The Names Tell the Tale: The Great Replacement in Australia, By James Reed
details a significant shift in Victoria's most common surnames, reflecting the state's changing demographic landscape due to migration. In 2024, "Singh"—a name meaning "lion," prevalent among Sikh and Hindu men from Northern India—topped the list of registered surnames, overtaking the long-dominant "Smith," which slipped to fourth place. "Kaur," meaning "princess" and common among Sikh and Hindu women, ranked third, while "Nguyen," a Vietnamese surname, held steady in second, a position it's maintained for over two decades. Other South Asian names like "Patel" and "Sharma" also cracked the top ten, alongside traditional Anglo names like "Williams" (fifth), "Jones" (ninth), and "Brown" (tenth). The piece contrasts this with 2004, when "Smith" led, followed by "Nguyen," "Brown," and "Jones," with "Singh" and "Kaur" absent from the top 20. Over two decades, names like "Johnson," "Ryan," and "Martin" vanished from the list, replaced by "Gill," "Sandhu," and "Ali." This shift, the article suggests, mirrors Victoria's evolving multicultural identity, driven by immigration from India, Vietnam, and beyond.
Now, let's argue the demographic consequences through the Great Replacement lens—a theory positing that traditional Western populations are being systematically displaced by non-Western immigrants, often framed as a cultural or racial threat to the "original" society. Applied to this data, the replacement of "Smith"—a quintessential Anglo-Saxon name tied to Australia's British colonial roots—with "Singh" and "Kaur" could be seen as evidence of a profound transformation in Victoria's, and by extension Australia's, ethnic fabric. This represents the decline of traditional names signals a broader erosion of the "old Australia"—a largely white, Anglo-Celtic society rooted in the British settlement of 1788. The rise of South Asian and Vietnamese surnames, isn't just a nominal change but a marker of a demographic tide where migration—particularly post-1970s from Asia—has diluted the cultural dominance of the founding population.
The numbers back this perception. Australia's 2021 Census showed 49.3 percent of people had at least one parent born overseas, with Indian ancestry surging to over 900,000 by 2025 estimates, driven by skilled migration and family reunification. In Victoria, "Singh" topping the list reflects this, as Punjabis and other Indian groups have grown rapidly, often settling in Melbourne's outer suburbs. Critics of the Great Replacement might dismiss this as benign diversity, but advocates would highlight the speed: in 20 years, names tied to the British heritage that defined Australia for two centuries have been eclipsed. This isn't organic evolution but a consequence of deliberate policy—Labor and Liberal governments alike pushing high migration (e.g., net inflows of 400,000+ in 2023-24) to boost the economy, heedless of cultural cohesion, and Asianise the country.
The consequences, per this view, are stark. Traditional Australia—imagined as a homogenous, English-speaking, Christian society—is being "replaced" not just demographically but culturally. Schools now teach in multilingual settings, Diwali and Lunar New Year rival Christmas in public prominence, and political power shifts as migrant-heavy electorates flex their muscle. The article's data could fuel claims of a tipping point: if surnames are a proxy for identity, the Anglo-Saxon "Smiths" are losing ground to the "Singhs," with "Nguyen" as a longstanding bridge between. Economically, this might sustain growth—migrants often fill labour shortages—but socially, it risks fracturing the shared history that bound "old Australia," leaving it a relic in a nation unrecognisable to its pre-1970s self.
Australian society, fragile at best, will not hold together after this genocidal social experiment.
Comments