Squatters in the RuinsEdward Donne
The last time I visited London was when it really struck me: The hordes of non-whites living in the city were squatters, living among the ruins of a formerly glorious civilization. Moslem mothers in their burqas and niqabs waited outside a Victorian-era school for their offspring. That school was an example of Victorian greatness: an architectural marvel on the one hand and nothing that special on the other. Its red brick facade was grimy from years of London smog, yet it stood proud and tall, its distinctive windows and angles all present and accounted for. The children that flooded out to their parents were almost uniformly brown or black. A few white children were scattered in the crowd. The juxtaposition was stark. The glory of the Victorians was now occupied largely by Third World immigrant population of the third world and their offspring, by people who could never have built such buildings of greatness.
Once I had noticed this, it was hard to ignore it all over London. Despite being heavily bombed during the Second World War, great swathes of London retain their Victorian-, Georgian-, and Edwardian-era housing and buildings. As white flight and non-white birth rates have increased, more non-whites live in these houses, go to school in them, or even work in them. The distinctive style of each era of English history is reflected in these buildings, but they are occupied by a population that has no real connection to the people who once built them.
That connection is part what keeps nations alive. It keeps people rooted in their own history and sense of place. It is the idea that you might live in a house in which another family might have lived years ago, but you know they looked like you. They shared your language, they probably shared your religion, they likely shared most of your beliefs about what makes the good life. Inhabiting that house is a connection to your shared past. The squatters in those houses today have no such connection. These buildings are alien to them. For a long time, a refrain of the nationalist has been one of Blood and Soil — and this spoke to people who were once more strongly connected to the land. That connection has largely been severed now, though. More and more people grow up in an urban environment.
In the United States the problem is similar, although architecturally Americans haven’t been as determined to destroy older buildings or to build new ones. Our cities here are also occupied; in fact, a common refrain from many on the Right as a whole is that people should abandon cities. It was on a recent trip to Europe that I was reminded that cities can be lovely places to live. They can be functional, beautiful, engaging places of culture, trade, and energy. In the US, however, most cities are haunted by the specter of black crime.
The inner cities of many great American cities have already lived through one Great Replacement; readers and indeed the general public are acutely aware of what happened to Detroit. It is black crime and the subsequent influx of Hispanics that have largely made cities unappealing places to white Americans — although even now, as some young whites attempt to move back in order to rebuild in their own weird hipster way, they attack any attempt to reclaim such ground. There was a slew of articles about “gentrification” framed around well-paid whites (often Bugmen, unfortunately) moving to areas of cities that traditionally had been white, but that in recent memory had only been immigrant breeding grounds. These populations thought of this space as “their turf,” and now capital and the white bugman/hipster were coming back, bringing with them investment, rising prices, and horrific architecture.
That horrific architecture is part and parcel of modernity, it seems. It does not seem a coincidence to me, though. Traditional architecture roots people in their past. When the new developers or Marxist-trained architectural students get into their world, they build mono-pods. They are square, blocky, and brutalistic; they are also completely interchangeable the world over. We would not be surprised to see such a building in downtown Delhi, Sydney, or Singapore as we would in London. With interchangeable architecture that has no connection to the past, the occupants themselves become much more interchangeable. Many global cities end up looking very similar as capital and ideology combine to ruthlessly eradicate unique identities. The oddness of Pozuzo, a German-Austrian colony city in Peru, is marked largely by the fact that one does simply not expect to stumble upon Bavarian-style dwellings deep in the jungles of South America. Those people built in their own style, and their descendants maintain this unique connection to their heritage today.
In the age of the Great Replacement, it seems that it is not only people who are being replaced. It is ideological architecture and buildings that are changing the faces of many of our cities and countries. Ideology has replaced tradition and heritage in so many spheres that we are almost immune to its effects. Predictions are always difficult to make, but the generic nature of modern buildings and their underlying ideology could give way to something else. Already we see the murmurings of how “climate change” must be tackled. Does this represent the future ideology of builders? Will everything now align towards optimizing the human footprint upon the Earth? Get in the pod. People without concrete identities will accept the pod life. They will accept the pod life, as they feel replaced not just by the people around them, but because everything around them has been replaced.
The Great Replacement hits us as nationalists hardest when we see the changing nature of the people around us. The analogy of slowly boiling a frog to kill it never feels far away. It starts with a trickle into major metropolitan areas, a consequence of trade and expansion. Then it spreads further afield. There are many white areas around all of Europe that I have visited where I have been surprised to see a non-white face, in the same way that it is surprising when once-quaint alpine villages now have brutalist modern housing put up as the old structures are torn down. The rot spreads slowly and is harder to see, but what is lost through the changing faces of our cities, towns, and dwellings can perhaps be fought.
To end on an optimistic note, many German cities have been rebuilt in the traditional style. Dresden is perhaps the most famous, and the rebuilding there began much earlier, but even as recently as 2013, Frankfurt was rebuilding parts of its historic downtown in a more traditional style. The work has now largely been completed and it is a triumph of preservation and beauty. This gives at least a little bit of hope.
As a vanguard, we should not only care about the replacement of our people. This is indeed the most pressing issue we face, but that replacement is enabled by the destruction of things such as architectural beauty and the eradication of identity that is associated with it. The Great Replacement rolls on because our people have been psyopped out of having children. The housing market itself is a key concern I hear from many of my peers. It all comes together. We have to live somewhere and in something. We should be reclaiming our own buildings as we reclaim our past and take hold of our future.
Returning to London, where I began, I am struck how, even amidst the madness of the age, the Victorian, Georgian, and Edwardian buildings stand tall and proud. They can endure these squatters in them, for they are not yet ruins, as long as we live to fight.
* * *
Counter-Currents has extended special privileges to those who donate $120 or more per year.
- First, donor comments will appear immediately instead of waiting in a moderation queue. (People who abuse this privilege will lose it.)
- Second, donors will have immediate access to all Counter-Currents posts. Non-donors will find that one post a day, five posts a week will be behind a “paywall” and will be available to the general public after 30 days.
To get full access to all content behind the paywall, sign up here:
Paywall Gift Subscriptions
If you are already behind the paywall and want to share the benefits, Counter-Currents also offers paywall gift subscriptions. We need just five things from you:
- your payment
- the recipient’s name
- the recipient’s email address
- your name
- your email address
To register, just fill out this form and we will walk you through the payment and registration process. There are a number of different payment options.
Sexual Utopia in Stockholm
Springtime in Tallinn
Liberal Anti-Democracy, Chapter 5, Part 1: Democracy Against the People
The Burial of the Blarney Stone: Ireland’s New Hate Speech Legislation
Polite Society: A Film for the Coronation
(500) Days of Summer
Counter-Currents Radio Podcast No. 532: Tucker Carlson, America First, and More
We Can’t Save the Earth Without Reducing African Birth Rates
Non-Whites have come to occupy houses built by our ancestors, but they also occupy White society itself. Wherever White people try to flee, Jewish power will arrange to send non-Whites and we’ll have to take care of them. The worst squatters are the Jews themselves. They interfere in the relations between White people, even within White families. They prevent us from having our own media, our own internet, our own intellectual life and public discussion. As Theodor Fritsch wrote in 1927, “There is scarcely a field, from Art and Literature to Religion and Political Economy, from Politics to the most secret domains of sensuality and criminality, in which the influence of the Jewish spirit and of the Jewish entity cannot be clearly traced, and has not imparted a peculiar warp or trend to the affairs in question.”
There’s no doubt the Jews are responsible for the cubic architecture. I don’t know if they are trying to be funny or just want to encourage a more rational approach to building podhouses.
I think the ideology that is killing us has been well summed up in these words:
• There can be no all White countries anywhere. And there can be no all White areas in the formerly all White countries.
• There can be NO all White neighborhoods, police departments, pool parties in the formerly all White areas of the formerly all White countries.
We need to reclaim our architectural tradition, but most of all, we must reclaim the right to live among other White people, in separation from Blacks and Jews. American White Nationalists like to say: “We built this country”, but above all, White people built the White race. Other races should have no rights over us. They should not be allowed to use us as a disposable commodity. As Hitler said, “the most precious possession you have in this world is your own people”, it’s not the Victorian architecture.
@Armoric – Absolutely brilliant and inspiring comment! Your words have, quite sincerely, made a lasting impression on me. I will remember this:
“We built this country”, but above all, White people built the White race. Other races should have no rights over us. They should not be allowed to use us as a disposable commodity.
“Wherever White people try to flee, Jewish power will arrange to send non-Whites and we’ll have to take care of them.”
No one is stopping us European Peoples from forming our own towns; we’re still the majority. However, we do not have power because we are too gutless. Trump is an excellent example, NOT ONCE did he mention the European Peoples unemployment rate, while mentioning the non-Whites. Btw, he never deported ALL illegals, built the wall, & canceled birthright citizenship. He betrayed us, &, the sheeple still attend his appearances. Yes, we have a problem because we are the problem. Only an uncaring people pass on a future to their children being a minority.
As far as communities & towns, there are plenty examples like the Amish & the Hutterites (of course, we don’t have to copy their model verbatim).
Here are a super minority with a spine – Jews have their own areas like Kiryas Joel & Monroe. It is embarrassing to blame the enemy for their actions against us – it is not what they do but what we don’t do.
Blaming Trump is easy, when in reality, the man had to do his work in a totally negative atmosphere. He did what he could do within the confines that he had to work in.
A peoples architecture is an expression of its soul, history and culture. The moderns see people as interchangeable economic units and thus its architecture reflects this. Why would they build beautiful buildings to stand the test of time? They care not for the past or for the future. In their minds, buildings are only vehicles to maximize profit in the present.
Comments are closed.
If you have Paywall access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.