What Is The Correct Number Of Native White People In Britain?

Whither 2050..?

Will we know when the ‘correct’ number of white people has been reached? And will the British government, or the US, or Canada, tell us when this happens?

I really don’t like the term ‘white’, preferring instead the nomenclature ‘European’. The term is now so ubiquitous however in the current political and cultural climate, that we have to play along a little bit just so that we can participate in the debate — such as it is. White people, we can presume, are those folks with ancestry from Europe. No white person is white, with skin tone ranging from the pale-pink Irish, to the nicely-tanned Greeks. Other phenotypes have an equally wide range: eye color from pale blue to dark brown, hair color from light blond to black, and everything in between. Diversity is indeed Europe’s strength!

The Courier

European-heritage people now live all over the world; from the descendants of settlers in North America and Australia, to former colonial administrations in Hong Kong, India and Africa. Despite this, it is Europe itself that is the only homeland Europeans have in this world — and this is important. Whilst arguments can be made that Europeans in North America for example cannot reasonably call it their ‘homeland’, even though prior settlers and their descendants created these countries as we know them today from scratch. The European homelands, in contrast, have been home to the various tribes of Europe for over 10,000 years, since the retreat of the glaciers from the last Ice Age.

Receive them, help them, educate them … but ultimately they should develop their own country. I think Europe belongs to the Europeans.

Dalai Lama

The number of white people in their various world locations is steady, or slightly declining, in absolute terms, and dramatically declining in relative terms. In the 1950s, the United States had those of European-heritage representing 90% of the population; today it’s estimated to be around 65%. In the 1990s, Canada had a European-heritage population of 95%; today it’s around 75%. The British Isles in the 1990s had a native population (indigenous English, Irish, Scottish & Welsh) also of around 95%; in the next census of 2021, it’s estimated, like Canada, to be around 75%.


These relative white-population declines are significant, considering especially the 20% decline in just over 20 years for Canada & the UK. In the 1950s, it was estimated that people with European ancestry accounted for 25% of the world population; today that number is down to around 10%, due to the exceptional growth in the last fifty years of Asian and African populations. The point here is that white people have a significantly lower absolute and relative population numbers in the world today, a world where migration from anywhere in the world to European and European-heritage countries is now deemed (and the courts will be glad to deem them) to be a human right.

The Toronto Star

The United Nations Global Compact on Refugees (2018) basically transfers these human rights to migrants, essentially diminishing or even nullifying any concept of national sovereignty for the receiving nations. The ‘human right to migrate’ inherent in their document is essentially a transfer of people to the homelands of the European people (and settled European-heritage nations) from anywhere in the world. And now that the ‘rest of the world’ is currently 90% of the world’s population, that’s a lot of potential people transferring themselves to these Western nations.

Angus Reid

Not that global compacts are really needed at this point in order for leftist European and North American politicians to virtue-signal their liberal bona fides. In the recent Canadian election the Liberals declared their intention to increase immigration (not including work- and student-visas) to a staggering 350,000 a year, despite only 6% of Canadians wanting an increase. The milquetoast ‘Conservative’ leader, Andrew Scheer, when pressed into what his number would be, basically agreed to the Liberal’s astronomical levels. And in the upcoming UK election, Labour’s Jeremy Corbyn believes that no cap on immigration should be enforced (the UK is also in the 300,000+ range), and the ‘Conservative’ leader, Boris Johnson, in imitation of his damp-rag Canadian counterpart, stated that he too will not be diminishing the importance of immigration by assigning any limit to the annual numbers. And to find the wokest views on mass, uncontrolled immigration, one needs only listen to the rabid open-borders Democrats in their 2020 presidential candidate debates.

There are arguments to be made on what role the European-Americans will have in a future America, and what role European-Canadians will have in Canada, and so on. Their ancestors certainly made those two countries what they are today, both in cultural and economic terms. But the homelands of Europe are different. If all else fails, this is where they came from, and this is where they should be able to return. However, with the United Nations deeming migration to be a right, and encouraging ‘replacement migration’ for the purported benefit of upholding the social-welfare economic structure in Western nations, there are powerful forces arrayed that don’t believe that indigenous Europeans should have any place to call their own at all.

United Nations

Which brings me back to, “What is the correct number”? We have a current situation where a consensus of Western politicians want to increase already-high immigration. We also have a consensus that we shouldn’t really talk about any limits, any caps, or indeed even mentioning any immigration numbers at all. We also have native populations that are highly suspicious and cynical about the never-ending influx of the third-world to their once-peaceful, high-trust societies, but most are too afraid to say anything. To even think about such things would be racist, and that’s the worst thing (as opposed to destroying an entire culture) you can be apparently.

The Telegraph

But what of a future 2050 America, Canada and Britain? What of its indigenous and settled peoples? What of its culture? When their populations are at 40%, what does this mean, when even at today’s 65%-75% levels the denigration of European-heritage culture is institutional and ‘white privilege’ and ‘decolonization’ of learning are accepted anti-white concepts? And is there any end to this? As noted, 90% of the world is non-European. A constant, open-borders, annual mass immigration policy deemed necessary by most Western political leaders would presumably eventually decrease white populations to 10%. Or less. In Europe. In North America. In Australia. Everywhere; with no homelands to call their own.

2 thoughts on “What Is The Correct Number Of Native White People In Britain?

  1. Excuse me but you are wrong to say Europe is the homeland to white skinned humans. Actually, their homeland is in the Caucasus Mountains region and they were descendants of Albino “Black” Dravidians who were secluded from the rest of the populations, and then essentially were driven out of central Asia by Mongolian Tribes into Europe which was populated by dark skinned humans. No the truth……………………………


    • Thanks. Maybe so, even though research will no doubt continue offer different interpretations on the movements of peoples. It’s not that they might have come from a place that is not now Europe, it’s that, as recognizable ethnic groups, it seems they alone are not afforded protections to their ancestral homelands & culture that seems uncritically a self-vide then truth when we think of the North America Indians, Tibetans, Japanese & so on.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s