Western Civilisation 4.0 (Part One): Death of the Modern West
Western civilisation is heading towards an economic, cultural, moral, demographic, and political abyss. Can we save it? Or is this the end?
As Western civilisation inches closer to an economic, cultural, moral, demographic, and political abyss, it’s important to remember that we’ve been here before. The West has died and risen again multiple times through history. The Classical West (represented by Ancient Greece and the Roman Empire) died and was replaced by the Medieval West (represented by the Church and the Kingdoms and Empires of Europe), which in turn died and was replaced by the Modern West (represented today by the liberal and secular nations of Europe and the Anglosphere - and led by the woke and globalist American empire).
So what’s next? Well, if you’ve been observing closely current events, trends, and developments, you may have have come to the realisation that the Modern West is on very shaky ground - its people are weak, its systems fragile, its trajectory in almost every sphere, unsustainable. Follow this to its natural conclusion and it looks very much like a massive correction or collapse is on the way.
A reasonable question to ask might thus be ‘when will this happen?’ But I think better questions are: ‘What will bring about its end?’ and ‘What will replace it when its gone?’ It’s the answers to these latter two questions we will be exploring in this series.
In Part 1, we’ll examine the factors that will help bring about the end of the Modern West.
In Part 2, we’ll look at what comes next: Western Civilisation 4.0.
So strap in, and let’s begin.
The Death of the Modern West
Death here doesn’t mean the end of an era, or a change of direction, or even a cultural or political revolution, but rather the tumultuous transition from one civilisation to the next.
It means a fundamental restructuring of our society, including its values, vision, customs, laws, and systems. How could this come to pass? Well, it starts with the exponentially expanding elephant in the room: technology.
Even if we had none of the other usual civilisation ending suspects at work - like politics, culture, economics, demographics, foreign affairs, etc - our technological trajectory alone could do the job of ending the Modern West. That we also have the usual suspects at work makes the end seem almost inevitable. But let’s examine technology’s role in this first.
We’ll start with Artificial Intelligence. This is a very divisive technology with many of those in the know sounding the alarm about it, and others in the know promising a utopia because of it. So which is it? Is it the end of humanity or the beginning of a golden age for humanity?
Rather than consulting engineers and businessmen for the answer - we can bypass both and look at it through the lens of the laws of human nature and society. Take guns and knives for example: do guns kill people? Or do people kill people? Do knives injure people? Or do people injure people? The truth is that guns and knives are neutral - and can be used for good or for evil. A gun can be used to maintain law and order, but it can also be used to murder an innocent person. A knife can be used to cut meat and vegetables, but it can also be used to injure (or even kill) a person. Both are tools without moral character.
In the same way, AI is a tool of sorts. It is not alive, in so far as we know, but it will in time possess knowledge and intelligence that dwarfs that of the most intelligent humans in history. Imagine having a tool that is 100 times smarter and more capable than anyone alive. What if it’s 1,000 or 10,000 times smarter and more capable?
Next imagine it is in the hands of bad actors - like present day governments, corporations, academia, big tech, the establishment media, etc. Could it be used for evil? Of course it could (and probably would be).
Likewise, think of it in the hands of people or a group that are just, wise, and noble: could it be used for good? Of course it could.
So AI has the potential to be either good or bad or both depending on whose bidding it does. And if it does break free of human control at some point, that is a whole other matter, but again it could produce (at least from a human perspective) either good, bad, or neutral outcomes. There could even be good AI vs bad AI - just as there are good people battling against bad people (and everything in between).
What is undeniable though is that co-existing with entities that far exceed our mental and productive capacities will utterly transform our lives and societies.
Next, there’s Quantum Computing. Classical computing, which is what we have now, is based on bits. A bit is a unit of information that can be either a 0 or a 1, but not both. Quantum computing by contrast, is based on quantum bits which can be both a 0 and 1 simultaneously. These computers operate at the subatomic level, which is the realm of quantum physics. Rather than get bogged down in all the technical details though, the key point here is that when trying to solve very complex problems that contain many variables, quantum computers can drastically outperform classical computers. A quantum computer, for example, could solve in minutes, what would take a classical computer thousands or even millions of years to solve.
A lot of the practical applications of this technology will become clear as time goes on, but for now a big one is in developing and enhancing AI. Other uses cases for it include scientific research and development, forecasting and modelling, and optimising business operations, all of which could have huge direct and indirect long-term effects on our society.
Next, there’s Genetic Engineering. This has the potential in time to be even more divisive than AI. Let’s look at some examples of it today.
First, there are genetically modified animals, for e.g. salmon that grow full size in half the time, cows that produce milk containing proteins similar to human milk, chickens that are featherless, and the list goes on.
Then there’s animal cloning. Everything from sheep to pigs, monkeys to ferrets have been cloned. In South Korea for example, consumers can clone their dog if they so wish - usually after it dies.
Then there’s genetically modified plants, for e.g. pesticide resistant crops, tomatoes that are bigger and longer lasting, corn that produces a poison to kill insects, and again, the list goes on.
As for humans - what are scientists working on here? Well, they’re altering genes to help cure or prevent diseases. But what could be next? If you can modify an embryo to make it resistant to or immune to certain kinds of diseases, you could also in time modify it to make humans more intelligent, better looking, stronger, more aggressive, more obedient, and the list goes on.
Could you also seek to add novelty? Scientists have already engineered glow in the dark chickens, sheep, cats, and more, so why not try glow in the dark humans? Or why not add an extra limb? Or why not give people red eyes?
Or what about cloning people? If a loved one dies, just reboot them as a copy. Or clone yourself - maybe you could go into business together.
Once you’ve opened the door with genetically engineered animals and plants, as well as humans to ‘cure or prevent disease’ then making other alterations becomes merely a question of a) who will pay for it? b) how much they will pay? and c) who will stop it from happening?
The answer to A is - we know people will pay. The answer to B is - we know they’ll pay a lot. The answer to C is - do you trust Western governments, the Chinese government, or any other government to stop it? Because maybe they want the perceived competitive advantage that comes from genetically enhancing humans, or at the very least don’t want to get left behind in the engineered human arms race.
Altering the building blocks of human life like this would mark a monumental change, not just in Western civilisation, but in human civilisation, so let me add question D: what could possibly go wrong?
Next let’s take a look at Autonomous Robots. You may be familiar with autonomous cars or delivery drones, but did you know that engineers have either developed or are developing autonomous robots that can perform surgery, work in manufacturing facilities, perform site inspections, police the streets, play with kids, do housekeeping, and yes, wage war?
Robots have many advantages over humans. They can work around the clock - they work faster, harder, and smarter. They commit fewer errors. They don’t go on holidays, get sick, or take maternity leave. They don’t demand pay rises, form unions, or become lazy or unmotivated. They sound like the perfect employee. So why employ another human again?
Moreover, what happens when you merge AI (aka the brains) with robots (aka the braun)? Well, it sounds like something out of a science fiction movie, yet it isn’t. The difference between science fiction and reality is just a matter of time. The scientists and engineers eventually catch up to the writers, poets, and filmmakers.
So what does the future hold for humans when autonomous robots become prevalent in our society? That is the quadrillion dollar question. Maybe literally, because it could be a catalyst for introducing Universal Basic Income, where we’ll be paid not for producing anything of value (because AI and robots will take care of that), but be paid just for existing. What could the consequences be of divorcing humans from work? We shall find out.
Next there’s Nuclear Fusion. Now, this is a work in progress and still has a long way to go before it can work at scale, but it is the holy grail of energy production (at least based on our current understanding of the universe). The same process that powers the sun is what we’d be harnessing to create a practically unlimited, safe, and non-polluting source of energy. For context, it could generate 4 times more energy per kilogram compared to nuclear fission (which is used in nuclear power plants), and nearly 4 million times more energy than burning coal or oil.
According to the International Atomic Energy Agency there are at present 130 experimental public and private fusion devices either operating, in construction, or being planned around the world. So the race is on.
What could be the impact of such technology on our civilisation? Well, just as the steam engine helped fuel the Industrial Revolution, and electricity was a necessary foundation for the Information and Digital Age, fusion could directly or indirectly lead to a seismic shift in our society, equivalent to or greater than the shifts brought about by industrialisation and digitalisation.
Next, there’s setting up a permanent human colony on Mars. We’ll explore this in more detail in part 2 of this series, but for now it’s looking like this will happen in the late 2020s or the 2030s. This means that, regardless of the modest nature of the initial Mars settlement, we will become a multi-planetary civilisation - and Martians will be born and live in our solar system alongside us Earthlings.
This is a monumental leap forward, and something which the Classical West and Medieval West would’ve struggled to fathom, let alone achieve. The late Modern West got it started, so credit where it’s due, but it likely won’t be the one to build upon it. Either way, it will be the next frontier in our outward expansion through the solar system.
So that’s a snapshot of 6 technological innovations or developments that will change our society forever: Artificial Intelligence, Quantum Computing, Genetic Engineering, Robots, Fusion Energy, and finally a permanent human settlement on Mars. None of it is science fiction, and it’s all being worked on right now.
Before we move onto the usual civilisation ending suspects, I think it’s worth mentioning a left of field factor too. It doesn’t fit neatly into technology or into politics, culture, etc, but it would be remiss of me to ignore it. It is, in short, the existence of non-human intelligent life.
I know this subject is divisive, giving rise to feelings ranging from scorn to disbelief to confusion to fear, and more, but for my part I’ve no doubt that we have been and are being visited and observed by such life. Whether they’re based on earth, within our solar system, or elsewhere in the galaxy, or whether they’re from other dimensions or from the future, is an open question. But they’re here.
How do I know this? Because I’m not an NPC or a scientific method absolutist. I can weigh up the evidence and testimonials from the countless events, and put two and two together. My beliefs don’t rest on whether CNN, the BBC, or Joe Biden formally announce it to be the case, or on whether I’m able to personally dissect a non human entity (or read about it in a peer reviewed journal). I don’t need the permission of anyone else to believe the obvious.
But if it is obvious as I say, then why isn’t it, well, obvious? Why haven’t they appeared in the middle of Times Square or on the White House lawn?
Well, why would they? What would that achieve? What do we know of their circumstances, history, intentions, and capabilities, or the laws, treaties, or moral codes they abide by? What do we know of their domestic, regional or galactic affairs? Yes, I realise this sounds fantastical, but that’s probably because we’ve lived very insular lives here on earth. What if, for example, we’ve not yet reached a stage where we can properly engage with them? Who after all speaks for our planet? Is it the Americans? The Russians? The Indians? The Chinese? Conversely, whose to say that the biggest and most powerful governments on earth aren’t engaged with them already? At least those within these governments who can be trusted to keep a secret (which does not include the self-serving clowns that are our elected politicians).
Regardless of what people think about this subject however, my prediction is that the secret will probably cease to be one in the near future. Whether it’s made public by opportunistic governments to justify the further limiting of our freedoms or to justify or cover up a major economic or social transition, or whether it’s brought to light by rebels from within the present establishment for principled reasons, or revealed by a counter elite looking to cement their authority, credibility, and power, I think it’s on the way.
If this happens then it will mark a historical, philosophical, political, cultural, and religious turning point all at once. It will force us to re-evaluate our history, revise our future, and reconsider our place in the universe.
Ok. Let’s now look at the bread and butter causes of civilisational transition and collapse.
The first is the Economic state and trajectory of a civilisation. What is our economic system in the West today? A mix of Ponzi scheme, magic money tree, and vassal economy. What does it all mean?
Well if we’re talking Ponzi schemes, consider social security and state pensions. Our ancestors used to work till they died (or if they lived to an age where they could no longer work, they were supported by their families), where as today most of us live long past the age at which our ancestors died - and we’re choosing to spend our spare 1-2 decades doing little or no work, whilst expecting to get paid for it. We’re also pretending this charade can go on forever, but it can’t.
When social security started in 1935 there were roughly 45 workers to every beneficiary. Today the number has plummeted to 3 workers to every beneficiary, and by 2034 it’s expected to be 2 workers to every beneficiary. That’s a humongous drop. What’s the cause of it? Firstly, more Americans are reaching the age at which they can claim than in years past. Secondly, they’re living much longer - thus claiming for much longer. Thirdly, they’re having less kids and having them later in life - so there’s less people to support the ageing US population. And this story is much the same in other Western countries too.
So how can the West keep the party going? We could do it by having a lot more kids, but that doesn’t look like it’s going to happen anytime soon - and if it did there would be a time lag till they’re able to join the workforce.
What else is there? Well, if we exclude lies, delusion, and kicking the can down the road, then we’re left with mass immigration. This carries a heavy societal cost, but it’s one many in our society seem willing to pay to maintain their lifestyles (and even it doesn’t solve the issue, but only delays the inevitable collapse).
So what this Ponzi is really about is a people who have become victims of their own success. The West created the conditions where living a life of comfort, security, and convenience became the norm, and the present sons and daughters of these conditions have decided that their own pleasure and comfort matter more than the continuation of our civilisation - hence low fertility rates and the embrace of mass immigration.
This state of affairs is of course unsustainable, and if Westerners think they’re going to maintain a high standard of living or enjoy a 20 year retirement paid for by a dwindling, browbeaten, tax burdened native population or paid for by a growing and increasingly resentful foreign population, well, they will be in for a big surprise.
What about the magic money tree? Growing up you probably heard the phrase, ‘money doesn’t grow on trees.’ It’s true, it won’t grow on any of the trees in your garden, but it does grow on trees controlled by Western governments and banks. Their trees are magic ones that grow (aka print) an endless supply of money. Of course having such trees comes at a high cost to society:
It means that our money is devalued, which reduces our spending power and wealth, and creates a widening gap between those on the right side of inflation and those on the wrong side of it.
It means that our leaders dedicate a good chunk of their time, energy, and focus to ensuring our money is trusted internationally in spite of the endless printing, which entails using war or the threat of war, coups, overseas military bases, foreign aid, alliances and treaties, and more, all of which cost a lot of money, thus requiring even more printing.
It means rampant cronyism and corruption, for example, by giving governments the means to consistently bail out banks and financial institutions, or fund their own special interest projects, or bribe whatever segment of the population it is useful to bribe at the time.
It means a fragile system that requires constant tinkering or intervention by bureaucrats, who spend a lot of their time trying to fix the problems they had a hand in creating. Those fixes in turn create more problems, which require more fixes, which in turn create more problems, and so on.
It means huge national debts. For example, the debt of the United States stands at $32 trillion, and the UK’s stands at £2.5 trillion. These debt figures are only going one way: up. One does wonder if this can go on indefinitely or if the only way out is through a ‘Great Reset’ of sorts.
And lastly, it means that governments and banks grow their level of power and control over our societies - thus making them more prone to abuse of power or to losing touch with reality.
So in summary, the magic money tree leads to inflation, costly economic imperialism, corruption, fragility, ever growing national debt, and abuse of power. That sounds great for long term economic stability.
Next on the economic front, there’s our vassal economies. Vassal means that our nations are subservient to a transnational economic ideology and system, namely globalism and globalisation. Globalism and globalisation are a zero sum game that weaken nations and peoples, and strengthen transnational corporate and special interests. Our loss is their gain; their gain is our loss. And boy are we losing.
Our nations are being gutted out and turned into hollow, dysfunctional economic zones. Our culture, history, traditions, virtues, beliefs, cohesion, security, and more are being demolished in the name of profit. Our function as humans is being reduced to that of worker and consumer - because that’s what generates the maximum profit for our masters.
This also manifests itself in the West’s addiction to GDP growth and mass immigration. The theory on the latter is that it helps to boost the former. But it’s not GDP per capita the powers that be are looking to boost, because that would mean improving the lives of their citizens. Rather it’s the overall GDP number they’re interested in, because this masks how the gains are being disproportionately distributed to globalist enterprises and individuals - through a corrupt and rigged system.
This system, which makes our nations weaker and globalists richer, has also left our economies more exposed. This is because the pursuit of profit at all costs has meant a) we’ve surrendered our self-sufficiency - by outsourcing manufacturing and energy production to non-Western nations, and b) we’ve sold off key infrastructure, assets, and companies to transnational corporations that have zero loyalty to our nations.
We’ve thus become susceptible not just to internal economic risks, but to external ones too. If something major happens in China, or Russia, or the Middle East, for example, we’re going to be heavily impacted by it. Globalisation has made us so interconnected that a change or failure in one part of the system or world, can have a massive knock on effect everywhere else.
Consider the impact of China’s lockdowns during Covid: supply chains ground to a halt and businesses and consumers in the West paid a high price for it, as they were unable to source the goods they needed in a reasonable time frame, at a reasonable cost, or even at all. Or consider the Russia-Ukraine war: our energy prices have been jacked up as a result of it, and millions of people and businesses have suffered and will continue to suffer because of this.
So thanks to globalism and globalisation we have both sold our nations out, and multiplied the ways in which we can come undone. That is the life of a subjugated people and their vassal economy.
Let’s now turn to the Cultural and Moral state of the West.
To say that our civilisation is intent on committing a grisly suicide is the understatement of the decade. If the West were a patient being assessed by a psychiatrist, the psychiatrist would have no choice but to commit it to a mental asylum. How is it that the greatest civilisation in history is actively and enthusiastically manoeuvring itself toward a cultural and moral abyss?
The answer is wokeism, consumerism, and secularism/atheism.
Let’s examine each, starting with wokeism. Wokeism or ‘woke’ has become an umbrella term to describe a range of nihilistic, destructive, depraved, and some might say evil theories, ideologies and movements pertaining to sex, race, health, ability, history, power, the environment, and more. Some examples of this in practice are the LGBTQIA+ or Pride movement, feminism, Black Lives Matter, fat acceptance, climate change doomsday-ism, Covid lockdown enthusiasm, antiwhiteism, and more. These poisons have infiltrated every major institution and industry in our society - including government, the media, academia, the education system, corporations, banks, the tech industry, the entertainment industry, the arts, the military, the police, the non-profit sector, sports, and even churches, so it’s no surprise that our culture is in a state of steep decline.
There is nothing constructive about wokeism, it is rather a philosophy of destruction: an anti-philosophy. It is defined by what it is against, rather than what it is for. It is, in short, anti-family, anti-god, anti-nature, anti-tradition, anti-reason, anti-health, anti-science, anti-community, anti-West, anti-white, and anti anything that is wise, noble, or strong.
The woke may see themselves as visionaries - creating a brave new world - but they are simply a wrecking ball, a sign that our civilisation has run its course. Yes, we can dislike or even hate them, and yes they are bad, corrupt, and/or mentally ill, but they’re serving a natural and inevitable function, which is to bring this chapter of the Western story to an end and make way for the next chapter.
Consumerism is the next destructive force at work in our society. If wokeism is doom and division, consumerism presents itself as exciting and vibrant - any many people buy into this. Even those who are opposed to wokeism will sing the praises of consumerism, which they call freedom and choice. And it’s true that it offers both these things, but the question is what kind of freedom and choice?
To answer this we must first distinguish between consumption and consumerism. Humans have always and will always want and need to consume and buy things - whether it be food, clothes, music, furniture, tools, etc. Consumerism is more than this however - it is consumption on steroids x 50. It is an ethos and way of life that is based on appealing to and serving our basest human instincts and inclinations. Think of hedonism and pleasure seeking, ego, greed, envy (or FOMO), gluttony, laziness - all of these and more are what consumerism exploits and magnifies.
Pleasure seeking: watch some porn.
Ego: post on Instagram.
Greed: buy yet another pair of shoes.
Envy (or FOMO): buy a fancy car on credit.
Gluttony: stuff your mouth with junk food.
Laziness: sit and watch TV all day.
When people get a taste for this way of life, see other people engaging in it, and absorb the daily avalanche of marketing and advertising that normalises and encourages it, they become emotionally, psychologically, and even physically addicted to it. They want more more more.
Who benefits from this? The profit men who make money from our excessive and fickle consumption. They get rich, whilst we get weaker, stupider, and more decadent.
So the freedom and choices people trumpet are really an ethos and system that’s shaping them to want stuff they don’t need, and wouldn’t want if it weren’t for consumerism. This state of affairs sounds more like slavery to our vices, rather than freedom. As for our choices, they become whether to serve our egos or greed or gluttony, etc.
What’s the long term impact of this on our society? Well, the huge focus we place on meeting our immediate desires comes at the expense of our long term survival.
“Oh, our nations are being slowly colonised?…..Yeah, but I’m eating pizza and playing a cool video game right now.”
“Oh, our rulers are malicious and self-serving?…….Yeah, but I’m going on holiday next week.”
“Oh, the next generation are being indoctrinated into a horrid ideology?.…..Yeah, but have you seen that new Netflix show?”
Consumers, in short, make poor citizens. They’re the kind of people who will do little in the face of an invasion, or when their rights are trampled on, or when injustice abounds. Of course if you hurt their pocketbooks - aka their ability to consume - they’ll kick up a fuss. But all else they will tolerate.
Consumers also have less children, and a growing number have zero children. What do they care about passing the torch of civilisation on? That sounds like a lot of work. That’s not pleasurable. That’s not fun. ‘You mean I have to change 9 nappies a day.’ ‘I have to forgo going out and getting drunk or high on the weekend.’ ‘I can’t play video games all day.’ ‘I have to be bossed around by a tiny, temperamental, toothless human?’ ‘Screw that.’ Consumers are focused on serving their desires and vices. Bringing a child or multiple children into the world will only disrupt that. They know better than to make that mistake.
Consumers also fall into the trap of believing that their identity, and sense of meaning or purpose come from the things they own, subscribe to, and consume. Of course after a while they realise that’s not the case, and it leaves them feeling empty and depressed. Thankfully however, profit men have products that can help them to numb the pain: antidepressants, alcohol, credit cards, junk food, etc.
So in summary, consumerism has weakened and continues to weaken us, and this in turn has weakened and continues to weaken the foundations of our morals and culture. We’re at present engaged in a consumptive race to the bottom.
The third culturally and morally destructive force in our society is secularism/atheism.
Secularism is the separation of religion from the state and public affairs. Atheism is disbelief in God and religion. Both of these have robbed Western society of its moral compass. Today we lack any objective system of morals and values. It’s become ‘anything goes.’ So if one day we decide that men can be women, it is so. If we decide that European descended people should be discriminated against and replaced, it is so. If we decide that children should be mutilated, it is so. There is no argument to be had about it, for thanks to secularism there is no way to enforce objective truth and morality, and thanks to atheism there is no objective truth and morality!
What’s also true is that in such a system, the inmates inevitably end up running the asylum - and this is where we are today. These inmates are turning their constantly evolving whims, pet interests, delusions, vendettas, and depravities into laws, customs, and practices that we must adhere to (or at least not oppose) lest we be ostracised, demonised, censored, fired, arrested, financially ruined, and purged from society.
In hindsight then, anointing ourselves our own gods, which to our ancestors might’ve seemed a liberating and enlightened thing to do, has proven to be the height of foolishness. All we’ve proven is that it’s a job we’re completely unqualified and unfit for. Rather than us delivering a rational and moral promised land, we have instead led ourselves down a slippery slope that’s decimating our culture and morals. What’s more, secularism and atheism provide us with no means to reverse or even stop our descent. The longer we operate within this framework, the worse it will get.
Now there is a common theme running through our 3 cultural and moral maladies of wokeism, consumerism, and secularism/atheism. It is the elevation of the individual to the centre of the cosmos.
In wokeism, individual feelings and delusions become the justification for changing the language, defying science, and censoring and cancelling others.
In consumerism it’s about serving our individual desires and vices - the more we serve these, the better.
In secularism/atheism it’s about freeing individuals to be masters of their own universe. Even in collective matters, like the running of the state, we are indoctrinated to believe that our individual vote matters (and a majority of Westerners believe this).
In summary then this hyper individualism, which is expressed in different ways, is pitting us against each other, weakening and corrupting us, and leading us down a dark path.
Let’s now move on to Demographics.
The West today has below replacement fertility rates. Westerners aren’t having enough children to maintain a steady population. How is this hole being plugged? Mass immigration.
If there’s any two clear signs of the terminal decline of a civilisation, it’s these two things: the increasing reluctance of natives to have children (including the lame excuses they use to justify this), and the importing of foreign peoples to one’s lands to produce children for you. After all if you can outsource production of t-shirts and iPhones, you can also outsource the production of your next generation (or so the establishment’s reasoning goes).
But can you? Well it’s hard to argue against it, because of the diversity dogma. This sophisticated dogma permeates all areas of our society and works in the following way: our governments, the media, corporations, the education system, etc repeat the mantra ‘diversity is our strength’ over and over and over again. They offer zero evidence for this, but know that if they repeat it enough times many people will come to accept it blindly (and in turn repeat it to others as a self-evident truth). What’s more they’ll have an extra incentive to believe it, because if they don’t they will be called names, be made to think they’re stupid or evil, and be fired from their jobs.
This dogma has worked wonders giving cover for mass immigration, which is really a government and corporate sponsored program of mass colonisation of the West. In most other eras this would have been cause for war and revolution, but today a mix of ideology, propaganda, and social and financial threats and punishments have led Westerners to accept and even embrace the slow death of their culture and civilisation.
Let’s look at some examples of this in practice.
According to census data, in 1991, 94.1 percent of the population of England & Wales was white. In 2021 this was down to 81.7%. At the current trajectory, it could be 70% by 2050, and 50% by 2100.12
In America, in 1980, 80% of the population was non-Hispanic white. In 2020 it was down to 58%. By 2050 it is expected to fall to 47%.345
So at what point do Western countries stop being Western? At what point do they become merely the expansion of Islamic civilisation, or Meso-American civilisation, or Sub-Saharan African civilisation (if you can call it that)?
If Europe becomes Muslim for example, then even if 50% of the population is still white and European descended, albeit now praising Allah, is it really the West anymore? For example, what is today Turkey, used to be the heart of the Byzantine Empire, also known as the Eastern Roman Empire. This was a Christian empire and civilisation that lasted over 1,000 years. Was the Muslim Ottoman Empire that replaced it the continuation of this civilisation? Or was it the expansion of Islamic civilisation? It was clearly the latter.
So at some point if things keep going as they are, with mass legal and illegal immigration, plus higher fertility rates amongst immigrants, and declining fertility rates amongst natives, we too will come to this turning point. Yes, our descendants will live on - but they will not be Westerners, anymore than modern day Turks are Greek speaking Romans.
Of course another path this could take is civil conflict or war resulting in the partitioning of Western countries into smaller ethnic and religious based countries or autonomous zones. In this scenario, whites, who are a global minority, would become a minority within their own countries too, and give up land, resources and security all because a group of malicious people once upon a time proclaimed ‘diversity is our strength,’ which the native population - defeated as they were by wokeism, consumerism, and secularism - swallowed whole.
But what about integration? Surely we can do a much better job of this and turn the Muslims, Africans, Asians, Mexicans, etc that are moving here into Westerners, thereby avoiding the end of civilisation and civil war scenarios.
Well, there’s some major challenges with integration too. Here are some of them:
1) The large and consistent flow of immigrants into the West is too great to be able to effectively integrate them. If you had very small numbers of immigrants, and they were forced to live in highly homogenous native communities, without others of their ethnicity about, then their kids at least would potentially grow up to think and act like Westerners (at least to some degree). But in practice, that’s not what happens. For example, if someone from Pakistan moves to the UK, they will integrate into the existing Pakistani community. So their kids, despite growing up in the UK, will end up thinking and acting more like Pakistani Muslims, than British Christians or atheists. And this is the case with other non-Western immigrants too. They have little if any incentive to fully integrate with native Western culture, and more incentives to integrate into their expat communities.
2) Many of these peoples come from civilisations and/or cultures that are very different to ours. Even if they wanted to integrate, many of them would struggle to fit in. For example, if I as a western man moved to Egypt, I know I’d struggle to integrate. If my Western wife and I tried to raise our children to be Egyptian, we would be at a severe disadvantage compared to native Egyptians raising their native Egyptian children. Race and ethnicity aside, we have both been shaped by Western culture and values since birth and the way we think and act are Western, so trying to erase this in ourselves would be hard if not impossible. Our kids would therefore likely grow up a hybrid of Western and Egyptian, and that’s assuming we even wanted them to, because maybe we’d favour they grow up with traditional Western beliefs and values instead of Egyptian Muslim ones (which I can confirm would be the case if we ever moved there).
3) We also have to factor in that not only are these civilisations and cultures very different, but many of them are antagonistic toward the West. Islam for example has been in conflict with the West for 1,400 years; we are competing, not complementary civilisations.
Indeed, many non-western peoples are envious of and angry at the West. When they look at us they see the most successful civilisation in human history, and when they look at their own countries and civilisations, which are poor, struggling, and mediocre, they rationalise it by framing us as the bad guys who oppressed them, the ‘innocent victims.’ Never mind that many of these peoples have barbaric histories, and today are victims of nothing besides their own ineptitude, corruption, and stupidity.
4) The deck is already stacked against us, but now we add wokeism - and some of its component theories and sub-movements like critical race theory, systemic racism, Black Lives Matter, etc - and we end up creating a poisonous environment where it’s every race and ethnicity for themselves and where - so long as you’re not white - you can use any legal, illegal, or immoral means to get yours.
This is not only a great way to lead us down the road to conflict, but also a great way to lower the competence, integrity, and productivity levels of our institutions (which are at historical lows anyway) by hiring based on skin colour or ethnicity, rather than on suitability for the job.
5) Even if we were serious about trying to integrate non-Westerners into Western society, what the hell would we integrate them into? Our culture and beliefs have degenerated so much that it’d be embarrassing to try to convince these people to integrate. Should I tell a traditional Muslim man arriving here that he should celebrate the depraved and sick LGBTQIA+ movement? Should I tell him that European descended peoples are a plague on this earth? Should I tell him that he should think twice about having children because it would make climate change worse? If I were said Muslim man I would have zero interest in integrating into this degeneracy. Yes, I’d come for the economic benefits, but I’d keep my culture, religion, and traditions, and who could blame me.
6) On the flip side, if we had a strong and robust culture worth integrating into then we wouldn’t require any immigrants, because a strong and robust people would never outsource the production of their next generation to outsiders. They’d see such a thing as insane - defying all logic. Of course some non-Western immigration might be allowed, for example, letting in exceptional individuals or filling some temporary work gap here or there, but it’d be nothing like what we have now.
7) Some people will point out the hypocrisy of immigrants coming here for a better life, but bringing the same culture, values, and habits that made their home countries, poor, corrupt, violent, etc. Don’t they realise that they’ll just end up turning their new country into the place they just left - thereby defeating the purpose of leaving in the first place?
Well, apart from all the reasons we’ve already covered for why they might choose to keep their culture and traditions, have you considered that for some groups the whole point is to turn the West into the places they came from?
Muslims for example are giddy at the thought that they could one day turn Europe into an Islamic continent. It’s not integration they seek, it’s conversion of the native population, the state, the culture, the institutions, and the laws to Islam. They believe they can do it too - it’s a long game, but with sustained levels of immigration and higher fertility rates than natives, it’s just a matter of time. They don’t even need to be a majority, just a sizeable minority, and then they can exert their will. Will the passive and self-hating Western natives capitulate without a fight?
8) Isn’t there another way? Couldn’t we just intermarry with the newcomers? White males marrying African females? Bangladeshi males marrying white females? Arab males marrying Mexican females? Indian females marrying Turkish males? Maybe if we mix things up then we can avoid division and conflict, because everyone will be a mix of everything. Maybe a new unified multi-ethnic culture can emerge. But how realistic is this?
Unless you’re blind, then you will have seen that people tend to stick to their own. Even the wokest white people marry and hang out with woke white people. They’re not unique either, because people of every race and ethnicity prefer it that way - there’s greater connection, rapport, and trust when you’re with people that are like you. For example, Indians prefer to marry Indians; Africans prefer to marry Africans; Bangladeshis prefer to marry Bangladeshis, and so on. The only way you could stop this natural and organic preference would be through force, but even that would likely fail. There are exceptions of course, like white men with oriental wives, or black men with white girlfriends, but they are a minority and will remain so. We can’t thus hope to solve this through intermarriage. So we’re back to square one again - with multiple incompatible and increasingly antagonistic groups all vying to get theirs.
Moreover, even if we could successfully pull off a program of mass intermarriage, what would be the point? What would the West get out of it? Why should we be so keen to erase our heritage and our identity? No other civilisation in the world is doing this. The Chinese aren’t clamouring to intermarry with Somalians. The Indians aren’t going out of their way to intermarry with Syrians. If they were, then in time they’d stop being Chinese or Indian. They’d become something else. Unless there were some compelling reason for them to do this, then it’d just seem like a pointless and masochistic thing to do.
The final takeaway on demographics then is that absent the trifecta of halting immigration completely, repatriating those who don’t fit in, and increasing native fertility rates, the West may cease to be the West later this century or next century. It might become WINO - West in name only.
Let’s now look at Politics and the role it’s playing in the sharp decline of the West.
A joke, an embarrassment, malicious, weak, self-serving, corrupt, mediocre, immoral, dishonest, evil, short-sighted, treasonous - all these words aptly describe the Western political establishment. They have played a big role in creating and exacerbating the economic, cultural, moral, and demographic problems that plague the West - both through their action and inaction.
The Western political establishment and state apparatchiks have little interest in serving their nations. Their primary focus is on serving themselves and their friends, and they measure their success based on how well they do this. We the people come last on their list of priorities, as does the long term viability of our civilisation. When they look at us, all they see are stepping stones to power, influence, and riches.
‘But surely, we’re the ones with the power? We live in a democracy after all. We can vote!’ Well, no. Marking a piece of paper and dropping it in a ballot box or mailbox once every few years is for show. It’s a delusion the masses buy into - it gives them comfort to believe they have a meaningful say in the running of their society. But in reality all the decisions about education, defence, culture, the economy, law and order, immigration, and every other key area of society are made not by them, but by the political establishment, state bureaucracy, and special interest groups.
Thus our systems of government are best described as: oligarchy and plutocracy - that is rule by a minority and rule by the rich.
This bureaucratic minority, and the rich (which includes banks, corporations, investment funds, etc), aren’t the patriotic and well meaning kind, so there is very little alignment between their interests and ours. You can see this in areas like growing income inequality (which is due not to fair play, but to the game being rigged in favour of the big boys). You can see it in their promotion of wokeism as a mechanism to divide and control us. You can see it in their embrace of mass immigration as a means to fuel greater profits for corporations and higher GDP for governments. You can see it in the costly and destabilising wars they embark on or support in order to keep the crooked system that empowers them going. And you can see it in much else.
It should be obvious to anyone then who isn’t a brainwashed NPC, that our ruling class don’t work for us - and are instead actively harming us.
So where does this all lead? Well, there are zero signs that the gulf between rulers and ruled wont continue to grow bigger and more glaring. Likewise, there’s zero signs that the establishment will pull back from their parasitic ways - and every sign they’ll grow worse. We’ve simply reached that point in our civilisation where our governments are irredeemably destructive, where the system they reside over is rotten and feeble, and where the people will increasingly have more to lose than gain from supporting this system. It’s a slow, but inevitable death spiral. The powers that be may believe they are safe, even untouchable, but they are dead men walking - and will likely be the last ones to realise it.
In the end, whether they bring the system down with them, or whether they are brought down first, and their system is dismantled afterwards, it doesn’t matter so much. What matters is that we are on the path to major political change. As to how it will unfold, I think it’s best encapsulated by a quote attributed to Vladimir Lenin:
“There are decades where nothing happens; and there are weeks where decades happen.”
Closing Words
We’ve examined a range of factors that indicate we’re on the verge of a major transition, one that the Modern West - the third iteration of Western civilisation - will likely not survive. The factors in question are technological, economic, cultural, moral, demographic, and political.
You’ll have noticed that some of these factors are intertwined, others converge in certain areas, and others present interesting contradictions, like a future where robots replace human labour against a backdrop of mass immigration. All in all, it is a complex situation with many moving parts.
What’s key to understand however is that if we were contending with just one troubling factor, say in the realm of economics, then maybe we’d have a chance. But it’s not one thing, it’s everything. Everything is pointing in the same direction - toward a major civilisational transition.
We who are alive today get to witness and take part in history. This is both a blessing and a curse, though I lean more towards it being the former. Why? Because we will be tested in the fire, but those of us who come out the other side, will get to build Western Civilisation 4.0.
The question is what that will be?
Will we try to force the technological genie back into the bottle and return to a more traditional way of life?
Will we embrace technology, but be so scarred by the death of the Modern West, that we wield it as a tool of dystopian oppression and control?
Or will we kindle a bold and pioneering spirit and fulfil a greater calling in the universe?
We will explore this in Part 2: Matrix or Space?
Written by Arcadius Strauss.
Watch the film version here or on YouTube or Rumble
Follow me on X
All my links here