Emmanuel Macron shown attending an Elton John concert on the first night that extreme violence broke out across France recently.
1,566 words
At the beginning of July we witnessed further rioting and looting across France. President Emmanuel Macron, with the nerve and arrogance only he is capable of, pretended to find this event surprising, despite the fact that everyone had been expecting it at least since 2005 and the last large-scale riots in the suburbs.
No sensible, informed person with common sense was surprised by this week of chaos. And even if the Left, either out of treacherous electioneering or stupid candor, were talking about a revolt for justice, justified anger, or even festive demonstrations [sic!], it became clear that this was not a structured and thought-out revolt, or even a spontaneous and politically-oriented one. It was rather a series of savage acts of violence, and an expression of hatred and total rejection of France, as if a parasite’s immune system was rejecting the host.
And while it is obviously wrong, unfair, and absurd to lump all immigrants or descendants of immigrants together, it has to be said that too large a proportion of this population, despite the fact that they did not take part in the riots or the looting, likewise did not put up any resistance, nor did they try to intervene and stop the actions of their sons, brothers, cousins, or neighbors.
No, this was not a riot, but the expression of something far more serious, far more worrying, and far more profound: It was a secession. First and foremost, we are witnessing a secession of the “new French.” These were tens of millions — read that number again — of new French citizens. Most of them are from the former French colonies, but not only there, as the majority today were born in France as the descendants of legal immigrants who had posed no problem when they arrived. It was supposed to be temporary labor immigration. And these people are more and more clearly putting one foot in secession.
This is by no means a popular, conscious, or politicized movement. The rioters are not poor people thirsting for social justice; they are the new barbarians spawned by our civilizational collapse. They are no revolutionaries, but looters full of hatred for white people and a desire to dominate their space — which they intend, sooner or later, to make their own.
We saw detonations of homemade bombs; live ammunition fired at police officers; destruction of public buildings; theft of vehicles; burning of cars; lynching of white people, as well as of plainclothes or off-duty policemen (after they had been hunted down), settling of scores between rival gangs along the way; accidental deaths (for the time being); attacks on symbols of the state and society, as well as on transport, schools, police stations, post offices, town halls, the Olympic building, and large shops); and French flags burned. This litany of acts committed by the “opportunities for France,” as the Left calls them, is the only political message that counts. No, this is not a social revolt: It is a secession, a profession of faith in identity. It is the very authority and legitimacy of the French state that is being called into question here. — not the government, or even the regime.
It is the closest thing we have to militant action: the fruit of a collective intelligence, bearing witness to a clear perception of power relations. In this dress rehearsal, the mass of secessionist insurgents declared war on the remnants of the French state, which has been trapped by its clientelism and its succession of acts of cowardice and renunciation over the last 50 years, which made it a hostage to what it itself has created.
What was the Paris regime’s response to this mess? First of all, silence (censoring of videos), then media distraction (pointing the finger at militant patriotic self-defense groups to stir up the ghost of the fascist threat), and finally denial, that immense mental strength that sometimes allows people to live, even until their deaths, without ever taking danger into account. This denial has deeply animated the macronist, globalist, authoritarian post-bourgeoisie, a remnant of a bourgeoisie in decline that denies both its disintegration over the last century — as well as the death of the industrial bourgeoisie as a result of the universalization of joint stock companies — and the scale of the problems for which it is responsible.
The violence of the police, who are less and less professional and French and more and more full of riff-raff, serves only to subdue the last Gallic inhabitants of peripheral France, who are being fleeced by the riff-raff at the top, the anti-national oligarchy, and robbed by the riff-raff at the bottom, the post-Islamic and Americanized lumpenproletariat.
This breakdown of France into three blocs, as described by geographer Christophe Guilluy in his book La France périphérique, confirms Guy Debord’s analysis that was published in 1985:
We can no longer assimilate anyone: not young people, not French workers, not even provincials or old ethnic minorities, because Paris, a destroyed city, has lost its historic role of creating French people. What is centralism without a capital? . . . Only a focused spectacle can unify the spectators. The rich expression “cultural diversity” is often used in advertising-speak. What cultures? There are none left. Neither Christian nor Muslim; neither socialist nor scientistic. Don’t talk about the absent ones. If we look for a moment at the truth and the evidence, there is nothing left but the spectacular global (American) degradation of every culture. . . . Some put forward the criterion of “speaking French.” Ridiculous. Do today’s French people speak it? . . . We’ve become Americans. It’s only natural that we should find all the United States’ miserable problems here, from drugs to the mafia, from fast food to the proliferation of ethnic groups. . . . Here, we have America’s troubles without having its strength. . . . Here, we are nothing more than colonized people who have failed to revolt, the yes-men with their spectacular alienation. . . . The risk of apartheid? It is very real. It is more than a risk, it is an inevitability that is already there (with its logic of ghettos, racial confrontations, and one day, bloodshed). A society that is falling completely apart is obviously less able to welcome large numbers of immigrants without too many problems than a coherent and relatively happy society.
You can buy Alain de Benoist’s Ernst Jünger between the Gods and the Titans here.
So in this context peripheral France, which has been openly relegated to an underclass status during the period of the Yellow Vests, when the regime in Paris brutally — and often illegally and immoral — repressed demonstrations by honorable workers and ordinary people, is increasingly entering a state of secession as well, whether consciously or not.
We are witnessing the beginnings of the complete disintegration of the French nation — or what’s left of it. France is going to become brazilianized, with a concentration of capital that will enable small groups to secure a high standard of living for themselves by privatizing public services while the rest of the population, whether of Gallic or immigrant origin, will have to rely on mutual aid from the community to meet their needs.
Increasingly weak, the French state is mutating into an authoritarian and repressive system in a terrible admission of powerlessness. There are calls for more surveillance, more control, drones in the streets, automatic facial recognition, and control and censorship of the Internet. No one on any side of the political spectrum seems to realize that the solution does not lie either in disarming the police (but never the scum and gangsters, of course) or in arming the police to the teeth and turning the country into a police state. The solution is fewer barbarians and fewer traitors; not less freedom in the hope of restricting the thugs, but the return of guaranteed fundamental freedoms for citizens who respect the social contract.
It has to be said that France is falling apart, whether as a result of the cultural and identity-based decomposition of the French people, who are being subjected to the globalist steamroller, or as a result of mass immigration by a vengeful sub-proletariat that is generally unsuited to life in a European society.
The profound mechanisms that have led to this state of affairs cannot be stopped, let alone corrected, by a few political reforms. It is too late. At the beginning of July, a potential nation in the making whose barbaric morons were the noisy representatives during the riots and looting is facing a nation in decomposition that has been betrayed by its elites and left to fend for itself in its inevitable decline.
The determination of the ruling French oligarchy to suppress any attempt at a reaction or self-defense betrays better than any words the globalist agenda of the powers-that-be. France and the French must submit to the globalist order and its barbarian auxiliaries, even if order is temporarily lost. Any resistance will be countered. Thus, we shouldn’t be surprised to see a growing desire on the part of the French people to secede from the French state.
We were not witnessing “urban riots,” but rather a historical spasm that reveals the partitioning of the French national body. This was just one seismic tremor, and there will be others — certainly much bigger ones. The future of France, or what’s left of it, will be determined by the degree to which each side submits.
The above essay was reprinted from Deliberatio.
* * *
Like all journals of dissident ideas, Counter-Currents depends on the support of readers like you. Help us compete with the censors of the Left and the violent accelerationists of the Right with a donation today. (The easiest way to help is with an e-check donation. All you need is your checkbook.)
For other ways to donate, click here.
21 comments
When he describes the facts in the streets, the author is correct, when he muses about the causes, he is completely wrong.
“…the globalist agenda of the powers-that-be. France and the French must submit to the globalist order …”
France is one of the less globalized countries in Europe, always proud of and protecting local industries.
The French disease has its root in 1789 and the “droit-du-sol” lunacy. “droit-du-sol” is the ‘steamroller’ mentioned in the article, not globalism. Not even high-profile politicians could stop it.
De Gaulle understood that Algeria cannot remain French departments without severe ethnic consequences:
“Si nous faisions l’intégration, si tous les Arabes et Berbères d’Algérie étaient considérés comme Français, comment les empêcherait-on de venir s’installer en métropole …”
So he released Algeria’s rich resources and French-built infrastructure to the Arabs – who could not exploit them and invaded France by the millions, at a time when ‘globalism’ was not even invented.
So DeGaulle cast Algeria adrift, letting the Pieds-Noirs twist in the wind, to keep the Algerians from colonizing France. Well, they did anyway. Funny how that works…
Although I applaud the eloquent vehemence of this author’s writing style, what has happened to France is perhaps less complicated than he (and certainly than Alain de Benoist) make out. For reasons I cannot understand, France has come to be ruled by not merely fools and cowards, but for several generations, actual traitors – presumably mostly authentic Frenchmen (abetted by sprinklings of influential leftist Jews) who hate their own people and European civilization. The result was to allow for the physical importation of many millions of racially as well as culturally unassimilable aliens, who, moreover, hail from races and peoples with much lower modal ethicality as well as ‘civilizability’ than that of whites. These persons, furthermore, seem to have had higher domestic birthrates (their otherwise insupportable fecundity directly aided by white healthcare, and further indirectly subsidized by white taxpayer-provided ‘welfare states’) than the feminist-infected native (white) French, with the predictable result that there are now apparently tens of millions of nonwhites legally (as well as who knows how many illegally) living in France. These nonwhites, like most nonwhites everywhere within the West, are both jealous and contemptuous of us: envious of our superior goodness and professional accomplishments, as well as obviously more advanced cultures and modes of life, while [appropriately?] contemptuous of our males’ lack of virility, and females’ lack of feminine submissiveness.
To envy those in close physical proximity to you whom you do not otherwise respect is a situation naturally giving rise to intense hatred.
Nonwhites in France are trashing France just as the civilizational quality of every white nation into which diversity is admitted gets lowered. What is the difference between the mass black American riots of 2020 (aided by vicious white and Jewish commies), and the Arab/African destruction of France in 2023? And who cares if there is a difference? Pragmatically, the problems and solutions are the same: the presence of nonwhites in white lands, and the return to racio-geographic segregation, secession and new ethnonational self-determination. This will entail, however, different particular solutions for North America and Europe. In the former, we should work peacefully to dissolve the USA, and create more harmonious homelands out of it: an all-white Ethnostate; perhaps a much smaller all-black one, or at least somewhat autonomous, self-governing areas akin to Indian reservations; and new, sovereign multiracial conservative and progressive national territories. In the latter, however, insofar as nonwhites have no moral right whatsoever to inhabit the ancient, exclusively white homelands of the Europeans [I speak for the moment from a Christian perspective holding that morality exists objectively], the only proper solution is the total expatriation of all nonwhites from Europe, peacefully if possible, forcibly as necessary.
As the aliens are in fact conquering colonizers, this will likely necessitate a Continent-wide transnational civil war pitting indigenous patriots everywhere against the enemy aliens and their white traitor allies, also everywhere. I’ve long believed that this will in fact happen. Indeed, continental racio-ideological armed conflict is actually much likelier in Europe than in North America insofar as the displacers of the native Europeans are racially and culturally both more distinctive and aggressive than are nonwhites here, the largest group of which are Hispanics, many of whom are white or have white blood, and an even larger number of whom are Christian (and thus bereft of Euro-Islam’s religious, or at least “pretend-pious”, hostility). While the African-American population is extremely volatile as well as racially hostile, most new immigrants are either Hispanic or Asian. And while Asians can be extremely antiwhite, too, and they certainly vote mainly leftist (obviously, I am and always have been staunchly opposed to any nonwhite immigration-invasion), they also tend to be of much higher human behavioral (as well as cognitive and thus professional) quality than the predominantly Arab-Muslim and Islamo-African nonwhite invaders of Europe.
I therefore strongly disagree with one conclusion of the author’s: it is America that is becoming “Brazilianized” – developing into an ever lower quality, and more civically degraded and economically dysfunctional, Mestizo society. Europe, however, is becoming ever more “Balkanized”- a part of the world with violent, totally alien savage enclaves in physical proximity to racio-culturally very different zones of civilization. America is sinking; Europe is igniting.
‘And while it is obviously wrong, unfair, and absurd to lump all immigrants or descendants of immigrants together…’
Nothing is ‘obvious’ any longer.
What is ‘obviously wrong and unfair’ can only ever be ‘obvious’ from a racial perspective.
It is not ‘unfair’ to lump all (non-White) ‘immigrants’ together if you do not grant that ‘immigrants’ have the same moral standing as Whites.
And, if you grant (non-White) immigrants the same moral standing as White France, then, on what grounds are you to complain if these immigrants choose to make the very existence of White France ‘unfair’ (systemic racism)?
The attempt to create a universal morality has failed.
There can be only ‘racist’ values now.
Any value that does not enhance the prospects for the White race is to be discarded.
Any value that enhances the prospects of the White race is to be valorized.
The attempt to create a universal morality has neither fully failed, nor fully succeeded. It is an ongoing intellectual project, a worthy one insofar as it could succeed (and perhaps already has, and we have merely failed to recognize this, or forgotten the results). I see universal ethnonationalist separatism as a universal ethic applied to race. My wish to live racially separately doesn’t deny another racial group’s right and ability to do so, too. How is that not universal?
I agree your position as stated is a universal value system. I also note that (a) it’s founded on the notion of race and (b) it’s essentially a rhetorical position.
Whites are not fooling anyone by saying they don’t mind if other people have their own ethnostates. Whites are the ones who have a problem simply asserting their own interests without attempting to cover up their intentions with universal-values talk.
The ethnonationalist argument attempts to conceal the point of the position: To get other races to not oppose White ethnostates.
Pragmatically, the ‘ethnonationalism for all’ is not a universal position but, rather, a rhetorical strategy that is primarily of value when directed at Whites who are not yet ready to take their own side without permission from non-Whites. It allows such Whites to imagine their values as ‘universal’ when, in fact, they are entirely White-centric.
Non-Whites see right through the ‘universal values’ nonsense that literally hypnotizes Whites.
I don’t know how you can say that ‘universal values’ hasn’t failed. It’s had almost 3000 years to succeed. At some point it seems to me you either concede the obvious and invest energy in something else or admit to delusions of grandeur.
As a pragmatist, I see the primary utility of ‘universal ethnonationalism’ as rhetorical. If a world-wide ethos of ‘ethnonationalism’ could be implemented, I predict it wouldn’t prevent the typical crap of people fighting with one another over territory and resources.
‘Universal ethnonationalism’ solves a problem for certain kinds of White people who tacitly or explicitly feel the need to curry favor with non-Whites.
I see it as something every White simply needs to just get past so we can see our range of available actions more clearly.
“The ethnonationalist argument attempts to conceal the point of the position: To get other races to not oppose White ethnostates.”
The “Other Races” are going to have to simply understand that we Whites WILL be left alone and if they follow us from North America ( or any where for that matter! ) back to Europe, and then via Australasia onto Argentina and from there onto Antarctica – then that’s stalking – and we will retaliate – we’ve already developed the bio-chemical technology. Just stay away from us – or else! We don’t care how tasty your food is – STAY AWAY!
🙂
If the vibrant non-White masses in France are seceding, who’s going to write their welfare checks? They didn’t think this one through.
Other than that, about American dysfunctions being exported, for the record I should say that real Americans don’t like those things either. I hope everyone abroad will understand that there’s a big difference between what the people here want versus what our so-called “elites” want.
I have to disagree on ‘secession’ because nonwhites cannot and do not want to live without whites. They want a takeover with white oversight.
Having lived in and visited all over France (and other parts of Europe), it is actually much worse than North America insofar as solutions. France already has so many layers of security (gendarmerie, national police, military and transit security) holding together this unholy union. In fact, Americans don’t realize that traffic stops are uncommon in Europe because there are cameras for that. Yet it doesn’t protect whites from diversity.
We have white-flight, which means escaping into empty spaces to carve out new suburbias/exurbias, while Europe does not have room or legislation for that. Even worse is the oversaturated public transportation of Europe makes ferrying these animals into untouched homogeneous regions simplified in ways that has no equivalent in sprawling North America because we are not a pedestrian syndicate like overbuilt/overpopulated Europe is.
Yet even though driving is cheap here, blacks tend to stay where they are because the barrier-to-entry (purchasing a vehicle, registration etc) is simply too much for them. It functions like Natural Selection. They get stuck in the hood succumbing to violence, addiction etc. The only thing we can hope for is containment. Let these great cities/capitals become ungovernable cauldrons of diversity. It’s a worthy sacrifice. It is so unbelievably effective in this country, especially where I’m living now. I wish this website could do a study on it because the zero-sum change is occurring so quickly that it is palpable. The Florida model is occurring in so many different places within states right now because white-flight never stopped.
The areas where the last of the white holdouts are departing have crumbled, but the blacks are forced to stick around. This has depressed their birthrates and thus the population is collapsing. This has dissuaded any new migration into the region because it is so off-putting. This is happening throughout the rural South too. The lifespan disparity in parts of North St. Louis County (now black) and parts of South/West St. Louis County (white) is 12-30 years. https://news.stlpublicradio.org/health-science-environment/2016-08-03/researchers-find-12-year-life-expectancy-gap-in-north-st-louis-county
In Eastern Missouri, there is a Democrat ‘better together’ effort to consolidate the independent city of St. Louis with St. Louis County because it is hemorrhaging population (literally 1/3 the size it was in 1950), but the state is dominated by Republicans who shoot it down each election because it is the most violent city in the USA. The Democrats have also tried in vain for decades to expand the useless public transit system into St. Charles County, which has exploded and ironically become more Republican, and only slightly more nonwhite, yet still 80%. But it gets shot down each time because only blacks use it and it is so undeveloped that it is pointless to not drive.
The other nonwhites (Asians, Mexicans) are cosmopolitan urbanites, filling the Jewish areas (outer ring St. Louis County suburbs) and formed hipster enclaves (midtown/downtown St. Louis) that even SWPLs are fleeing to have families in St. Charles County. These populations are either not growing or declining, while the white areas are. This is how the nation’s most segregated region continues its tradition of being the last to desegregate.
Very interesting.
Sorry to trouble you, but what does that little wee square symbol mean that you posted under my recent comment on this thread, dated July 20th 2023 at 7.22 pm?
It was supposed to be a ‘smiley face’.
Thank you for your explanation. I apologize, but I’m from a very long line of Norwegian Viking-descended “Square Heads” who colonised Ireland and have absolutely no sense of humour whatsoever.
“The other nonwhites (Asians, Mexicans) are cosmopolitan urbanites”
“Cosmopolitan Urbanite” quite often, though not always translates as homosexual; homosexuals cannot start families of their own.
Correct. I carefully chose this phrase even though I only recently discovered this demographic phenomenon. I’m not sure if one (urbanism) leads to the other (homosexuality), but either way I welcome this new development (urbanization of other nonwhites in addition to blacks) because regardless if they are or are not homosexual, it contributes to a dramatic decline in their birthrates nonetheless. These people are far more susceptible to degeneracy than we are. Their traditional insularity has collapsed, whereas we finally learned to navigate this hellscape without any protection whatsoever: Social Darwinism.
It is happening so blindingly fast that I almost do not oppose ‘woke’ (or any of the other corrosive elements: feminism, LGBT, multiculturalism, abortion etc) anymore insofar as whites are acclimating to it just like we did to the Black Plague and other diseases, whereas any nonwhite we came into contact (merely shaking hands or trading blankets with) with was instantly ravaged to the point that it is retroactively assumed to be genocide even though it was accidental/incidental. I now believe that ‘make white babies’ is now far less important than ‘make less nonwhite babies’ because we cannot compete with the world in a fertile arms race, but we can outlast them by adapting to corrosion like we always have.
I really want other people to engage me on this. I can’t be the only one pleased with this.
There are dysfunctional currents within the White racial dissident ‘movement’ and ‘Make more babies’ is one of them. Any sensible person, just sitting down and thinking about it with even a little bit of public information (world census numbers) would have realized that Whites were never going to ‘womb their way’ out of this problem. This is just one example of any number of dysfunctional currents within the White racial dissident sphere. Another is just about anything that has to do with the ‘manosphere’.
I applaud your willingness to actually appreciate what Darwin says and apply it to our current situation. Human beings have been adapting the natural environment to their needs for millennia. Cities are one of those adaptations. But cities – urbanization – have become their own environments now, and those environments will have an effect on the distribution of the expression of available inherited characteristics in a given population, i.e. ‘fitness’.
Finally, the notion of no longer ‘opposing woke’ is very sensible. A lot of Whites are ‘woke’. Opposing with them does little good and much harm. Especially compared to cleaning up our own (White) house and setting a good example, creating a place where The White Woke Who Wake Up can go to for a ‘cure’ of what ails them.
We should always be suspicious of any aspect of our ‘political community’ that emphasizes sub-racial characteristics over race. Whites have their differences, but every difference is exacerbated by race-mixing and allowing non-Whites – and anti-Whites of any race – to have power over White life. Any position that results in ‘Let’s you and him fight’ while our racial enemies stand on the sidelines with popcorn is not in the interests of the White race.
There are dysfunctional parts of the White racial dissident sphere that tend to reify differences instead of understanding that actually having power changes everything and that pro-Whites should not create obstacles for ourselves to gaining power. There for, there’s not reason to believe that ‘feminism’ might not play a benign and usefully pro-White role in any pro-White society. The same for homosexuality or anything else. What the White race wants and needs does not have to conform to judeo-christian fetishes. That doesn’t mean that some White behaviors – like homosexuality – need to be celebrated or anything like that. It simply means that – in the interests of comity – pro-White racial dissidents need to prioritize issues. And the number one issue is race and nothing else.
I have to assume you are a woman [. . .]
I clearly see that you are an asshole. Dial it back or find another platform.
“These people are far more susceptible to degeneracy than we are. Their traditional insularity has collapsed, whereas we finally learned to navigate this hellscape without any protection whatsoever: Social Darwinism.”
It may well be that as the white west is the originator of Liberalism along with its offshoot disease of social degeneracy, socially responsible white westerners have developed a natural immunity to the disease. Many non-westerners have not, and those that have tend to be the most socially conservative and therefore less likely to engage in socially degenerate activity.
Non-westerners in the west are not unlike small children let loose in a candy factory – gorging themselves to sickness with lax sexual morality, drugs and other addictions, which were not encouraged in their own societies.
Incidentally, although you probably know this anyway – high-achieving North East Asians; Japanese, Koreans, Chinese, etc living in the United States are not as socially conservative in terms of their voting behaviour as many people think – or would like to think. Hardworking Japanese Americans for Trump? Much of it is hot air
They are in fact more often as not, likely to vote Democrat – the reason being? Because they think its what ALL upwardly socially mobile white people do. Copying white Liberals to earn brownie points – essentially sucking up to kick down, they thereby conform to white Liberal norms.
Many years ago – 1996; whilst living in Cardiff, I was talking to a black fellow I worked with who said to me that he noticed all Asians wherever they came from – including west-central Asians Indians and Pakistanis were trying to be white and didn’t think much of black people
Well, if they think being “white” means embracing LGBTQJUSTPLUGMEINI’MANINDIVIDUALPRAISETHELORDANDPASSTHEAMMUNITION!* , then I say bring it on!
*Anyone who can work out what has been written above will get an absolutely free Augusto Pinochet plush toy c/o Jim Goad – answers on a post card!
So the French are being troubled by ‘French’ Algerians invited there by the French state and funded by the French people, and this author’s response is to blame . . . America? Quelle folie!
Comments are closed.
If you have a Subscriber access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.