editorial style.

In the wake of Vance’s come-from-behind win in the Ohio GOP primary, Politico followed The Times attack on Vance and the white Americans he speaks to with a targeted hit-piece headlined: ‘He’s Dangerous. So Is His Book.’

Fashioned as an interview with Silas House, the Appalachian Studies chairman at Berea College in Kentucky who is a well-regarded and prolific author himself, Hillbilly Elegy is labeled as “dangerous” because it speaks to the white experience, explores the struggles of the white working class and celebrates, however clandestinely, whites as a people.

Accordingly, no matter the merits of Vance’s book or the talent of his literary prose, its reflection of white Americans and concern for them as a people posed grave dangers to the progressive Left and they recognized the threat.

“It’s a dangerous book because it’s a treatise in disguise,” House tells Politico. “If it had just been a memoir, it would be a powerful piece of writing and it would be his own proof. But the problem is it is woven through with dog whistles about class and race, gender. And if your ears are attuned to those dog whistles, you know exactly what he is saying.”

Other high-profile journalists have been much more transparent than The Times Ulloa by publicly gushing on camera at the very prospect of replacing a majority white America. Far from being bashful about it or even angry at the suggestion that there is a massive population replacement policy underway, some media players of note have been downright giddy about it.

In May of 2012, veteran 60 Minutes correspondent Leslie Stahl moderated a panel on presidential politics that was hosted by the New York Historical Society that also featured Time Magazine reporter Joe Klein of Primary Colors fame. During the discussion, which was centered around the emerging issues that would shape the impending presidential campaign, Klein said that President Obama could still “get some mileage” out of progressive redistribution of wealth schemes, but that he’d have to be careful to recalibrate them as “redistribution of opportunity” and Stahl jumped in with: “Right, we’ve got to change the language.”

Klein then goes on to brag to the tittering studio audience that he had actually traveled around America and “talked with civilians” and sensed that while the white Americans he happened upon in the heartland harbored genuine fears about a nation that they no longer recognized, their fears were a sign of success as they heralded a sweeping demographic shift that Klein had long pined for in America.

“You know, you go to a Tea Party meeting and you see a forest of people who are scared to death because this country has changed underneath them. You go to a Tea Party meeting in Arkansas, as I did, and all of a sudden they are looking at a country where South-Asians run all the minimarts and motels, and there are Mexican-Americans all over the place,” Klein said. “And the economy sucks, the jobs that they used to be able to hold without having a high school diploma have disappeared. And as a New Yorker, I have to say, that the things they are most afraid of are the things that I love the most about this country. But their fear is genuine and it is rapidly becoming a minority fear because the country is diversifying so much, which is one of the reasons I love it so much.”

Klein looked quite content as the studio audience broke into applause.

So too did Mona Charen when she appeared on a panel at the Principles First Summit in February 2024 and held forth on the inherent dangers of white Americans actually understanding what was happening to the country. As an old newspaper columnist and policy maven who circulated among Republican heavy hitters dating back a half-century, Charen has long been associated with Bill Kristol’s neocon operations and has been a staunch advocate for mass immigration into the West.

At the Principles First Summit, Charen addressed the rising concern among neocon globalists and their open-border lobby that white Americans are increasingly feeling they are being overrun by design and being intentionally led to destruction.

“We have lots of different communities, huge geographic diversity, religious, racial, every kind of diversity,” Charen told the audience in her assessment of America in 2024, in what appeared at face value to be a plug for multicultural consensus.

“And we need to be able to have certain things we agree on. We have to have certain facts that we all accept as true so we can compromise with one another and we can say ‘Ok, you like more immigration and we like less immigration [so] let’s meet in the middle,’” Charen said. “That has become practically impossible in our age of bespoke realities where people on the right don’t just think that Democrats want more immigration…they think Democrats have a scheme, a plot run by Jews to import more dark-skinned people into the country in ‘The Great Replacement.’ So, how do you do you compromise with such a terrible…”

It was at this point that Charen’s comments were interrupted by laughter and applause—at the prospect of ‘The Great Replacement’—and fellow panelist Robert A. George, a writer who is black, quickly interjects rather happily: “Is there something wrong with that?”—replacing whites—which in turn prompted a knowing smile and a nodding chuckle of agreement from Charen and a ‘Yeah, yeah!’

Charen would go on to tell the audience that the challenge ahead rested in controlling technology and cable news outlets to prevent the wrong narrative from spreading. She did not explain what she found so reassuringly amusing about the prospect of replacing white people.

Michelle Goldberg, a columnist at The New York Times, has had no problem candidly proclaiming her pleasure at white Americans being replaced with migrant populations nor has she equivocated about the general benefit she sees in erasing white America.

In a column entitled ‘We Can Replace Them’ that was published in The Times on October 29, 2018, Goldberg meticulously spells out her desire to see a white American majority wiped out by non-stop demographic re-carpeting fueled by unrelenting mass migration and the political benefit she sees for progressives as whites face an electoral extermination.

Goldberg used the 2018 gubernatorial race in Georgia between Stacy Abrams, a Democrat and black woman, and Brian Kemp, a Republican and white man, as the rhetorical vehicle to convey her fundamental problem with America—which is white people—and the promise she believes America holds for her and her fellow progressives: that whites are steadily being replaced.

“Kemp is the candidate of aggrieved whiteness,” Goldberg wrote, then pivoted to a nameless Kemp campaign volunteer who reportedly wrote disparaging assessments of Detroit, Haiti and South Africa as a bellwether of what governance by predominantly black leadership portends. Goldberg continued “Kemp cannot be blamed for the words of his volunteers, but he’s made little discernable effort to distance himself from bigots,” before declaring that Kemp’s candidacy was essentially a Peach State cross-burning that illuminated the Ku Klux Klan nationally.

Kemp’s support for reasonable voter identification safeguards was, according to Goldberg, a polling variant of the Jim Crow-era sundown laws. Even the most modest efforts to prevent voter fraud was akin to hanging a ‘whites only’ sign at the polling booths.

It’s all nonsense, of course, but that no longer matters.

Goldberg’s hyperbolic editorial positioning is important to note because it transparently conveys the grave threat progressives perceive from even the slightest hint of whites expressing a racial consciousness or vocalizing anything close to approximating a racial identity outside the razor wire surrounding the intellectual ghetto of self-loathing that Goldberg and her political fellow travelers demand whites inhabit pending further notice on the question of their continued existence.

By accusing a white candidate like Kemp of doing he something that he didn’t do or of supporting something that he didn’t support, Goldberg telegraphed what progressives think of white Americans in general and what they have in store for them in the coming era. On that score, Goldberg didn’t mince her words, closing her column with the line: “Show them they are being replaced.”

On CNN in late 2011, anchor Erin Burnett interviewed Pat Buchanan about his book Suicide of a Superpower: Will America Survive to 2025, providing another insightful moment that again demonstrated how the media infrastructure viewed the elimination of white Americans as a desirable development. Burnett is a capable journalist who clearly understood that in interviewing Buchanan she was speaking with a brilliant writer, a veteran of the Nixon and Reagan administrations and a patriot who had blazed the America First trail that Ross Perot and Donald Trump would later follow. But Burnett could not conceal an impish little grin that spread across her cutie-bug face as she asked Buchanan: “Isn’t the end of white America…a good thing?”

It was a rhetorical question, of course, as her smile related.

Michelle Goldberg’s exhortation to rub the demographic displacement of whites into their fair-skinned faces while taunting them with their demise had already been taken to heart by David Horsey, the Pulitzer-winning editorial cartoonist whose work has appeared in Seattle’s two dailies (when Seattle had two dailies), the Seattle Times and The Post-Intelligencer, as well as the Los Angeles Times. In 2015, three years before Goldberg wrote ‘We Can Replace Them,’ Horsey celebrated the progress of the replacement on the pages of the Los Angeles Times with a cartoon depicting a blonde-haired young woman performing a rewritten ‘America The Beautiful’ that trumpeted:

“It’s beautiful we’re not just white,

nor will we be again,

Our names are not just

Smith and Jones

but Gupta and Hussein,

And Wong, Guzman and Escobar

and some I can’t quite say

We’re more than we used to be,

God Bless The USA!”

The final image of Horsey’s illustration has the blonde-haired woman standing with her hands clasped in front of her, sporting an ear-to-ear grin as she radiates pride in her progressive anthem. The cartoon was not clever, funny, intellectually stimulating or emotionally moving and Horsey’s work has never come even close to the authentic artistic impact that Paul Conrad’s illustrations had long delivered for the Los Angeles Times during the newspaper’s heyday as an editorial powerhouse.

Where Conrad reliably displayed depth and nuance when grappling with the complexities presented by the universe of thorny issues that he addressed with his illustrations, Horsey’s work is a predictable presentation of a one-dimensional progressive Pap smear. While his work is flat, unsurprising and rarely daring, Horsey could nonetheless be counted on to reliably deliver rote dogma for the progressives.

Horsey’s ‘America The Beautiful’ cartoon offers a surreal depiction and it captures the Jonestown zeal with which progressives pursue the demographic displacement of whites and celebrate the prospect of their cultural death.

They cannot contain or conceal the happiness it brings them.

Comedian and cultural observer Bill Maher has casually acknowledged this during a variety of podcasts, including one in 2023 with Sharon Osbourne in which he noted that when he landed in London for the first time in 1984 he was taken aback by how white London was and it clearly put him off. In the four decades that followed, Maher mused with clear delight, London’s ethnically British white population had been annihilated by mass migration. “Can’t we just take the win,” Maher offered in a staged befuddlement over the Left’s continued war against whites everywhere.

Maher’s comments are instructive, as they again reveal what animates the worldview of Maher and his fellow travelers: that a world where whites are being eliminated in their homelands is a world heading in the right direction. The demographic razing of London’s white population is, as Maher sees it, “a win.” For someone who fancies himself as a fearless social commentator, Maher has yet to face any materially substantive push-back from his guests, which is probably understood before he books them. Maher has yet to be seriously questioned as to just why eliminating a white majority in the capital city of a white nation is a win? A win for what? A win for who? Pursuing his point to its logical conclusion, one must assume that the demographic destruction of white majorities in Liverpool, Manchester, Birmingham and Glasgow must all be viewed as dazzling victories to be achieved yet.

No one seems to care to ask Maher if he recoiled by how utterly Japanese the streets of Tokyo were when he first landed there, or whether he was put off to discover all the ethnic Turks bustling through the bazaars of Istanbul? Did Maher collapse as he stepped off the plane in Nairobi to find black Kenyans abound in Kenya? Or did he let out a geschrei when strolling the Zócalo in Mexico City at the sight of so many brown people?

Why does Maher’s fixation with population demographics focus solely on whites using a metric of less-is-better and none-is-divine, to be applied everywhere from whites’ ancestral homelands to the colonies they forged and the civilizations they built?

Perhaps someday he’ll be challenged and called to explain what really drives his desire to see whites marched steadily into mass marginalization before being shoved into the cattle cars bound for the furnaces of oblivion as the band plays the old progressive crowdpleaser: You Put In The Work (The Work Will Set You Free!), but who knows, Maher may have toked his way into a THC fog so impenetrable that even Cheech Marin couldn’t decode his answers.

Preaching the Joys of The Replacement has long been a crowd-pleaser among progressive Left circles and among cultural voices that reach far beyond in-crowd salons, newspapers’ editorial pages, university panel discussions and Sunday morning news shows.

Not all that terribly long ago, the late Anthony Bourdain, a well-regarded chef-turned-journalist pseudo celebrity whose series Parts Unknown on CNN became very well known for its compelling atmospherics and nuanced exploration of the human condition amid cultures around the globe, was captured on camera much like Joe Klein and Mona Charen’s had been, excitedly heralding the importance of reducing America’s white population as a means to a desirable end.

When told that sustained mass immigration was rapidly reshaping America’s demographic landscape, Bourdain became visibly animated with obvious glee as he declares “Good! Good!” and explains only by being less white will America change for the better.

Of course, Bourdain was destined to never see his dream come true.

Publicly humiliated by his significantly younger love interest, the actress Asia Argento, who had repaid his fanatical if slightly pathetic and somewhat disturbing adoration by canoodling with other men in-between accusing others of rape, well, old Tony decided no reservation was required and strung himself up in his French hotel room in June 2018.

Before he killed himself, Bourdain had suffered the sleazy indignity of having to go full-Weinstein and pay off one of Argento’s own accusers who said the actress had sexually assaulted him when he was a minor, providing a nasty hiccup in Bourdain’s holier-than-Hollywood narrative and one that prompted him to whip out his checkbook in a desperate effort to shut the kid up.

And what could be more Hollywood than hush money?

As Bourdain jerked, spasmed and twitched in terror and horrific agony during his last gasping moments on earth, it’s unclear if he harbored any real regrets about his elitist gloating over the ongoing replacement of white Americans, or whether, as the abyss crept over him and then swallowed him whole, his final thoughts remained solely focused on his tawdry humiliation at the hands of Ms. Argento.

For her part, Argento would later sniff to People Magazine that she was angry at Bourdain for killing himself as she considered it an abandonment of her and her kids, who were not his.

And there it is for poor old Tony; even in his grim death it was still all about her.

Regardless the fate of the Western world, one thing is certain: at the end of his own life Bourdain was clearly tired of waiting for death and, perhaps shouting ‘Yes, Chef!,’ took the matter into his own hands. If he gave any thought at all about the white populations he wanted to see diminished or destroyed, it is possible that he thought by personally dancing the Spandau ballet he could lead by example.

Perhaps.

Regardless, the green-lighting of mass migration has indeed been something of a cultural murder-suicide pact policy delivered to the West by its elite leaders.

The field testing of the formula was perfected during the mass waves of migration that began rolling over California in the mid-1980s following the mass amnesty of the Simpson-Mazzoli Act, which was complimented by the Left’s launching frenzied smear campaigns against any and all who dared to notice let alone challenge the policy that saw public schools, hospitals, recreational areas and even prisons overrun with migrants—all while doing everything they could to keep mass immigration into California running at full-steam.

There was ‘no evidence,’ the scripted refrain from the Left held, that proved millions of migrants pouring into the state were responsible for the ongoing replacement of Americans (and particularly white Americans) throughout its blue-collar employment sectors, across its infrastructure and at the center of the implosion of its social services that working class Americans relied upon in tough times.

Embittered residents knew the glaring truth: No evidence? Ha! It was only obvious to anyone who was actually there, including this writer. From the emergency rooms to the classrooms to the DMV and across construction sites everywhere, the replacement was unfolding in real time and right in front of our eyes.

And so it goes, with the replacement of white Americans both on and offscreen, as the progressive Left aggressively denies anything more sinister than a sociopolitical Happy Meal of ‘diversity’ and ‘inclusion’ is underfoot as whites are eliminated everywhere while simultaneously launching visceral attacks against the meaningful presence of whites virtually anywhere.

White Americans are increasingly understanding that ‘diversity’ really has precious little to do with actual inclusion but rather is merely the Left’s dog whistle for the absolute exclusion of whites. And as has been historically demonstrated beyond debate; successful exclusion is often merely prelude to an attempt at total elimination, either by forced exile or extermination.

White Americans have been speaking quietly amongst themselves about their accelerating visual zeroing out—daring to at least privately acknowledge the obvious undertaker in the living room—but oddly not a single network has covered the issue with any real racial ballast beyond the occasional passing and semi-cryptic comment from an anchor. Even Fox News seems intent only on addressing it through the perspective and voices of black commentators, as white commentators speaking clearly from an unapologetic position of support for their fellow white Americans remains largely verboten on Fox News.

Long before the spring of 2020, whites speaking in defense of fellow whites—beyond the legacy media-approved pathetic grovel of ‘Not all whites are racist’—was deemed the very definition of an affirmative denial of history and a brazen attack on blacks and Latinos.

Well into 2025, if whites are going to be defended on Fox News, the network believes that it’s better to assign that task to blacks.

Before he was fired, Tucker Carlson was free to observe the obvious but only with bizarrely opaque lines like: “A group of people are being targeted and attacked for their immutable characteristics.” Carlson was allowed to scratch his head and ponder aloud such slurry rhetorical fare as “where is all this heading,” but as the top-rated, primetime cable host he was not allowed by Rupe Murdoch & Co. to address the issue directly, in a very candid manner and over a meaningful length of time or consistently.

Tucker Carlson was allowed to say a new population is being funneled into the United States at a dizzying pace to replace the existing population of Americans, but he was not allowed to state the obvious: that the white majority population is effectively being targeted for elimination, not just as a dominant racial demographic but as a relevant racial presence altogether.

Tucker Carlson was allowed to say that an unnamed, mystery racial group is being targeted with vitriol and violence as a result of their “skin color,” and he was allowed to play cute little word games with terminology about the “levels of melatonin” of the targeted group, but he was expressly prohibited from acknowledging the obvious in any relevant, sustained fashion.

Thus, even at Fox News Channel, Tucker Carlson was not allowed to say that white Americans are coming under increasingly violent assaults across the United States, often by blacks and in wildly disproportionate ratios when considering racial population figures, official crime statistics and offender/victim profiles. Tucker Carlson was not allowed to state the fact that whites are far more likely to be violently attacked by a black criminal than blacks are to be violently attacked by a white criminal.

He was allowed and even encouraged to note that blacks are also far more likely to be victims of horrifically violent crime, just not by who, though he was allowed to say it’s not the police.

Imagine if the racial violence that greeted civil rights workers during the Freedom Summer of 1964 was reported on by using such a perverse clinical sterilization, with Walter Cronkite or David Brinkley dryly intoning: “A bus filled with individuals seeking to expand voter registration among Americans who have been systemically discriminated against as a result of their immutable characteristics was violently set upon by a frenzied mob determined to prevent people of a certain color from registering to vote as a result of their melatonin level.”

Imagine that absurdity versus what the obvious ugly truth of the matter was: “A bus filled with civil rights workers seeking to expand voter registration among blacks was violently set upon by a frenzied mob of whites determined to prevent blacks from registering to vote because they are black.”

The violence by whites against blacks in the 1960s and 1970s (Boston’s school desegregation efforts, etc.) was largely reported in an unvarnished and straightforward fashion. A half-century later, brazen and coordinated violence by blacks against whites is professionally obfuscated in a manner that reveals exactly what it is: a progressive policy objective.

For decades now, if the assailants are white and the victims are black—or any other category of ‘person of color’—that fact not only leads the story, but more often than not it is the story. So genetic is this narrative in what remains of newsrooms that trigger-happy editorial desks working social media outlets frequently label assailants white if the victims are black as an automatic hot-take on social media well before the actual facts are determined.

Conversely, if the assailants are black and the victims are white, that fact is either downplayed or effectively buried altogether by the news media. This is known across social media as ‘The Coulter Rule’ in honor of best-selling author Ann Coulter who has been pointing out this dynamic for decades.

Editorial guidelines long ago were effectively revamped to assert that black criminals victimizing whites may well be a crime but by definition cannot be a racially motivated crime, with rare exceptions possibly permitted if the black suspects are caught on tape bragging that they wanted to violently victimize whites. Yet even then only if other nebulous thresholds and malleable criteria are met and verified under the scrutiny of top editors.

The media even applies this double-standard and journalistic malfeasance on its own white employees, who dutifully submit as politically reliable social justice activists. Such was the case a decade ago in Norfolk, Virginia, when in April 2012 Virginian-Pilot reporters Dave Forster and Marjon Rostami, both white, were set upon by a mob of blacks and brutally beaten on the street—a terrifying assault that was carried out by waves of blacks jumping in after other assailants had had their fill.

And as the white reporters were beaten, their black attackers offered racial slurs as a soundtrack to the assault.

The response from the newspaper?

Well at first, in a word: nothing.

For two weeks the newspaper, from beat reporters to its top editors and the publisher, sat in stony silence on the story in an attempt to wait it out and see if every staff member at the broadsheet would do their duty, shut their mouths and move on in the hopes that the vile racially-motivated attack and disgusting aftermath would simply blow over.

For in pursuit of the progressives’ racial justice plan, whites (including reporters) are expected to stoically take the occasional black mob beat down. In progressive Left parlance it’s known simply as an admirable part of: ‘Showing up’ and ‘Putting in the work.’ Dutifully suffering an assault that will leave them with PTSD and worse for the rest of their lives was seen by their newspaper as an act of atonement on behalf of Forster and Rostami for their genetic guilt.

As for the two reporters, they fell in line and blamed the cops.

When news of the attack finally leaked, the Virginian-Pilot rushed columnist Michelle Washington in to spell out an approved version of what happened as the newspaper went into damage control mode. Then as the shit-storm broke around their racially-motivated cover-up, the Virginian-Pilot deployed reporter Kerry Dougherty to pen a column headlined: ‘Attack on Pilot Reporters was a Crime—but not only one.’

Forster and Rastami being pulled from their car by the black mob after they had pelted it with rocks and then beaten them on the street while gleefully shouting anti-white racial epithets was, Dougherty acknowledged, a crime. But without missing a beat, she then deflected the fact that the “punks” who did it happened to be black and Forster and Rastami just happened to be white.

Ascribing a racial motive to the horrifying assault would be premature. Or in Dougherty’s words: “Some have assumed that because the victims are white and the perps are black, this was a racially motivated crime. That’s irresponsible.”

And the second crime in this case?

Well, as Dougherty saw it, it was the enormous backlash the newspaper received as a result of its failed cover-up. The angry letters, the cancelled subscriptions and the pulled advertisements were far more of a criminal offense than the mob stomping the newspaper’s reporters had taken two weeks earlier. The newspaper’s figurative beating came largely at the hands of the Drudge Report, which sent the assault viral with the headline: ‘100 Black Teens Beat White Couple in Norfolk…Media Bury Attack.’

Dougherty’s reaction to Drudge’s undeniably accurate assessment: “Sheesh.”

So, what does the Virginian-Pilot’s disgraceful operation in the aftermath of a racially-motivated hate crime by a black mob against two white journalists in 2012 have to do with the ‘Great Replacement’ now coming into crystal clear focus a decade later? Well, it provides another invaluable insight into the mindsets of the people—in this case the editorial activists at the desks of the agitprop broadsheets—who have been working relentlessly toward our present moment and the near future in heralds.

The replacement of whites is not a theory at all, but it is a conspiracy, a plan of action long pursued and one that is inseparable from the beatings such as that Forster and Rastami took a decade ago. Whether or not they concur is irrelevant, for it doesn’t make it any less a cold, hard fact.

If there is a silver-lining to the digital age, it is that it has stripped many of the narrative management and storyline powers from the legacy media gatekeepers—one of the most fundamental reasons that Silicon Valley has gone absolutely all-in on Big Tech censorship—and so the truth is still out there. For now, anyway.

And white America knows it.

That’s why its commonplace to see a story online with a headline like ‘Baltimore Man Shoots Mom Dead’ followed by hundreds or even thousands of comments along the lines of: “The mom is white and the alleged shooter has been identified as a 19-year-old ‘Baltimore man,’ anyone want to guess his race?!”

Just as it is commonly asserted that police in America pull over black motorists or otherwise harass, attack and murder blacks because they are black, it is now commonly understood among whites that the media in America will run relentless cover for black criminals victimizing whites because they are black.

This is important to grasp, since the progressive Left’s infiltration, seizure and programming of the news media narrative—along with their triumphant conquest of academia and entertainment— was a vital precursor to the moment the nation now finds itself in where the majority racial population can be erased and replaced in the public square in something of a flash but apparently without much of a bang, at least as of yet.

What awaits white Americans in the months and years ahead largely depends on whites themselves.

Whites got themselves into their current precarious position through decades of deferential detachment amid increasingly impolite company and, of course, by moving to more hospitable environs that ranged from new neighborhoods to rural redoubts across mountain ranges.

Whites got themselves into this deepening fix by refusing for the past four decades to demand that white political leaders of every political stripe speak up explicitly in defense of white Americans when and if the occasion called for it. To the contrary, white Americans have spent the better part of two generations allowing a political leadership to remain stone silent as a blood libel against them has been spewed forth by the progressive Left from rostrums in every venue imaginable.

As legacy media outlets like the Los Angeles Times and The New York Times weaponized their newsrooms of old into agitprop platforms staffed with cultish anti-white activists, most whites began and ended their objection with the cancellation of their subscriptions. What they didn’t do is employ the tactics that the progressive Left mastered long ago; they didn’t form advocacy groups and direct-action organizations that focus on multiple fronts to confront the newspapers’ (in this case) radically anti-white editorial policies. They didn’t target the newspapers’ advertisers with withering campaigns against their businesses or publicly stalk and harass them as they attempted to enjoy drinks, dinner or a show with friends and family—all tactics the progressive Left has ruthlessly employed.

No, white folks simply cancelled their subscriptions and bitched about it over morning coffee and on talk radio, hoping perhaps that Glenn Beck’s tear-streaked cry of: “Can’t we just end the division in this country!” would somehow be enough.

But it wasn’t enough. It wasn’t then, it isn’t now and it won’t be tomorrow.

The forces in play against white America are, generally speaking, not the majorities of any other racial or ethnic group in the United States. Most blacks and Latinos do not hate white people or even particularly dislike them personally, but they don’t need to in order for the policy of replacement and the anti-white pogroms that underpin it to proceed apace and eventually lead to what most certainly will be a violent catastrophe for all parties concerned.

The ultimate question confronting white Americans today isn’t: ‘What’s going to happen next?’

No, the only relevant question for white Americans at present is: ‘How are we going to defend our people, defend our culture, embrace our history and secure our future?’

Of course at the mere suggestion that whites would even dare contemplate a collective threat analysis and coordinate a risk management plan in response, the progressive Left escalates their organized attacks against proponents of white Americans, hysterically claiming that even calling for whites to defend themselves in the public square both literally and figuratively is somehow a brazen exhortation designed to inspire psychotic trailer-dwellers across the country to commit violence against blacks, Latinos and whoever else suits their fancy.

Naturally, the progressive Left is merely projecting its own homicidal hatred for all things white and its own long-running and often successful campaigns to motivate violence against white Americans.

Yet if the answer from whites continues to be remaining compliantly silent when disparaged in public, to keep their collective heads down and to sheepishly slink about their business in the hope that perhaps the plague of anti-white hatred in all of its manifestations will miraculously pass over their doorway and leave them unscathed—especially if their yard is suitably adorned with one or more social justice cult slogans—then white Americans can and should look forward to much darker and far more destructive days ahead.

Throughout the professions, across civic institutions, in the public square and into their private lives, if white Americans continue to hope that the highly organized, deeply financed and meticulously directed assaults against them will somehow magically ebb—as if hunting season might actually end when the allotted number of tags issued have either expired or been used—then their sudden deletion across the media will indeed prove to be the overture to their absolute violent denouement.

The progressive Left dog-whistle of ‘racial justice’ is a zero-sum power game based on a formula of subtraction; the elimination of whites, from statues torn down to historical and even fictional white figures turned black. That’s not happening in a vacuum nor is it by happenstance.

As brilliant as the musical Hamilton was (and this writer enjoyed an early performance of it at the Pantages during the production’s original LA opening), its raison d’être was the necessity of introducing a Founding Father like Alexander Hamilton to a generation of black Americans in a supposedly relatable manner.

As horribly insulting as that is to black Americans of every generation—accusing them of being unable or unwilling to comprehend a pivotal historical figure’s importance because he didn’t look or sound like them—the subtext of Hamilton was far more damaging to whites, which was precisely the point.

Just flip-the-script and the offense is quickly obvious.

In 2016, Nate Parker wrote, directed and starred in the film The Birth of a Nation, which was based around Nat Turner’s 1831 slave rebellion in Virginia. Since Parker is black, perhaps the now decade-old movie should be updated with a reboot starring Chris Hemsworth in the lead role as Turner as an effort to make the character more relatable to younger white audiences?

Or how about a Broadway musical on the life of W.E.B. Du Bois featuring Neil Patrick Harris cast as the lead? After all, Harris did a fine job fronting the cast of Rent when this writer saw it open in LA back in 1997, so there’s no reason to believe he couldn’t set a new standard of excellence on the stage as the seminal pan-African author who rose to prominence in America during the early 20^th Century and introduce Du Bois to a younger generation of white audiences who would better relate to him if he were presented as looking and sounding like them.

No? Of course not.

Whites don’t need to see a black historical figure of note be whitewashed in order to have a compelling interest in that person or their accomplishments, so why would blacks need to see a white historical figure dipped in chocolate before intellectual consumption? They don’t and it’s insulting to suggest they do, but of course the point isn’t to expand a white historical figure like Hamilton’s reach into the black community, the actual underlying point is to denigrate whites at the highest and most historically relevant level and then revel in the fanfare from both blacks and whites as they applaud and obscenely shout ‘Bravo!’

It has been five years since the fateful summer of 2020, five years burning down the road that is accelerating toward the collapse of the American construct and heralding a Post-American Age that has already dawned in many parts of the nation.

Most people seem to sense this and the mass anxiety that fills so much of the atmosphere now flows from a collective acknowledgement that the homeland stands on the brink and is unlikely to return to its former incarnation, but with dreadful uncertainty of what tomorrow may hold for them and how the tribalization of the American landscape will impact their lives.

For white Americans, there’s good news and bad news.

The good news is their own destiny still remains within their control, but only if they choose to step up and exercise it and own it. No one else is going to defend their history and their legacy, no one else is going to protect what they have worked for and earned and no one else is going to safeguard what they have built.

The bad news is that the hour is very late and continued denialism by white Americans of the clear facts that now face them will produce nothing more than the certainty of their demise, first figuratively across the civic and cultural landscape, which is already well under way, and then, without question, quite literally.

Those are the stakes and the choice is still theirs alone to make, for now.