Sex and Deviance

by Guillaume Faye

  So this is really a case of what is good for the goose not being good for the gander. Here we have reached the very heart of ethnomasochism. Court intellectuals have invented a term to legitimate their choice for a multiracial society (if possible, with ever fewer Whites): they reject the monochrome society, that is, as formerly in Europe, one entirely composed of Whites. But they find it perfectly normal that African society should be ‘monochrome’ and entirely composed of Blacks, because ethnomasochism is always accompanied by its counterpart: xenophilia.

  Birthrates and Ethnic Origin

  Questions regarding the birthrate or reproduction of a given people are much more important for said people than are all other questions. In particularly more important than those concerning economic prosperity. For economic prosperity belongs to the historical superstructure and is contingent, while ethno-anthropological identity and the reproduction of generations belong to the infrastructure of history, that is, to the order of first causes. Moreover, economic prosperity and the level of technology — the sole preoccupation of European leaders — are already gravely threatened (though they are incapable of seeing this) by a negative birthrate and unceasing immigration, the costs of which continue to mount.

  * * *

  France has the highest birthrate in Europe, with a level of 2.01 children per woman in 2010, when 828,000 births were counted, a record since 1974 and higher than the figures for Germany or Russia — much larger countries which are hemorrhaging population, as are Italy, Spain, etc. France has passed 65 million inhabitants and gained more than 10 million in thirty years (Germany 81.8, United Kingdom 62, Italy 60.3). Let us make clear that this level of 2.01 children per woman is still beneath the replacement level of 2.1. We must also mention that the average age of maternity continues to rise since more women are having children in their thirties than at younger ages, with the average age at which to have one’s first child being 30.

  But by what miracle are the French having more children than the Spanish, the Italians, the British, the Belgians, the Portuguese, the Swiss, the Germans, etcetera, all of whom live in comparable societies in West Europe? Yet it is in France that socio-economic pessimism is the highest of all countries in the world (over 40 percent of people polled fear downward mobility) and that the consumption of antidepressants is highest. Some people explain the French birthrate by generous family subsidies and the high number of nursery schools available for working mothers who have children aged 3–4 years. Such explanations are not more than moderately convincing. But then, for heaven’s sake, might it be due to immigration, principally, to the greater fertility of foreign women rather than that of native French women?

  The National Institute of Demographic Studies, whose figures are often faked to minimise the impact of immigration, claims that ‘foreign women contribute only 0.02 to this birthrate of 2.01’. Fine, but let’s be careful: the reference is to ‘foreigners’. What about the legions of naturalised North Africans, Black Africans, and Middle Easterners who are ‘French on paper’? What is their birthrate in comparison with that of the native French? And among these 828,000 babies born in 2010 in the land of Clovis, Henri IV and Colbert, how many came from the wombs of these women and how many from those of the native French? It is forbidden to say, forbidden to keep statistics according to ethnic origin (an ethno-racial taboo), unlike in Anglo-Saxon countries.

  Three factors, however, allow one to form some notion of the ethnic reality and get around this prohibition: 1) Consulting municipal bulletins which publish monthly lists of marriages, deaths, and births declared at the town hall. Looking at the names given to children, especially in the larger towns, we see a very high proportion of Afro-Arab and Muslim names (the desire to assimilate no longer exists). Indeed, in some communities, one finds 100 percent non-European first names. 2) France is at the same time the country with the highest birthrate and the highest proportion of foreigners (naturalised or not) in all of Europe. Just a coincidence? 3) Watch when schools let out — in working class neighbourhoods, not in the West and Center of Paris or in rural areas, of course. The number of children belonging to visible minorities, as they are modestly called (and which will soon be visible majorities) is impressive. To complete our deductions, we would have to enquire among obstetricians, asking them to estimate the number of non-European births at which they preside. Who will dare to undertake such a census (which in the United States is openly practiced every day)?

  The conclusion is obvious: the high French birthrate in comparison to that of its neighbours is due to the fertility of Black African and North African families (above 3 children per woman), most of them naturalised. It is colonisation by womb and cradle, the gentlest and most effective of all. If we restricted our calculations to French women of native European ancestry, our birthrate would be well beneath 2.01. There is something very disquieting about this: considering the high proportion and high fertility of foreign women, this figure of 2.01 is rather low. It leads one to think that the birthrate among native French is very low indeed, not much higher than 1, which is similar to the catastrophic rate of Italians and Germans.

  Denying the obvious and what we see in the streets and on television, the bien pensant elites do not want to admit these facts; though some of them admit it with the remark that ‘after all, it’s a good thing, it’s diversity, it’s wonderful’. To reassure themselves, they call impoverishment ‘enrichment’, according to the Orwellian logic of semantic inversion. Our sick elites approve and encourage this transformation, this disfigurement of the native people, making believe and persuading themselves that it is a mark of honour.

  A further point is that, at the current rate of migration permitted, and according to mathematical laws, our Italian and Spanish neighbours will also see their birthrates rise. The bien pensant elites will rejoice! But it won’t be European babies driving the increase.

  In Japan, which is experiencing the same birth crisis and the same drop in population as Europeans, certain voices are being raised in favour of opening the country up to immigration, which successive Japanese governments have always rejected up until now. The argument made by those who advocate keeping the country closed to immigration is the following (and this in a country deeply penetrated by material imperatives and standard-of-living mongers): better a possible temporary loss of population and ageing concomitant with some social and economic costs than a modification of the ethnic substrate of our people. Better to become poorer but remain masters in our own home than to try to remain rich by welcoming the foreigner on our ancestral soil, losing our identity, our peace, and our freedom, as we currently see happening in Europe.

  This position is all the more correct in that mass immigration as we know it today is not a source of enrichment but of exorbitant financial, social, and cultural (that is, relating to quality of life) costs ten times as large as the nudge it gives our birthrate. However that may be, Japan has perhaps not lost its soul.

  * * *

  For the first time in the whole history of civilisations, Europeans are at risk of disappearing not through the forcible invasion of people objectively stronger, but through their own fault, by moral renunciation and weakness, by a lack of inner readiness, by anemia. Not only are they not reproducing sufficiently, but they are accepting without a fight a massive and harmful demographic colonisation which they declare a positive good and which they could perfectly well forbid. And, rendered brainless by their own cosmopolitan ideology, they approve the insidious spread of race-mixing, that is to say, the irreversible modification of their genetic capital which is the root of their historic capital.

  [1] In psychology, sociology, sexology, and even philosophy, we are accustomed to speak of Man without stopping to think that it only describes characteristics common to ‘Man of European origin’.

  [2] The sin of racism is defined as being consubstantial with being White. Moreover,
White racism is considered as proven as soon as the White race is affirmed (‘I am proud of my White identity’), even if there is no denunciation of other races. On the other hand, if another race affirms its superiority or pride in its identity (‘Black is beautiful!’), the dominant ideology finds nothing to criticise. Contrary to the tireless propaganda, racism in multiracial France is principally directed against native French, notably the victims of ‘positive discrimination’ which favours foreigners. Ethnic criminality and violence is also widespread, as is the never-suppressed anti-White, ‘anti-Gallic’ cultural discourse. Jews are starting to find themselves in the same line of sight, which greatly troubles Jewish intellectuals. The countless acts of hatred directed against native French are never considered and are suppressed as such. We may also note that if a person of non-European origin declares that he is entirely opposed to miscegenation and is proud of his racial or ethnic group membership, his speech is perfectly legitimate. If a native European professes the same beliefs, he suffers a modern-day witch hunt for racism.

  [3] Stellio Gilles Robert Capo Chichi (b. 1981), also known as Kémi Séba, is a black militant born in Strasbourg to parents from Benin. In 2004, he founded Tribe KA, a political organisation dissolved by the Ministry of the Interior in 2006 for ‘racist incitement’ against Jews. Mr Capo Chichi himself was prosecuted and jailed for statements and actions deemed anti-Semitic. Upon his release from prison in 2008, he announced his conversion to Islam. In 2011, he left France and settled in Senegal. –Tr.

  [4] A law proposed in March 2011 for criminals who had been naturalised for fewer than ten years to be stripped of their citizenship was hurriedly withdrawn amid a scandalised outcry from bien pensants and judges.

  [5] This piece of blackmail is really a rape of conscience, with the man in question assuming the role of victim by guilt-tripping the woman.

  [6] Faye is presumably referring to the infamous ‘family portrait’ billboard advert from 1991 which depicts two nude women, one White and one Black, enveloped in a green blanket holding an East Asian baby. Luciano Benetton has been recorded as having said: ‘We did not create our advertisements in order to provoke, but to make people talk, to develop citizen consciousness.’ –Ed.

  [7] The idea of the ‘superiority’ of Whites is deeply anchored in Blacks, and produces a kind of schizophrenia, even more than among North Africans, like all ‘denied but obvious’ facts.

  [8] A European friend of mine who lives in Senegal made the following observation: a number of White men of a certain age come to spend several months in the country, where the living is cheap. Most live with young Senegalese mistresses whom they support. Similarly, European women of a certain age also come for several months at a time, and keep a young Senegalese lover (supported by them) constantly at their side.

  [9] It should be noted that not only do childless couples do this. Far from it. A certain number of couples, especially those of the humanitarian type, adopt third world children and try to integrate them with their own offspring out of a sort of moral duty. In many cases, the results do not live up to the expectations, of course.

  [10] Jean-Philippe Smet (b. 1943) who goes by the stage name Johnny Hallyday has been a fixture of the French popular music scene since 1960. He and his fourth wife, Laeticia Boudou, adopted a Vietnamese orphan girl in 2004 and another in 2008. Bernadette Chirac (b. 1933) is a French politician and the wife of former French President Jacques Chirac. –Tr.

  [11] Remember the scandal of Zoé’s Ark, a ‘humanitarian’ association which, for a fee, imported African orphan children — victims of the endemic civil wars ravaging the continent — into France. In reality, the children were not orphans at all. The project was to import 10,000 of them in order to satisfy the demand of the ‘adoption market’ for children of colour.

  [12] Pierre Chaunu and Georges Suffert, Le peste blanche (Gallimard, 1976). See also Les yeux grands fermés [Eyes Wide Shut –Tr.]: immigration en France (Denoёl, 2010) by Michèle Tribalat, one of the rare demographers who can be taken seriously. Also: Jean Bothorel, Requiem pour les Français (Bourin Editeur, 2011).

  [13] Although ethno-anthropological statistics are prohibited in France, it is still possible to get an idea of the number of French of native stock in proportion to the population as a whole from several indicators, namely one’s view of the street, but also the discreet statistics kept by gynecologists and obstetricians, as well as local birth announcements, school registers, and so on, which give us a great deal of information. At the time of writing (2011), the situation has been seen to have deteriorated in the more than ten years since my book, The Colonisation of Europe, was published. Out of a population of about 65 million inhabitants, the number of non-native Europeans (i.e., foreigners, descendants of foreigners, mixed-race persons — whether of French citizenship, legal residents, or uncounted clandestine immigrants) can be estimated at about 20 million. In other words, a proportion of almost one third, which is approaching 40 percent among the younger age groups, and constantly rising. It is a major anthropological change such as France has never known in its history or even its prehistory.

  [14] The term ‘Négritude’ literally means ‘negro-ness’, and refers to the literary and ideological movement founded in 1930s France by Black intellectuals, poets, and politicians. Its principal aim was to awaken an African consciousness among the African diaspora in France in order to combat French cultural hegemony and racism. One of its founding members, Léopold Sédar Senghor, went on to become the president of Senegal. –Ed.

  [15] All urological studies show that the idea that the Black man has a larger penis and of their supposed superior sexual performance do not correspond to reality. On the other hand, African cultures are among those that most repress eroticism. The proof is female genital mutilation, which aims at preventing the woman’s sexual pleasure. On this point, see Nicole-Claude Mathieu, L’anatomie politique: catégorisations and idéologies du sexe (Côté-femmes, 1991), a Leftist-feminist view of the question, but still interesting for the contradictions it conceals. See, above all, Serge Bilé, La légende du sexe surdimensioné des Noirs (le Serpent à Plumes, 2005). Finally, see noireaufeminin.com, where Black women contest the supposed sexual superiority of Black men and equate this legend with the animalisation of Blacks... which they themselves do. Anyway, many anti-White racist internet sites drip with bilious fantasies about the sexual inferiority of White men.

  [16] On this subject, see my books La colonisation de l’Europe and Pourquoi nous combattons [Why We Fight –Tr.](L’Aencre, recently republished).

  [17] Those who claim France has always been racially mixed are also the ones who explain to us that races do not exist: an insoluble contradiction.

  [18] The American melting pot initially only concerned the mixture and cohabitation of White European immigrants and didn’t include Blacks or Asians or South Americans. This is often forgotten. On this question, see Serge Halimi, Atlas 2003 du Monde Diplomatique.

  [19] Jared Taylor, White Identity: Racial Consciousness in the 21st Century (New Century Books, 2011). The increase in multiraciality in American society, which has long since abandoned the migratory quotas designed to preserve a majority of Americans of European ancestry, will result in Whites becoming a minority over the course of the twenty-first century. There may well be, for the first time, a mulatto in office (Barack Obama), but this situation will not result in an increase of social harmony, contrary to what the propaganda tells us, but in the opposite, as Taylor demonstrates. One may consider that American super-power in the twentieth century came from the US benefitting from neo-European synergy, a fermentation within a single nation of the energies of various European peoples who, in Europe, had been rivals and existed separately. But after American society becomes heterogeneous and un-European, a neces
sarily unstable ethnic kaleidoscope, will the US be able to compete effectively with China, which benefits from relative ethnic homogeneity? One may doubt it.

  [20] Alain Peyrefitte, C’était de Gaulle (Gallimard, 2002).

  [21] That is, a figure triple that for native French. In most of the world’s countries, an unemployed foreigner — useless and an expense to the native population — is asked to return to his native country. Only in Europe is such an aberrant situation tolerated. On this question, see the Law on the Registration of Foreign Residents in Japan (9 March 2009), violently criticised by Amnesty International and various Western NGOs.

  [22] The semantic field of the term ‘racism’ has been altered from its original sense and today smacks of poetic ambiguity. It is this which permits neo-totalitarian ‘anti-racist’ laws to get around positive law. The term, which appeared in the nineteenth century, referred to a doctrine which explained history by the hereditary dispositions of races, without opposing racial mixtures as long as they were beneficial according the judgement of the authors concerned. Then, after the defeat of the Third Reich, the term ‘racism’ was used to describe any doctrine that sought to oppress or destroy another race. Today we have entered a time of semantic confusion, and the words ‘racist’ and ‘racism’ have taken on a quasi-religious and fluctuating connotations in the dogma of the dominant ideology. This ideology denies that races exist but condemns racism, considers opposition to Islamic fundamentalism (Islamophobia) a form of racism, thereby suggesting that Muslims form a ‘race’, and above all insist that those who oppose migratory colonisation are racists. So the European racist is no longer he who attacks but he who defends himself. The victim of aggression who defends himself is made out to be the aggressor. At the same time, the French State is entirely tolerant of the CRAN (Conseil représentatif des associations noires [Representative Council of Black Associations –Tr.] — the very name is perfectly racialist) and has even charged them with the mission of acting as an ‘observatory body’ against racism! We have turned everything upside-down. Racism is a magical term that can be used in only one direction. Anti-racist ideology, the pillar of the dogma, is in reality obsessed with the idea of race, just as puritanism is obsessed with sex.