Has the Great Replacement Gone Mainstream? By Chris Knight (Florida)

Is the "Great Replacement"—the idea that White populations in the West are being systematically replaced by non-white immigrants—finally breaking into the mainstream? Gregory Hood's American Renaissance article, published April 28, 2025, argues it is, pointing to the term's growing visibility despite heavy censorship. Coined by French writer Renaud Camus, the phrase describes a demographic shift where Whites face minority status in their "historic homelands" by century's end, with profound cultural and political consequences. Hood claims recent events, like the UK banning Camus, signal the idea's potency, even as elites label it a "conspiracy theory." But has it truly gone mainstream, or is it still a fringe fixation amplified by X outrage? Let's exam Hood's case.

Hood's Case for Mainstream Momentum

Hood argues the Great Replacement is gaining traction, not because it's universally accepted, but because its suppression proves its threat to elites. His key points:

1.Demographic Reality:

Whites are on track to be minorities in the US (where non-white births already dominate) and Europe by 2100, with outcomes ranging from "Zimbabwe at worst" to "Lebanon at best."

The scale is so vast it's hard to discuss without sounding "lunatic," making Camus's term vital for framing it.

2.Censorship Backfiring:

The UK banned Camus in April 2025, citing "public good," sparking media coverage (Wall Street Journal, GB News, Times of India). This "Streisand effect" boosted his profile, with @DaveAtherton20 on X noting it drew "greater attention" to his work.

YouTube flagged Eva Vlaardingerbroek's speech as "hate speech" for mentioning the term, and Amazon briefly blocked Camus's book, later citing an "error."

3.Elite Contradictions:

Critics call it a "conspiracy theory" (e.g., House Democrats' 2022 resolution), yet figures like Joe Biden in 2015 praised immigration making Whites a minority as a "good thing." Hood sees this as proof of a double standard: it's real when celebrated, toxic when opposed.

French far-left leader Mélenchon's 2025 call for a "Creole nation" shows elites openly embracing demographic change.

4.Anglosphere Repression:

The UK, Australia, and Canada curb free speech, with the US's First Amendment as a fading bulwark. Hood argues this shows the Great Replacement's reality—replacing Whites erodes liberal values like free speech, as non-White groups prioritise collectivism.

Hood's claim that the Great Replacement is "mainstream" holds partial truth but needs scrutiny. Let's break it down:

The term is more visible, thanks to censorship blunders. The UK's ban on Camus made headlines (AFP, GB News), and X posts like @RenaudCamus's "it's not a theory, it's a crime" show it's a hot topic. But mainstream doesn't mean endorsed—most media still frame it as toxic. The Guardian (2022) tied it to "racist conspiracy" narratives, and public opinion, per 2024 YouGov polls, largely rejects far-right framing.

Hood's stats are solid—US Census projects whites as a minority by 2045, and Europe's fertility rates (1.5 vs. higher migrant rates) point to shifts by 2100.

Hood's right that bans backfire. The UK's move, condemned by Vauban Books as anti-democratic, echoed on X with @Homeland_Party calling it a "plain fact." Yet, censorship isn't new—Camus's Twitter suspension predates 2025. The "mainstream" leap is more about fringe amplification than broad embrace.

Biden's 2015 boast versus 2022's "lie" claim exposes contradictions, as does Mélenchon's Creole vision. His Anglosphere critique holds, though: Australia's 2025 speech laws and Canada's Bill C-63 curb dissent, signalling discomfort with demographic debates.

Hood's argument shines in exposing elite double standards and the term's growing traction. The UK ban and media coverage prove it's no longer ignorable. His demographic warnings align with data, and the free speech erosion is undeniable—look at YouTube's takedowns or Amazon's "error."

The Great Replacement fuels X like wildfire. Posts like @BovrilG celebrates GB News debating it as "inconceivable" five years ago. Survivalist YouTube channels, akin to those hyping war culls, spin it as a globalist plot to erase Whites, urging prepping. These amplify Hood's narrative Still, the anger—over housing, wages, and cultural loss—mirrors van Onselen's student export critique: elites hide hard truths.

Hood's clarity cuts through. The Great Replacement isn't fully mainstream—public discourse still shuns it—but it's no longer fringe. Censorship, like Camus's ban, only fuels its spread. The real issue isn't just demographics but trust: when elites dismiss concerns as "lies" while praising "diversity," they breed resentment. Whether you see it as reality or exaggeration, the term's sticking because it names a fear—change without consent. That's why it's not going away, no matter how many bans or bot flip-flops we get.

https://www.amren.com/commentary/2025/04/the-great-replacement-goes-mainstream/

Gregory Hood, American Renaissance, April 28, 2025

The question is simple: The white race, yes or no?

By the end of this century, whites will be on track to becoming minorities in almost all our historic homelands, even within Europe. The majority of births in the United States are already to non-whites. This shift will have major political, economic, religious, and cultural implications. Whites can expect Zimbabwe at worst, South Africa at the norm, and something like Lebanon in the best case.

The scope of the change paradoxically makes it hard to talk about. It is so massive that to define it makes one sound like a lunatic. Naming it in an appropriate way is therefore essential.

That's why white advocates owe Renaud Camus a debt for coining The Great Replacement. No other term so accurately describes what is happening without seeming bizarre or overwrought. Mr. Camus is therefore a unique threat to our rulers despite his advanced age, reserved manner, and rather moderate opinions, including on Israel and Ukraine.

Recently, the United Kingdom banned Mr. Camus from entering the country. It said that his presence in the UK was not "conducive to the public good." It is an implicit admission that the millions of non-whites admitted to the United Kingdom are considered conducive to the public good. He was scheduled to speak at a conference of the Homeland Party and later at the Oxford Union.

The unfortunate truth is that censorship usually works. Ideas, figures, and political movements really can be relegated to the fringes, where the mere fact of their marginal existence scares people away. Yet this act by the Keir Starmer government may have backfired. The Wall Street Journal gave Mr. Camus a fairly positive profile because of the incident.

"Mr. Camus has committed the error of noticing all this," the article says. "If that makes him an enemy of the British state, it is because the state created the disaster." "The decision to bar Renaud Camus from the UK is only further confirmation that that country has abandoned the most basic principles of liberal democracy," said Mr. Camus's publisher, Vauban Books. Mr. Camus's latest book was reportedly blocked on Kindle by Amazon; Amazon now claims that this was an "error" and the book is being reinstated.

White advocates laugh at those who call The Great Replacement a mere "conspiracy theory." It is an obvious reality, especially because the same people who call it a conspiracy theory can't stop bragging about it in other contexts or urging that it continues. Nonetheless, it remains verboten.

YouTube labeled a speech by Eva Vlaardingerbroek "hate speech" and removed it due to her mention of "The Great Replacement." House Democrats condemned The Great Replacement theory as something that incites terrorism in a resolution in 2022. Joe Biden bragged in 2015 that "unrelenting" immigration would make whites a minority and that this is a "good thing," but in 2022, he said The Great Replacement is a "lie."

Mr. Camus's travails have made headlines:

o"French writer barred from visiting UK," AFP, April 19, 2024

o"Who is Renaud Camus and why was the French writer banned in UK?," The Times of India, April 20, 2025

o"French philosopher speaks out after being BANNED from entering UK for anti-migration views," GB News, April 19, 2025

Especially poignant was Mr. Camus's contention in the GB News article that "in my idea England has been the country of free speech par excellence." However, the Anglosphere today, outside the United States, may be the most repressive geopolitical bloc in the world. Australia, New Zealand, and Canada are all pushing major restrictions on free speech. The United Kingdom, the birthplace of what we once called "English liberty," has long since become a repressive Airstrip One, its institutions, traditions, and unwritten constitution notwithstanding. The United States has the First Amendment, but this is a holdover from a better time. Changing demographics mean a future Supreme Court could "discover" it does not actually mean what it says.

Yet one cannot help but feel Mr. Camus is speaking a language much of his audience simply cannot understand. A recent interview with Freddie Sayers is instructive. Mr. Camus refers to the existence of peoples and nations as things that we have a real stake in. Mr. Sayers does not seem to grasp this or relate to it. It is simply incomprehensible. If one subscribes to individualism or believes we are simply creatures that exist to maximise economic returns, this is logical.

Unfortunately, it is precisely in the Anglosphere where the false values of individualism and economism have taken root. Of course, mass non-white immigration ultimately destroys both of them by incentivizing racial and religious collectivism as different groups compete for more subsidies from the democratic state. Open borders do not create prosperity but a growing class of dependents that will vote itself an ever larger share of entitlements from the dwindling white tax base. It may seem paradoxical that Enlightenment Anglo-American political theories built upon individual freedom and property rights are leading us to a kind of racial communism, but here we are.

Now, the civilization that gave free speech to the world is leading the way in abolishing it. Those who refuse to address The Great Replacement tell us that "ideas" are what matter, not people. Yet we have seen that when white people are replaced, the "ideas" that once defined liberal democracy are replaced too.