The EU claims the Great Replacement is a conspiracy theory, but the UN claims Europe needs to accept 60 million migrants by 2050, mostly from Africa


In the same week that the European Parliament voted in favor of a resolution labeling the Great Replacement theory as “racist,” the Spanish newspaper La Vanguardia reported that the United Nations, the Wittgenstein Center in Austria, and the Center for Global Development in Washington D.C. are all advocating that Europe needs at least 60 million migrants in the coming decades “to survive” and that most of this immigration should come from Africa.

The UN, which has long advocated for “replacement migration” as a solution to Europe’s aging population, is now warning that Europe will not gain these migrants “if it does not stop being a fortress against immigration,” according to the Spanish paper.

The UN estimates that in 2050, the EU will have a shortage of 60.8 million workers, and the Wittgenstein Center for Demography and Global Human Capital argues this shortage will be even higher, placing it at 72.7 million. Both organizations are using their own estimates to advocate for further mass immigration.

In fact, Europe’s migrant population has been a net drain on state finances in many countries, including in Denmark, which spends €5 billion a year on integration efforts — efforts that have mostly failed. In fact, the non-Western migrant population is so poorly integrated that Danes are overwhelmingly against accepting more immigrants. Even the country’s left-wing Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen has promoted a policy of “zero” asylum seekers.

“Every fifth young man with a non-Western background born in 1997 had broken the law before turning 21. It’s not everyone. But there are too many young men who take the freedom of others, steal children’s futures, intimidate prison guards, and leave behind a long trail of insecurity,” said Frederiksen in 2021. Her position on migration is so popular that during snap elections on Nov. 1, she not only won a new mandate to rule, but her party is also by far the largest in Denmark.

It is not just liberal Denmark. In Norway, only about half of migrants work despite €6.6 billion invested in job integration efforts. In France, migration costs the country €25 billion a year, and many migrants remain unemployed even after years. Meanwhile, Germany announced two years ago it was spending €64.5 billion on education, social services, housing, and language courses to integrate the foreigners it already has. Those massive financial sums were disbursed even before nearly 1.5 million more migrants arrived in Germany this year.

If the UN report and Kenny’s claims are to be believed, these migrants should be heralded as a much-needed boost to Germany’s workforce. But the reality is that 12 out of 16 German states have already closed their borders entirely to new refugees, arguing their housing, social services, and education system are on the verge of being overloaded.

Data also refutes the argument that there will be integration problems in the beginning, but these will be outweighed by the benefits migrants eventually bring. The Turkish population, for example, which has in many cases been in Germany for multiple generations, is considered per many metrics to be the most poorly integrated group in the entire country. The promise of bringing in needed doctors, lawyers, and engineers, an idea elevated by proponents of mass immigration, has also not materialized. Most migrants feature low skills and little education; in some cases, migrants’ skills are so lackig that there is no viable path for them in Europe’s job market.

Others simply prefer to collect social benefits rather than toiling in low-wage, menial labor. Even in instances where doctors and engineers have been recruited from Africa, this raises troubling moral questions. Does Europe deserve to poach the best and brightest from countries in dire need of competent professionals? If economies merely needed young people to provide a better future, then Africa would be on the path to economic success. However, despite an abundance of young people, these countries are rife with corruption, have little to offer in terms of patents and innovation, and feature extreme insecurity and high crime levels.

Simply importing these young people to Europe will not work, according to many politicians, intellectuals, and policymakers. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, for example, has said the future of Africans is in Africa; he has put forward an alternative path, one which involves boosting the birth rate of Europeans.

“In all of Europe, there are fewer and fewer children, and the answer of the West to this is migration,” said Orbán in 2018. “They want as many migrants to enter as there are missing kids so that the numbers will add up. We Hungarians have a different way of thinking. Instead of just numbers, we want Hungarian children. Migration for us is surrender.”

Read More