This is not theory anymore. It is observable reality.
New Zealand’s demographic makeup is changing rapidly, and it is being driven overwhelmingly by mass immigration from India. That did not happen by accident. It happened because successive governments, and especially National, have treated immigration as an economic shortcut rather than a nation-shaping policy with long-term consequences.
Whenever this is pointed out, critics rush to smear anyone raising concerns as racist. It is a dishonest tactic designed to shut down debate. The truth is more uncomfortable than that. Plenty of Indians contribute to New Zealand society. Many work long hours, start businesses, and play by the rules. I’ll tell you one thing: you would not catch me working 14 hours a day in a corner dairy.
But contribution is not the same thing as scale.
When curry chefs and yoga teachers are waved through as “skilled migrants”, the system is no longer about filling genuine shortages. It is about volume. It is about numbers. It is about opening the bloody floodgates and then acting surprised when housing strains, wages stagnate, infrastructure buckles, and social cohesion starts to fray.
Replacement theory has always been framed as something extreme or fringe. Yet when people can see the transformation of their suburbs, schools, and workplaces with their own eyes, slogans stop working. You do not need to read manifestos or online forums to notice demographic replacement when it is happening in real time.
Governments like National have enabled this by setting immigration levels far beyond what the country can realistically absorb. They have done so while refusing to have an honest conversation about integration, limits, or the cultural impact of mass migration. Instead, they hide behind GDP figures and accuse critics of bad motives.
New Zealand in 50 years will not look like the New Zealand many of us grew up in. That is neither automatically good nor automatically bad, but it should be acknowledged honestly. Pretending this shift is imaginary, or dismissing anyone who notices it as a conspiracy theorist, is not leadership. It is denial.
Matua Kahurangi is just a bloke sharing thoughts on New Zealand and the world beyond. No fluff, just honest takes. He blogs on https://matuakahurangi.com/ where this article was sourced.
Whenever this is pointed out, critics rush to smear anyone raising concerns as racist. It is a dishonest tactic designed to shut down debate. The truth is more uncomfortable than that. Plenty of Indians contribute to New Zealand society. Many work long hours, start businesses, and play by the rules. I’ll tell you one thing: you would not catch me working 14 hours a day in a corner dairy.
But contribution is not the same thing as scale.
When curry chefs and yoga teachers are waved through as “skilled migrants”, the system is no longer about filling genuine shortages. It is about volume. It is about numbers. It is about opening the bloody floodgates and then acting surprised when housing strains, wages stagnate, infrastructure buckles, and social cohesion starts to fray.
Replacement theory has always been framed as something extreme or fringe. Yet when people can see the transformation of their suburbs, schools, and workplaces with their own eyes, slogans stop working. You do not need to read manifestos or online forums to notice demographic replacement when it is happening in real time.
Governments like National have enabled this by setting immigration levels far beyond what the country can realistically absorb. They have done so while refusing to have an honest conversation about integration, limits, or the cultural impact of mass migration. Instead, they hide behind GDP figures and accuse critics of bad motives.
New Zealand in 50 years will not look like the New Zealand many of us grew up in. That is neither automatically good nor automatically bad, but it should be acknowledged honestly. Pretending this shift is imaginary, or dismissing anyone who notices it as a conspiracy theorist, is not leadership. It is denial.
Matua Kahurangi is just a bloke sharing thoughts on New Zealand and the world beyond. No fluff, just honest takes. He blogs on https://matuakahurangi.com/ where this article was sourced.
7 comments:
I do not know why we have hundreds working for the Reserve bank when a 6th former could set the OCR and whilst it is really the Immigration Dept which determines inflation, our future, etc. If all the Indians aligned with the Coalition it could be some consolation. But many seems to have a resentful attitude toward whites, presumably based on their colonisation, despite colonists having established the infrastructure and governance which ended horrendous famines and enabled modern India. My concern is that with limited resort to English, and bombarded here with pro maori propaganda from day care through to university, and from the msm and more, many will identify with and fall for the current pro maori doctrine. However when Indians oust pro maori from the civil service, as they tend to do, we might get a far less indulgent approach to benefits for non industrious maori.
The economy in liberal democracies is a Ponzi scheme predicated on "endless growth" (which is impossible), which is why Western nations are being flooded with as many people as possible in order to keep consumption, demand and asset prices up. If these go backwards, the house of cards will crumble. The relatively recent concept of "racism" is used to prevent people objecting to the influx of brown people. But "racism" has lost a lot of its power, because it is increasingly obvious what is happening because the effects are seen everywhere you look. People are starting to ask themselves the obvious question "why are there so many Indians and Asians here?" As the author says, this is not an accident, it is a policy, and it is a bi-partisan policy, so it doesn't matter who leads the government.
What's more, the economic argument (as appalling as it is) is a best-case explanation. There's a good argument, evidenced by "multiculturalism" being almost entirely a Western phenomenon, that it is grounded in hostility and enmity towards White people and is purposely being used to replace us demographically (and the math tells us that the replacement is a fact, even if the motivation is conjecture at this time).
Lots of blame being heaped onto National but it was Labour, under Clarke, who opened up the imigration floodgates...Nowadays, I don't thnk a WASP approach to immigration would be allowed - thanks to the Left....
The "globalists" want a very mixed world population with one -way immigration to the West ( guaranteed via endless conflicts in developing states). Parents / grandparents who ignore this worldwide phenomenon are not preparing their future generations. As NZ is small, the impact will be very fast.
I don’t understand why the author and commentators think it matters that it’s Indians. Does it matter whether it’s Indians or South Africans or Chinese or Poms or anyone else, so long as the newcomers are willing to participate in a modern democracy where all are neighbours and all are equal? I like the fact that many of the young Indians moving to NZ are educated professionals. Most of those I know in Palmerston North are scientists and engineers. They’re lovely neighbours, with values and a work ethic that are enhancing our community. If we’re open to immigration, we’re doing very nicely out of it.
As I’ve mentioned before, just look outside hospitals in Wellington (and probably Auckland) at 600am and see who’s walking to work—almost all immigrants from India or SE Asia….
It matters who immigrants are - in the US the limit the number of immigrants coming from one country to about 10% - this results in 10% Turks, Lebanese, Chileans, Indians, Chinese, etc. You get the idea. No country should have a high concentration of immigrants from one country, especially in immigrants with potentially high birth rates. Immigration has to be controlled and monitored or the back lash against it is damaging.
Post a Comment
Thank you for joining the discussion. Breaking Views welcomes respectful contributions that enrich the debate. Please ensure your comments are not defamatory, derogatory or disruptive. We appreciate your cooperation.