It is almost incomprehensible to me.
In my lifetime - I turned 51 last year - they have managed, through adjustments to The Great Narrative - which the Man on Television and the Woman in the Party work on every single day, year-round - to normalise something that has historically always been epoch-defining.
Look at the graph.
In four years, nearly 8% of Nicaragua's entire population has migrated into the United States.
7% of Cuba.
6% of Haiti.
5% of Honduras.
Just stop for a moment.
Breathe, to get it in perspective.
Imagine it the other way around -
8% of Denmark's population moves to one other country in four years.
(and I know that was roughly the number who would have moved to Sweden back when the Danish People's Party was gaining ground in an election - but everyone except 3-4 people stayed - and the few who went are sitting in a suburb of Malmö now learning Arabic so they can better understand Sharia. It's survival. So good luck to them.)
8%
Imagine if Aarhus and Odense simply disappeared from Denmark in four years.
Not died.
Not over generations.
But moved collectively at once to one other country.
That is the order of magnitude we're talking about at 8%.
Not small movements.
Not gradual changes.
But enormous demographic shifts in a few years.
It's the same pattern we've experienced in Europe over the last 3-4 decades - just slower but still an enormous influx unlike anything seen in all of recorded history.
Entire population compositions are changing. Cultures, norms, belief systems and value hierarchies are being mixed at a pace never before seen in peacetime.
And yet it's called everywhere - "natural."
"Expected."
"Inevitable."
What throughout world history has been the cause of conflict, tension, friction and in many cases dissolution - and war - is now described as a kind of administrative technique. As something that just needs to be arranged and set up properly in a spreadsheet.
The most remarkable thing, for me, though, is not the change itself.
It's that the moral compass has been turned upside down for the entire Western world in the same period.
That you're not just expected to accept the development - but that you're morally suspected if you ask questions.
Psychologised. If not outright pathologised.
As if there's something fundamentally wrong with you if you feel an impulse inside that says -
"Wait just a moment. History shows us something else. Can we talk about the pace? The scale? The consequences?"
... such banal and fundamental questions are interpreted as though you have a moral deficiency.
Because - that is new.
Throughout all of recorded history, societies have had strong instincts for boundaries, cohesion and cultural continuity. Not because the societies or the people in them were driven by malice - but by self-preservation. Securing cohesion.
You can believe the development is good.
You can believe it's necessary.
You can actually also believe it's inevitable.
But to claim that it's without historical weight, without risks and without legitimate debate - that is itself ahistorical.
And it becomes extremely dangerous when every objection is met not with arguments, but with moral suspicion.
When conscience is activated as a weapon.
When you're made to feel that asking questions is a sign of lacking humanity.
That's where the "hack" lies - if you wonder how they managed to change the Narrative so you believed these enormous shifts were completely normal, and not something you should pay further attention to.
Not in the numbers.
But in the conscience.
And that's perhaps where my bewilderment lies.
Not in that the world is changing.
It always has.
But in that we pretend it isn't - because if we notice it, articulate it or ask about it, then there's something wrong with you.
That needs to stop.
Now.
❤️🔥🪽
Sidenote: You're welcome in the usual style to relativise the numbers in every conceivable way. Everyone with even a half-functional brain knows what I'm writing about.
