I have always had a fascination with empires and no doubt I will be writing on this subject again and again but for now I want to discuss something concerning imperialism which never fails to anger me. I am talking about how the existence of European overseas empires is somehow grounds for mass migration into Europe.
Unlike the masses of Afro-Asiatic peoples colonizing Europe, Europeans did not on the whole disrupt native cultures or ways of life. Obviously this was not so with the Americas, Australia and New Zealand but in Asia and Africa Europeans went out of their way to ensure that native folkways continued. In areas where other organized religions besides Christianity were present – Islam, Hinduism, Sikhism, Buddhism – Europeans generally left these groups alone. For example, in Indonesia the Dutch government did much to ensure that the primarily Muslim inhabitants of the East Indies could make the hajj. The Muslim scholar Sayid Uthman once stated that,
“Once again we [Muslims] consider it our duty to say thanks to the just Dutch colonial government which justly and dutifully enables us to perform our religious duties freely without any interference. Even more they graciously help us to perform our religious duties by providing salaries to the religious judges, by cancelling regular court sessions in the month of fasting and by supporting the building of mosques, as well as any other kind deeds which we have mentioned in our writings and in our prayers.”(Karel Steenbrink, Dutch Colonialism and Indonesian Islam: Contacts and Conflicts 1596-1950, trans. Jan Steenbrink and Henry Jansen (1993), page 133).
In Africa local chieftains continued to hold their posts and thus remain the heads of their communities. Similarly, in India and Malaysia local rulers were often left in place. The Indian Raj was actually a collection of many different states many of which were ruled by Indian monarchs.
Only truly perverse customs like cannibalism, FGM, wife burning, human sacrifice and the like were actually disposed of. Europeans also brought modern technologies and medicine which has allowed for greater mobility, better healthcare, access to knowledge than could have been the case otherwise. This is especially so in sub-Saharan Africa where birth rates are now skyrocketing as a result of European medicine.
Perhaps the most important issue to bring up is that Europeans never threatened the demographic makeup of the countries they conquered or peacefully absorbed – and yes that did happen. Again this is just in regards to Africa and Asia. Even in the case of Algeria and South Africa where Whites became substantial minorities the native peoples remained in the majority. Moreover, their birth rates remained stable. Most cases, however, the foreign presence was extremely limited, for example in India there was never any more than a few thousand Britons. They were never at any point a demographic threat.
This is completely different from the flooding of Europe by third-worlders. Our replacement levels are pitiful if existent at all. Those coming into Europe have far higher birth rates. Granted many foreigners are men but thanks to chain migration they can bring whole extended families. In time immigrant birth rates fall but not right away and seeing as how they are so much stronger to begin with, by the time they fall they will still be in a better demographic position. They are still well on their way to replacing Europeans.
One final point to make is that only a handful of European countries actually participated in overseas imperialism. Of course those who try to compare the displacement of Europeans by third-worlders to past imperialism are often unaware of how few nations actually took part in overseas imperialism. However, most would not change their opinions if they educated themselves because they are anti-White above all else.