Let us now enumerate them together:
1) Incessant neighbourhood riots, using any self-victimising pretext (the Théo Affair,[44] the 2005 flare-up, the manifestations of joy following attacks targeting the Kuffar,[45] and so on).
2) Ritualistic and mass-scale car arsons on the occasion of festivals celebrated by French natives, not to mention the destruction of shops and public utilities during each and every football match involving Algeria. If the match ends in a victory, one proceeds to burn and break everything. If not, one burns and breaks everything regardless. In the Maghreb, burning and breaking everything is a favourite pastime. Strange, don’t you think?
3) Occasionally deadly attacks and ambushes targeting policemen, gendarmes, and firefighters. Without good reason, of course, as usual.
4) Verbal or physical assaults committed against native French people in the street, especially if they are identified as being Jewish. Generally speaking, the explosion of violent and rampant criminality among non-native populations is also aimed at generating a daily feeling of fear and insecurity among the ethnic French.
5) The violent harassment of white women in the streets and public places of certain urban neighbourhoods, often involving assault, groping or rape.
6) Acts of aggression perpetrated against doctors, unnecessary damage to medical offices, and attacks on emergency personnel. These populations have turned public hospitals into one of their most frequent abuse targets.
7) The chronic insecurity afflicting public primary and secondary schools, which have fallen into the grip of daily violence and where normal education is becoming increasingly difficult to provide. Girls — especially those of European origin — are systematically harassed, as are any boys who have good school results.
8) The open and raucous appropriation of public spaces, followed by that of entire neighbourhoods. The strategy is the following — to corrupt the life of the French so as to ultimately drive them out, before settling in their abodes and conquering even more territories. Such is the multisecular Arabian ‘leopard skin’ tactic, whose dark spots then grow and slowly spread. The veil, the burkini and, more recently, their male clothing are all strong markers of territorial presence and intimidation. Their message is a simple one: ‘It is we who are increasingly more at home here, and you less and less’.
9) The growing number of mosques, cultural centres and Islamic schools, even in small towns now, all under the benevolent eye of the corrupt French authorities.
Could a racial war in Europe turn out to be a dialectical necessity? Let us first specify the meaning of the term.
After Socrates, and before Marx drew inspiration from it while making numerous mistakes and approximations, it was Hegel who developed the solid idea that a historical evolution can indeed lead to its very opposite, to its inversion, through a reaction effect or a shift in meaning; this serves as the etymological origin of the ancient Greek term dialectic. In the case with which we are dealing here, it is a question of determining whether a violent and bloody confrontation (i.e. a civil war) would not be more effective than utopian and weak policies of assimilation, integration and reintegration when it comes to resolving, at long last, the problems caused by mass immigration and rampant Islamisation.
By provoking a civil war and arousing a defensive reaction on the part of our overwrought natives, would the immigrational overflow, paired with the aggressiveness and growing impudence of these invaders, not enable the restoration of ‘order through disorder’? The answer is a complex one.
For now, the onset of the racial war is only instigated by the overwhelmingly Muslim-Arab aggressors, with the complicity of the extremist UOIF,[46] for instance, or even that of returned members of the official yet not very clearly defined CFCM,[47] with close ties to Islamo-collaborationist circles. Generally speaking, the native French remain passive and allow themselves to be pushed around. The collaborationists within our political class (counting both the Right and Left) are, by contrast, much more active.
One would be tempted to state that ‘it is necessary for there to be bloodshed if our major problems are to be resolved’; for the solution will not come from above, through naivety, nor through reflection and utopian, peaceful consultation, of course, but from below, through violence and tragedy, which have the unique historical ability to raise people’s awareness of the emergency case[48] (Ernstfall) theorised by Carl Schmitt[49] and to thus sever the Gordian knots that would otherwise never be unravelled.
The aggressiveness of the enemy camp, with its attacks, assassinations, riots, incessant violence and disorder, is bound to leave our native people less and less indifferent, as they are the ones that experience this reality first-hand and bear the brunt of it. The propaganda of Islamophilic and anti-racist leftist lobbies (involving media hype and the complicity of biased judges, who remain both ideologically and politically at the enemy’s disposal) has long managed to anaesthetise our indigenous people, making them feel guilty about protesting and responding to the invasion to which they have fallen prey. It is the non-violent attitude of our genuinely French compatriots that has, thus far, prevented war from breaking out. In many other countries, a conflict would have erupted ages ago.
What is both incredible and scandalous is that, sensing the escalation of major clashes with predominantly Muslim youthful populations and panicking at the thought of a civil war, our police and intelligence services choose to focus on a fictitious ‘extreme Right’ that must be repressed and is essentially presented as being just as dangerous as Muslim terrorists, perhaps even more.
Their behaviour is that of collaborationists, in harmony with a well-established French statal tradition of submitting to the invader. Their main obsession is to repress the identitarian movements of our native French population, i.e. those that resist the above-mentioned invasion. The underlying message is the following: ‘Should you be attacked, do not respond. What we must do above all else is avoid war! Do not resist!’ On the other hand, no repression is allowed when it comes to Black and Arab invaders and racists. And remember this: the French state’s main purpose is to preserve its own tranquillity as well as its agents’ sinecures, even at the cost of triggering the outrage of the indigenous population and giving rise to polymorphous degradations all over the country.
This is why their collaborationist intuition, which consists in focusing on the repression of all Europeans who embrace resistance, remains both straightforward and fierce, regardless of circumstance.
Things are changing, and driven by the welcome rise of the populist hydra (with Orbán, Kurz and Salvini, among others), indigenous peoples across our entire European continent are becoming aware of the fact that we must respond to the invasion and fight against the collusion of invaders and rootless elites. People are raising their heads, and that is a most welcome development. For it means that thanks to this awareness, to this increasing outburst of anger and exasperation on the part of these indigenous peoples, the latter will be able to manifest both violence and revolt not only against the migrants, most of whom openly declare their allegiance to Islam, but also against the repressive police forces of the French state (which is only French by name) and the cosmopolitan elites whose ranks include both leftist whites dreaming of the advent of a ‘new man’ (a necessarily anti-racist and mixed-race type of man) and collaborationist court Jews.[50]
44
TN: In 2017, two separate and unrelated riots shook France following claims of power abuse by the French police. The first of these, which lasted approximately eleven days, took place on 4th February, 2017 after the purported rape of a black man named Théo L. by police officers, who allegedly used a baton to carry out the assault. The second riot began in late March, when a Chinese man was fatally shot by Parisian police officers. In the latter case, the rioting only lasted a day, which highlights a clear mentality difference (and perhaps even a different purpose).
46
TN: Currently known as
47
TN: The French Council of the Muslim Faith (
49
TN: Carl Schmitt (11th July, 1888–7th April, 1985) was a conservative German jurist and political theorist who focused extensively on the effective wielding of political power. His work has exerted major influence on subsequent political theory, legal theory, continental philosophy and political theology, and remains both influential and controversial owing to his close association and juridical-political allegiance with Nazism. For this reason, there are some who have labelled Schmitt the ‘crown jurist of the Third Reich’.
50
TN: In the early modern period, a court Jew — or court factor (German: