Following this humiliating defeat suffered by our paralysed state, we may witness the creation of ghettos and what can basically be described as refuge areas, inhabited by our French natives and other Europeans (whose unity will have been brought about by the enemy). These zones will, however, be very quickly neutralised by the authorities, who shall then impose the arrival and establishment of allogeneous populations so as to avoid the dangerous and intolerable formation of a white fortress.
As for the members of the techno-economic and scientific elites in charge of our country, they would opt for an even more pronounced form of expatriation than the one they espouse today — they would remain in other, safer and less Islamised climates, abandoning a France which has been left underdeveloped and, having lost all of its previous capabilities and become a hell to live in, increasingly resembles an African country. This may well come to pass in the very near future… Oh, the death of France will not come about, you say? Are you absolutely certain of that? Let us sincerely hope so, although in history, the worst is never out of the picture.
Everything will depend on the shock caused by ethnic uprising and on the destruction and disorganisation that it will generate. If the shock is strong and traumatic enough and can reverse mentalities, a victory is possible; but obviously only at the price of a choice between the logic of war and the dogmatism of human rights, which are completely incompatible with one another. The essential criterion for a mental change on the part of the French people, be it our authorities or ordinary citizens, would be their readiness to shed blood. As for our police forces, they would have to acknowledge the fact that it is no longer a question of ‘policing’, as was the case in May 1968, but of a civil war, which is not quite the same thing.
To paraphrase Clausewitz, I would say that ‘what characterises war is one’s acceptance to receive death but also give it, without being confused with a murderer’. Who knows if, following our potential victory in this racial civil war, any and all immigrational invasions will not be rendered impossible (and even unthinkable in the eyes of those who would launch them), with de-migration a self-evident fact one shamelessly and assertively demands? For nowhere is the future written. There are many who lament, saying that ‘the damage is done, it is too late’. When one considers the horrid migrational invasion; the (mostly African) demographic explosion, which has gone hand in hand with rampant Islamisation; the emasculation of our ageing French population; the brain drain of our young people (as the ‘bac -6’ replaces the ‘bac +6’);[150] and the hateful aggressiveness of millions of non-integrable and unassimilable immigrants, there is indeed a great deal for us to deal with and to make us dizzy.
Pessimists predict that we are destined to vanish off the face of history, in favour of an inferior civilisation. And it is precisely in order to prove these predictions wrong that we must enter the arena and give battle.
CONCLUSION:
The De-Migration of the Afterwar
As it unleashes its fury and grows, the coming racial civil war shall, through its unique violence, turn into an unprecedented collective trauma whose memory will echo across the centuries. By means of its uncontrolled and uncontrollable aspects, this wave of violence shall make possible many human reactions and solutions which, today, seem unimaginable.
Moreover, the question is not whether de-migration, i.e. the massive repatriation of African and oriental populations to their countries of origin, is possible or not. It must be made possible, and must take place and commence very soon, because it is both necessary and vital.
It is humanly, politically and historically necessary for us, the white men and women of Europe, to have these people return home. Let me state things clearly: whether willingly or by force, they shall indeed leave. This is not only my promise, but also my prognosis.
The French state will soon find itself overwhelmed. In case of riots comprising a large number of bloody and incendiary attacks, as well as numerous murders and racial clashes occurring everywhere, it shall be left dismayed and completely taken aback. From that point on, all solutions shall come into consideration, and an unexpected sun shall, once again, ascend and shine upon Europe.
The phenomenon is easy to understand — it was analysed by Carl Schmitt as part of his ‘emergency case’ (Ernstfall) theory. Whenever a severe crisis erupts, bringing with it a risk of death and systemic collapse (as is inevitably the case with any interethnic civil war characterised by a high level of violence), attitudes shift and opinions change completely. That is when one witnesses an astonishing metamorphosis, perhaps even an utter reversal of people’s behaviour and moral judgments, i.e. what Nietzsche once termed an Umwertung.
The French State, whose members are all collaborationists at heart, will espouse an attitude of great severity towards all of our native people who shall resist more than others; which also means that, in the event of a civil war involving major blunders, a part of the statal apparatus and its accomplices will be overcome with disgust and openly switch sides to support the Resistance, i.e. the France of genuine Frenchmen.
Just like many other opponents of the Islamic religion, Catholics were horrified by the July 2016 slaughtering of one of their priests in the name of Islam and have drawn a comparison between radical Islam and communism, both of which inhibit people’s freedom. In this regard, their comparison is misplaced. In addition to the fact that communism was an ephemeral movement, whereas Islam is an age-old religion and culture, there is yet another, more fundamental difference: the communist threat was, just like many other sources of danger, ideological in essence. What makes Islam dangerous, by contrast, is that it is based on these people’s staggeringly high demographic numbers — blind and excessively fast immigration and extremely high Afro-Maghrebian birth rates within a saturated country. The two problems are thus not of the same nature. In order to neutralise communism, it was necessary to eradicate an ideology. Nowadays, when dealing with Islam and all that accompanies it, i.e. the ethnic replacement of entire populations and the abrupt destruction of people’s way of life, what we must contend with are no longer mere ideas but, instead, the immigrational inpouring and vigorous birth rates of organised people whose numbers are constantly growing; which is much harder, of course.
Although cultural education and struggle are necessary in this respect, they remain insufficient, because they only produce long-term results, and we already have our backs to the wall and are facing an emergency. What we must do is take physically tangible measures to protect our land and sea borders through effective, assertive and, if necessary, deadly repression. Our victory in the coming civil war may well end up serving as an example, thus discouraging and drying up the immigrational inpouring[151] and enabling the discontinuation of the suction pump of various aids and benefits. By putting an end to the right of soil and the countless naturalisations, it would additionally encourage the actual expulsion of illegal immigrants and all those who are denied the right of asylum, with the termination of all regularisations of illegal immigrants; the reinstatement of legal liability in cases of illegal residence and double jeopardy offences; the abolition of family reunification; and, above all, the implementation of a clear policy of de-migration, i.e. those people’s voluntary or forced departures, in parallel to a complete suspension of further arrivals. All of this as a symmetrical response to their invasive settlement colonisation. In short, no more beautiful words, ‘de-radicalisation’ (pure monkey-farting), inclusion, integration, assimilation, insertion and other ludicrously meaningless words, all of which are but pathetic attempts to ease tensions. We must block all entrances to our territories and initiate the mass departure of all these problematic populations, whose only acceptable fate lies, from our perspective, in having them cross the Mediterranean in the opposite direction from whence they originally came.
150
TN: In France, the ‘bac +6’ is a specialised post-graduate degree. What the author is thus alluding to is the gradual replacement of highly educated people by less educated individuals.
151
AN: According to a study whose results have been published on Wikipedia, it is expected that 4.4 billion people will populate Africa by the year 2100. And where do you think these people will seek to go? There is a lot to be worried about here.