France: Between A Rock And A Hard Place

Security is becoming more flexible during the growing process of globalization and regional integration in Europe. It is no longer possible to ignore new challenges to international stability, among which migration stands out: as a result of the increasing flow of people freely moving around the world, migration is being viewed through the prism of security.

Over the past fifteen years, the link between immigration, public order and national security has become ingrained in French society. France has one of the largest Muslim diasporas in Western Europe; it is becoming increasingly difficult for republican institutions to maintain a healthy and constructive dialogue with this diaspora. In addition, foreign policy and especially active French invasion in regions highly affected by terrorism, in particular in West Africa, have caused direct consequences for the country and its national security – an influx of immigrants from African countries and an increasing number of terrorist attacks of ISIS.

1. According to the official data, French immigrants constitute only 10% of the population, but the French themselves are already beginning to feel the trick in these statistics. They talk about the inevitable Africanization and Arabization of Europe in general, and France in particular, by the end of 2050. Researchers who share the idea of ​​a so-called “great new Migration Period”, reintroduced by the French writer Renaud Camus, predicting the replacement of the French (and European) autochthonous population, as well as its civilization by “others”, mainly coming from the Maghreb and Black African countries, often are “disqualified” in the French Republic as their ideas run counter to the leading “left” opinion.

Integration of the immigrants into European society is a must, but there are many factors that ruin the process of their integration and lead to the phenomenon called “communitarianism” (ER: where ethnic immigrant communities thrive alone without dissolving through assimilation). The main ones, as researchers claim, are schooling, education, employment and housing that are not designed for the great number of immigrants that the French Republic has been welcoming in since the 1980s. As a result, immigrants who should have been integrated completely into French society remain outside, welcomed by the officials but unwelcomed by the system. This all results in immigration that becomes wild and unbridled, that cannot adapt by itself to the Western way of life, threatening the country’s security, and leading to the “denationalization” of France. (ER: Isn’t that what the globalists want?) Some researchers even talk about a so called “tribalization” of France, revealing the stronger link between mass immigration and increased crime in the country, noting that official crime statistics have been falsified for many years, and in fact, every 24 hours there are “13,000 thefts, 2,000 attacks and 200 rapes” committed in France.

ER: We need to add our two cents here. For many years, our sources tell us that the government has been ‘dumping’ (allocating) legal migrants into certain municipalities that are notorious for having, say, up to 78 language groups in a single small city, people living cheek by jowl in multi-story concrete blocks. School populations reflect this soul-destroying, identity-destroying diversity. We’re not sure how any type of ‘integration’ or assimilation can happen in such conditions. Integration into what precisely? There aren’t a sufficient number of native French around them to pass on the culture. BUT PERHAPS THAT IS THE POINT … Further, government policy in, say, the education field, for example the adoption of gender theory by the government, riles Muslims enormously (and Catholics). Muslim families are far more likely to believe in biological gender and see homosexuality and transgender as wrong, so they remain steadfastly against values that were never part of French culture anyway, but which have been implanted by the globalists running the government. So the child who gets taught gender theory in school goes home perhaps to a family explicitly hostile to that. Even white French populations are living in a so-called mainstream culture whose values are being slowly reconfigured before their very eyes, which guilt-trips them into silence with charges of ‘racism’ if they feel the urge to protest.

2. Falsified official statistics are only half the trouble. The worst is the ban on certain types of statistics needed to understand the migration situation in France.

On August 26, 1789, the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen affirmed the absolute Equality of all French among themselves, regardless of religious beliefs, ethnicity or race, Freedom reigned in France, extending to every French from the day of his birth, and the French citizenship was believed to contribute to the republican ideal of Brotherhood. France became the Home of Human Rights, and the French nation, La Grande Nation, acquires “universality”, defining itself as a group of fellow citizens without a single reference to the concepts of race, ethnicity, or religion. The purpose of such decisions was to create a space of harmony that unites people, so all those characteristics that could divide French citizens into groups were erased from above.

Thus, there were no more Catholics or Protestants or internal French ethnic groups, and ethnic and religious statistics were prohibited. We do not have an exact idea of the number of French citizens of foreign origin or the number of citizens professing a particular religion, although we understand that every year there are more and more such citizens.

Researchers interested in the most accurate data possible, including representatives of right-wing and extreme right-wing parties, are trying to approach the migration issue from different angles. In particular, right-wing parties have often turned to screening for drepanocytosis, sickle cell anemia, a genetic blood disorder to which, according to numerous studies, people from Sub-Saharan and Maghreb countries are the most susceptible. In France, screening for sickle cell anemia, carried out by the French Association for the Diagnosis and Prevention of Childhood Disability in Newborns (Association Française pour le Dépistage et la Prévention des Handicaps de l’Enfant), is targeted at newborns of Mediterranean, African and Caribbean origins. There were statistics published in the public domain, a screening map for 2016 could be easily found: in the Ile-de-France region (ER: the region that encircles Paris), 73.56% of newborns were already at risk of the disease, and generally in the whole country, there were 39.39% of newborns at risk. This statistics were used by the right-wing to measure the number of non-white newborns and thus to illustrate the Africanization of France. From 2018, disease statistics would no longer be published, as its transition into ethnic statistics is considered to be dangerous (ER: dangerous to whom? Why is the government really suppressing such data?). Still, thanks to the latest data we can imagine what regions have the largest immigrant communities.

3. In big cities of with a high concentration of French of foreign origin, the phenomenon of communitarianism – the dense residence of immigrants in closed communities, – flourishes, making these immigrant areas “lawless”. During the COVID-19 pandemic, riots broke out across the country in immigrant areas due to an accident on the night of April 20, in Villeneuve-la-Garenne, when a motorcyclist collided with a police car. The victim’s origin was carefully hidden; however, at the same time, the media talked about his numerous crimes (he was convicted 14 times for sexual violence, and crimes related to drug trafficking and extortion), about his being under judicial supervision, about repeated violations of the quarantine regime, and about the motorcyclist riding an unregistered motorcycle without a helmet. A whole series of clashes between the “jeunes”(youth) and the police unfolded throughout the densely populated, disadvantaged areas (ER: the areas of high immigration).

In addition, the public became aware of the instructions for the national police of the Calvados department from April 24, which stated that if there was no threat to health or the threat of serious damage to property, there was no need to intervene in areas with a high concentration of the population (immigrant areas) during Ramadan. The extreme right called this instruction the religious immunity provided by the government, a sign of its weakness in front of the Islamist groups operating in the country. (ER: ordinary people have this perception, too, who aren’t necessarily ‘far right’. These areas do get free passes because of how certain residents are prepared to act, i.e. lawlessly, in the fact of government edicts.)

This summer France experienced a new round of the “becoming wild” process, when a wave of violent crimes, including ones against the police, took place in many major cities. Attacks, rapes and murders, of which French immigrants are suspected or already condemned, shook the public, and the image of Emmanuel Macron was especially damaged when he, unwilling to call a spade a spade, classified the crimes as “uncivilized behaviour”. (ER: yes, this phenomenon is called ‘ensauvagement’- ‘sauvage’ = wild – and is discussed openly now in right-leaning publications. Let’s not forget that France had its lockdown, medically unjustified and massively injurious to the population, between March and May, leaving the population during June and July nervous and shell-shocked. Is it a coincidence that, all of a sudden, poorer migrant areas are having flare-ups of violence and ‘ensauvagement’? We think not. Riots and car burnings are typical of these areas on the occasional ‘normal’ weekend. It doesn’t take much to set them off.)

Despite public outrage at such statements (ER: outrage generated by the globalist media?) and the fact that the president has ranked minor violations of public order and misconduct with the murder of policemen on a par, the French people are starting to understand that they cannot make the government hear them such that the political elites living outside of the “real” world would consequently take measures to counteract mass immigration, since the French “Gauchiste” (leftist) political system does not allow free expression of opinions on such delicate topics. (ER: there are at least two areas in which French public opinion is not being heard by the elites. One is the problem of mass migration and crime, the other is the fact that people are living under the lie of the ‘pandemic’, which professionals beyond Prof. Didier Raoult are publicly criticizing. Disillusionment with the government is vast, currently. And there is still the Gilets Jaunes movement, exposing the nasty economic underbelly of the country.)

4. The next elections are set for spring 2022, and for now France has two potential candidates who will fight each other to take the presidency.

Having been elected at the end of 2017, Emmanuel Macron can present his candidacy in 2022 for a second term according the Article 6 of the French Constitution. However, as he says, the second term is not his priority for the moment: the most important is to launch the reforms, including in the migration sphere, to bring down Marine Le Pen and her Party.

Marine Le Pen, on the other hand, can effectively use the difficult situation with immigrants to gain the trust of her electors. Thus, in several communiqués, Rassemblement National (ER: Le Pen’s rebranded party) refers to the French population who feel threatened by the immigrants in the country because of the frequent attacks during this summer – “one of the most deadly summers in the history of France”. Marine Le Pen proclaimed the safety of the French people “the priority” of the Party and states: France turns wild and savage, and 70% of the French see and sense it [Ifop], while the government keeps believing that it’s a fantasy. She will definitely place emphasis on the migration problems during her campaign, as they were focused on during the previous presidential race. The question is if the French are ready to respond positively to the RN measures they have always considered to be extremely severe.

If Marine Le Pen wins the presidential elections, that will definitely help other right wing parties to gain confidence in their countries, for instance, Alternative for Germany (AfD) that is currently undergoing an internal crisis. The situation with German immigration is not much better than with the French one: European Media is full of headlines about immigrants (typically repeat offenders who commit knife attacks, beatings, rapes) attacking German citizens on the streets.

(ER: The perception among the chattering classes is that Marine Le Pen will not win. We had two rounds of municipal elections bookending the lockdown from March to May, and for the few extra seats Marine Le Pen’s party won, she sacrificed others. She has not demonstrated she can gain power, even though more people now see how hideous Macron and his new henchman, technocrat PM Jean Castex, are via management of the ‘pandemic’. Just this past week, it was mentioned in the media that Le Pen’s niece, Marion Marechal, may be launching some sort of offensive against her aunt – because the pro-France right believes it to be necessary. Further, the Paris-based MSM, the gaucheistes and globalists, are pushing Le Pen in TV interviews and discussions, showing courteous behavior towards her and presenting flattering photos, thereby normalizing her. Yet they have treated her and other members of her party abominably over the past few years, barely able to be civil to her face. We remember a time not long ago when it was even hard to see any kind of press coverage of her at all. This 180 degree turn in the MSM is entirely suspicious. Le Pen also shows herself to be too willing to say anything to get power. Which means going along with some of the prevailing nonsense over, say, compulsory vaccination. See She Isn’t What You Think, Alas.)

The problem of the second and third generations has not bypassed one of the leading European countries: immigrants that do not have the opportunity or the desire to get a job, learn the language, send their children to school where they would get the chance to socialize with others; that live in immigrant areas on unemployment benefits, feel socially isolated and unfairly treated in comparison to native Germans. This feeling of injustice in society can lead the younger generations to revolt against the system, often resulting in violence. What is more, the terrorist threat usually comes from Europeans of foreign origin who have failed to find their place in society. Researchers, drawing the portrait of a “terroriste maison”  (terrorist house) right up to the 2015 terrorist attacks in France (ER: Charlie Hebdo shootings & Hyper Cacher Supermarket hostages), suggest that they are mostly young people with an immigrant background who have had problems with the law in the past. The overwhelming majority had more or less lengthy sentences for theft and other violations of the law. Prison gives them the opportunity to develop their hatred of a liberal society, which they do not understand because of secular principles that usually contradict their religious beliefs (ER: factor in the extreme feminism and gender theory/pro-LGTBQ/transgender aspect). For a certain period of time, future “terroriste maisons” have been influenced by the Islamist gurus most often found on the Internet, where jihadists are very active in recruiting Muslims seeking their path in life. Many young French Islamists travel to Syria and Iraq, whereas some remain in France awaiting their guru’s call for holy war in France and other European countries, as it was back in 2015-2016.

Ever since the French Revolution, France, a country of immigration, has been considered a “universal” nation, where Freedom, Equality and Brotherhood of its citizens should not have been threatened by any references to race, ethnicity, or religion. However, the phenomenon of communitarianism, which is nowadays a stable and extremely important issue in French society, contradicts the Ideals of the Republic, because it, in fact, subjects the society to fragmentation according to religious or ethnic criteria. This issue is perceived exclusively from the point of view of insufficient integration of Muslim “jeunes”, and the interpretation of the reasons leading to public disorder does not take into account the socio-economic problems that immigrants who have failed to find their place in the society have to face.

Terrorist attacks are reinforcing the link between immigrants and terrorism in society. For France, the threat of terrorism becomes internal, as it comes from within the state, from its own citizens – the “terroristes maison”. The deep social problems, inequality and social marginalization faced by immigrants make them vulnerable to manipulation by fundamental Islamism, which can lead to their radicalization. Strong negative consequences for the country and its people would be a result of building an “internal enemy” and generalization about immigrant areas being full of potential “terroristes maison”.

Instead, all French migration problems must be addressed outside the security field as long-standing and extremely complex socio-economic problems, otherwise, immigrant areas prone to communitarianism could become a cause for greater concern.

Thus, the French migration system ended up in zugzwang: the long-term practice of welcoming them in with loose integration has opened a window for a massive flow of immigrants, whose cultural identity differs significantly from the cultural identity of the host society. Conservative Muslims, who have traditional views on society, preserve their religious identity and their way of life, experience difficulties in “cohabitation” with the liberal secular identity of France, destroy the ideals and values ​​of the Republic, so fiercely defended by the “native” French, and endanger the cohesion of society.

************

Original article

via South Front