This article covers the United Nations’ political and legal groundwork that facilitates their Replacement Migration agenda, including the legally-binding UN refugee convention and the UN’s various statements on race, discrimination, prejudice, and tolerance. Replacement Migration article coming soon (maybe 2022).

All sources will be listed in section 4.


  1. Introduction
  2. Criminalizing homogeneity
  3. Criminalizing homogeneity: TL;DR summary
  4. Sources

US military marches kids into desegregated schools at bayonet and gunpoint:

1. Introduction

Since its founding, one of the primary objectives of the United Nations has been to criminalize nationalism and outlaw racially and ethnically homogeneous countries — specifically White countries. This has been achieved incredibly successfully in the Western world and somewhat successfully in Russia and other Eastern European countries. The United Nations has played a leading but underappreciated (and underpublicized) role in the “diversification” of the West and the ethnic cleansing of Europeans worldwide.

Many people today are aware of the UN’s ‘Replacement Migration’ agenda [1], which claims that White countries (plus Japan and Korea) “need” to take in hundreds of millions of Third World immigrants to “offset low birth rates.”

The UN’s partner in crime, the European Union, has published similar documents advocating for the ethnic cleansing of European peoples via the mass importation of foreigners. [2]

It’s incredibly important to note that White peoples’ low birth rates are 100% artificially engineered by globalist elites, including the United Nations themselves, via policies such as contraception, divorce, feminism, and so on. See leaked reports from Planned Parenthood, the Rockefeller Foundation, World Bank (United Nations), and US NSC (includes CIA, military, etc.) for more information. To increase White birth rates, one simply has to un-do the birth-rate destroying policies listed in the aforementioned documents.

People often claim that the UN and EU are completely powerless, yet Replacement Migration is indisputably occurring and indisputably intentional. Unless you refer to Replacement Migration in unfavorable terms, like “White genocide” or “the Great Replacement.” In that case, Replacement Migration instantly transforms into a baseless “White supremacist Neo-Nazi conspiracy theory.”

Are the UN and EU pulling all of the strings? No, obviously not. But they are the public-facing organizations of the people who are pulling the strings.

Some foolish and naïve people may inquire as to how importing millions of ethnic Africans can increase low birth rates among ethnic Europeans. The answer is quite simple: Race isn’t real, you silly Neo-Nazi. All humans are perfectly interchangeable cogs ready to be slotted into the globalist meatgrinder anywhere in the world. But it’s still very important to remember that all White people are racial supremacist colonizers, and that we need to #StopAsianHate and campaign for Black Lives Matter. Race is a social construct. Got it?

Holland, Japan, Colombia:

2. Criminalizing homogeneity

Populist and openly anti-migrant politicians once being seen as fringe extremists have moved into the political mainstream, though several of them are still in the opposition [nationalist] political parties are gaining strength in almost all the European countries. The growing opposition from native population led most of the European countries to refuse to accept the migrants fleeing from the war and violence in the Middle East and North Africa, though, under international human rights law, they are obliged to ensure safe and effective access.

— Increasing Migration Pressure and Rising Nationalism: Implications for Multilateralism and SDG Implementation, whitepaper for UN DESA [3]

Alongside their genocidal “Replacement Migration” manifesto, which calls for all-out, industrial-scale ethnic cleansing of Europeans worldwide, the United Nations has also published multiple legally-binding conventions on “refugees” and immigration, alongside several declarations on racial discrimination that are indistinguishable from modern “Civil Rights” laws.

In 1951, the UN authored the ‘Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees,’ which was to be effective from 1954 onward and legally binding for all UN member states, which currently includes ~98% of all countries. [4]

Although the Convention had restricted refugee status to “events occurring before 1951 in Europe or elsewhere,” the 1967 ‘Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees’ removed the temporal and geographic restrictions, in response to increasing numbers of “decolonization refugees.”

The Convention & Protocol define a ‘refugee’ as:

owing to well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it.

In practical terms, this means that any person who declares themselves “scared” for any particular reason can be classified as a refugee. As you can see, they are clearly terrified:

Important legally binding Articles from the convention include:

  • Articles 32 and 33:
    Member states are forbidden from expelling or returning refugees.
  • Article 26:
    Member states are forbidden from preventing refugees from moving freely within their territories.
  • Article 31:
    Allows refugees to enter any member state illegally without punishment, as long as their life is in danger or their “freedoms” are somehow threatened.
  • Article 3:
    Forbids rejection of refugees due to their race, religion, or country of origin.
  • Article 4:
    Member states may not prevent refugees from practicing whatever religion they follow.
  • Article 34:
    Member states must ‘naturalize’ refugees as quickly as possible, meaning refugees are to be assimilated as citizens into the member state.

In 1963, the United Nations published the ‘Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination,’ [5] which stated, among other things, that…

  • Racial discrimination was a violation of their Human Rights charter (Article 1)
  • Affirmative action is necessary to compensate for “institutional discrimination [racism]” (Article 2)
  • Discrimination in housing, employment, education, public space access, etc. must end. (Article 3)
  • All governments within the UN must repeal policies that discriminate based on race (Article 4)
  • An end to apartheid or segregation was necessary (Article 5)
  • Education systems must promote racial ‘tolerance’ and ‘understanding’ (Article 8)
  • ‘Hate speech’ must be criminalized (Article 9)
  • ‘Racist organizations’ must also be criminalized (Article 9)

This Declaration was technically not legally binding, but today we see that every single policy “recommendation” has been enforced by law in almost every White country. “Hate speech” laws and the proscription of “racist” political organizations are two notable examples (both of which were pioneered by the Bolsheviks).

Although most of the United Nation’s legal framework on race was laid out in the 1950s, the organization continues to publish racial treatises to this day. Major declarations include the ‘Statement on Racial Prejudice’ (1967), the ‘Declaration on Race and Racial Prejudice’ (1978), and the ‘Declaration of Principles on Tolerance’ (1995). Many of the later statements were delivered in response to United Nations’ policies being resisted and/or ignored on a local/national level.

The Declaration on Race and Racial Prejudice [7] is a slightly revised and expanded version of the Statement on Race and Racial Prejudice [6]. The following extracts from the Statement on Race and Racial Prejudice contain some very interesting statements; bear in mind that this was written in the 1960s:

  • “All men are born free and equal both in dignity and in rights. This universally proclaimed democratic principle stands in jeopardy whenever political, economic, social, and cultural inequalities affect human group relations. A particularly striking obstacle to the recognition of equal dignity for all is racism. Racism continues to haunt the world. Racism stultifies the development of those who suffer from it, and perverts those who apply it
  • “The conference of experts agreed that racist doctrines lack any scientific basis whatsoever. All men living today belong to the same species and descend from the same stock
  • ” “racial” divisions have limited scientific interest and may even carry risk of inviting abusive generalization. The peoples of the world today appear to possess equal biological potentialities for attaining any level of civilization. Racism grossly falsifies the knowledge of human biology. The human problems arising from so-called “race” relations are a social origin rather than biological. A basic problem is racism, namely, anti-social beliefs and acts which are based on the fallacy that discriminatory inter-group relations are justifiable on biological grounds”
  • Racism falsely claims that there is a scientific basis for arranging groups hierarchically in terms of psychological and cultural characteristics that are immutable and innate […] it seeks to make existing differences appear inviolable as a means of permanently maintaining current relations between groups. The anti-colonial revolution of the Twentieth century has opened up new possibilities for eliminating the scourge of racism.” [Note: The anti-colonial revolution is Marxist/Socialist in origin, it was, quite literally, pioneered by Lenin].
  • In order to undermine racism, it is not sufficient that biologists should expose its fallacies. It is also necessary that psychologists and sociologists should demonstrate its causes. Individuals with certain personality troubles may be particularly inclined to adopt and manifest racial prejudices. The major techniques for coping with racism involve changing those social situations which give rise to prejudice”
  • “the basically important changes in the social structure that may lead to the elimination of racial prejudice may require decisions of a political nature. The school and other instruments for social and economic progress can be one of the most effective agents for the achievement of a broadened understanding
  • “The media of mass communication are increasingly important in promoting knowledge and understanding […] Continued research into the social utilization of the media is needed in order to assess their influence in relation to formation of attitudes and behavioral patters in the field of race prejudice and race discrimination.”
  • Law is among the most important means of ensuring equality between individuals and one of the most effective means of fighting racism.
  • “Racial prejudice and discrimination in the world today arise from historical and social phenomena and falsely claim the sanction of science. It is, therefore, the responsibility of all biological and social scientists, philosophers, and others working in related disciplines, to ensure that the results of their research are not misused by those who wish to propagate racial prejudice and encourage discrimination.

Extracts from the Declaration of Principles on Tolerance [8]:

  • “Tolerance is not only a cherished principle, but also a necessity for peace and for the economic and social advancement of all peoples […] Tolerance is harmony in difference. It is not only a moral duty, it is also a political and legal requirement. Tolerance, the virtue that makes peace possible, contributes to the replacement of the culture of war by a culture of peace”
  • the practice of tolerance does not mean toleration of social injustice.
  • “Tolerance at the State level requires just and impartial legislation, law enforcement and judicial and administrative process.”
  • It is essential for international harmony that individuals, communities and nations accept and respect the multicultural character of the human family. Without tolerance there can be no peace, and without peace there can be no development or democracy.”
  • “In the modern world, tolerance is more essential than ever before. It is an age marked by the globalization of the economy and by rapidly increasing mobility, communication, integration and interdependence, large-scale migrations and displacement of populations, urbanization and changing social patterns.”
  • “Since every part of the world is characterized by diversity, escalating intolerance and strife potentially menaces every region. It is not confined to any country, but is a global threat.”
  • “As affirmed by the UNESCO Declaration on Race and Racial Prejudice, measures must be taken to ensure equality in dignity and rights for individuals and groups wherever necessary. In this respect, particular attention should be paid to vulnerable groups which are socially or economically disadvantaged so as to afford them the protection of the laws and social measures in force, in particular with regard to housing, employment and health, to respect the authenticity of their culture and values, and to facilitate their social and occupational advancement and integration, especially through education […] we solemnly proclaim 16 November the annual International Day for Tolerance.”

Did you notice anything about the UN’s statements in particular, other than the fact that they are riddled with falsifiable lies? Perhaps the fact that they’re all focused on creating a planet in which national borders and boundaries do not exist and in which men have no innate characteristics? Or that the UN appears is primarily interested in legally mandating your thoughts and feelings? What does the word “tolerate” mean, anyway?

“To endure someone or something unpleasant or disliked.” Fascinating.

It must be made very clear: The purpose of these laws is NOT to protect “minorities” or “oppressed groups,” but to persecute those who oppose the globalist agenda, the primary objective of which is transforming homogeneous White countries into multiracial dens of chaos, plagued by eternal ethnic conflict. The fundamental aim of globalists like the UN is the total extinction of the European race worldwide. If you can’t yet see where the “Replacement Migration” project is heading, you should probably start paying attention to the writing on the wall. It isn’t exactly subtle:

Your future:

3. Criminalizing homogeneity: TL;DR summary

There’s a lot to take in, so here’s a rough timeline highlighting the basic points.

  1. In 1951, the UN passed the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, which legally forbids UN member states from refusing, expelling, or returning refugees. It also requires states to ‘naturalize’ refugees as citizens. Refugees may enter any UN member state illegally and cannot legally be punished by said member states for doing so. A refugee is defined as any individual who fears being persecuted for their race, religion, nationality, etc., and thus feels that they cannot be protected by their own government for whatever reason — or anyone who can convincingly claim that they fit this description.
  2. In 1967, the Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees extended the Convention to encompass the entire globe, as the 1951 statement was primarily focused on European refugees of the Second World War.
  3. In 1963, via the Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, the UN demanded an end to segregation, apartheid, border restrictions, “hate speech,” and “racist organizations.” The declaration also demanded the introduction of affirmative action and related policies, and more. This declaration is near-identical to the “Civil Rights” race laws passed in all Western countries. Note: The US Civil Rights Act was passed one year later in 1964.
  4. In 1967 and 1978, the UN affirmed its dedication to the doctrine of equality via the Statements and Declaration on Race and Racial Prejudice, stating that: “Racism” has no biological basis; all human beings are descended from the same stock and completely biologically equal; all scientists, psychologists, sociologists, etc., must ensure that the results of their research cannot be used by nasty racists, and must actively work to undermine racism. They also made clear that the three biggest tools in “eliminating the scourge of racism” were law, education, and mass media. This statement confirmed that “racism” — which they essentially define as “acknowledging that race exists” and/or “excluding foreign races from your society” — is the biggest threat to the globalist project.
  5. In 1995, the UN’s Declaration of Principles on Tolerance explicitly stated that “tolerance” is necessary to maintain peace within an increasingly globalized, multicultural world, filled with “large-scale migrations and displacement of populations.” So-called “tolerance” is not just a moral duty, but a “political and legal requirement” that must be mandated by law.

4. Sources

  1. ‘Replacement Migration: Is It a Solution to Declining and Ageing Populations?’ United Nations Population Division (2000)
  2. ‘A EUROPEAN AGENDA ON MIGRATION,’ EU European Commission (2015)
  3. ‘Increasing Migration Pressure and Rising Nationalism: Implications for Multilateralism and SDG Implementation,’ whitepaper for UNDESA, United Nations (2019)
  4. ‘Protocol and Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees,’ United Nations (1951, 1954, 1967)
  5. ‘United Nations Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination,’ United Nations (1963)
  6. ‘Statement on Race and Racial Prejudice,’ United Nations (1967)
  7. ‘Declaration on Race and Racial Prejudice,’ United Nations (1978)
  8. ‘Declaration of Principles on Tolerance,’ United Nations (1995)