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.
Is a Racial War Dialectically Necessary?
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 case48 (Ernstfall) theorised by Carl Schmitt49 and to thus sever the Gordian knots that would otherwise never be unravelled.
The Great Fear of a White French Reaction
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
The armies that shall fight in this racial civil war will therefore include quite disparate populations on either side, as is the case in any civil war. Indeed, the configuration will be a little more complex than an ‘All Whites VS All Non-Whites’ clash.
Predicting the Battle Lines
I have heard people here and there claim that native peoples will not participate in a potential war. With populism on the rise all over Europe, however, things are moving forward in a specific way, and lines are being moved… To think of our l
aw enforcement forces as the sole entities that shall face the attacks carried out by those we all know about is thus to disregard recent evolutions.
a) In the first camp, i.e. that of the aggressors, whose members present themselves as victims while simultaneously resorting to attacks in accordance with the ancient Muslim-Arab strategy, we will encounter the heads of Muslim associations, with the Islamist and pro-jihadist UOIF — now renamed MDF (Muslims of France) — at the forefront, endorsed by hundreds of associations of all conceivable kinds (Cran,51 Indigènes de la République,52 CCIF,53 etc.) supporting the young rioters, whose numbers shall be in the hundreds of thousands. These will be the most influential actors, yet there will be a myriad of others in the gangrenous suburbs and provincial towns, inciting, championing and legitimising the actions of the troublemakers and rioters.
In the aggressor camp, one must not neglect the presence of collaborators (see Chapter 6 with regard to the Great Islamosphere), regardless of whether they are journalists, officials or politicians at all national and local levels: indeed, their purpose shall be to negotiate, retreat and make concessions, even at the price of being disavowed by law enforcement agencies deemed ‘too repressive’. Resorting to a mixture of agitprop and violence, the Islamo-leftists and their numerous groups shall also be very active in assisting the aggressors.
On the side of the latter, we shall also witness the granting of support and financial aid by the countries engaged in the Islamisation and colonisation of France (and not only the latter): Morocco, Algeria, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates, to only name a few. All of them are the close friends and official allies of the French state when it comes to financial profit, yet they readily subscribe to back-stabbing as far as invading us is concerned.
b) Within the second camp, namely that of the defenders, the ones that shall stand at the forefront are our law enforcement forces, the police and the gendarmerie (even if this does seem hard to believe nowadays). They will have remained patriotic and highly motivated despite the innumerable attacks they have suffered over the past years and the humiliating betrayals at the hands of the fearful political hierarchy in power. There will also be a growing number of exasperated Frenchmen with no ideological or political connections with the far Right, who could organise themselves into neighbourhood-based self-defence groups or structured militias. And therein lies our leaders’ greatest nightmare.
We will also encounter here some Muslims who no longer support the violence of their co-religionists, a number of Westernised Arabs, and a large mass of immigrants of a decent cultural level or DOM-nationals who do not wish to see a civil war erupt in France under any circumstance, since such a conflict would necessarily have an uncontrollable racial dimension that could end up turning against them. Speaking more generally, these populations are not very fond of those city ‘youths’…
The Rassemblement National, i.e. the former Front National, will comprise a majority supporting the country’s defenders, as will other identitarian movements, whose overwhelming majority will champion the Resistance. As for the Internet, it will enable the native camp to regroup. All these people shall be joined by a certain part (the least faint-hearted one) of L.R.54 MPs. As for ‘Macronists’, they shall simply go AWOL.
During the clashes that shall occur (including riots, attacks, and serious incidents that seem to involve Afro-Maghrebian and Islamised populations each and every time), our intelligence services will be haunted by the perceived necessity to identify French ethnic groups that could resist and take action.
These authentic resistance fighters, the real heroes of our modern times, are nowadays labelled Islamophobic scum. Although the official ideology changes from decade to decade, the disreputable psychology characterising collaborators, who are all sons of francisque55 -bearing Mitterrand, is impervious to time and remains unchanged.
The Guarantees Offered to the Islamic Conqueror Are Suicidal in Anticipation of the Civil War
Arab rapper Médine, whose name alone represents a kind of aggression, has authored many Islamist texts under the guise of irony and artistic licence, as well as an album entitled Jihad. He has close ties to Tariq Ramadan56 and the Muslim Brotherhood, and is supported on social networks by the Zionism-obsessed and Arabophilic Dieudonné.57 He was even asked to give a performance in the Bataclan, where Muslim terrorists perpetrated their infamous massacre in 2015! Médine was additionally supported by his co-religionist, hilariously funny comedian (think again!) Yassine Belattar, who also happens to be… Macron’s advisor on suburban issues! No, I am not joking at all. Macron has indirect ties to jihadist and anti-Zionist circles! That’s what I call submission and doublespeak…
Frightened into submission like a bunch of pubescent young girls and exhibiting the same behaviour as the owners of the Bataclan, the French elites offer this invasive Islam guarantees, paying no heed to the fact that it inspires and prompts assassinations and attacks. This fear of asserting one’s European identity has also contaminated the Right, now morally subservient to the orders issued by leftist sermons.
When Laurent Wauquiez, the President of the Republicans, authorised the distribution of a tract (diffidently) titled Pour que la France reste la France,58 thus cautiously implying his opposition to the hostile immigration dispossessing our French people of their own country, he brought his own camp’s wrath upon himself, including that of certain right-wing politicians and elected officials who labelled him a ‘populist rag’, which speaks volumes about their degree of mental pollution. One’s desire to preserve the identity of France is thus deemed foul, reprehensible and, of course, racist — i.e. a capital sin. If one follows the logic espoused by those that felt outrage and condemned the above-mentioned leaflet (including the Rightists among them), France must not be allowed to remain the France it once was, i.e. a majestic country. It must, instead, change. Innover,59 as we say in the petty and trendy jargon of the mediocre. It must embrace self-destruction (through ethno-masochism and self-reproach) and deny its own identity and origins. This social pathology has been described most accurately by Éric Zemmour in his essay entitled The French Suicide, which scandalised the ruling class and its clientele, of course, but achieved phenomenal public success.
The Weakness and Blindness of a Faltering State
In the event of insurrectional riots involving massive, bloody and arsonist attacks and followed by an outbreak of uncontrollable racial clashes, the state, mistakenly believed to be invincible, could indeed lose its footing.
The phenomenon is easy to understand and has been analysed by Carl Schmitt in his theory of the emergency case (Ernstfall), which I first mentioned above. Whenever a serious crisis erupts, bringing with it a risk of death and systemic collapse, as would inevitably be the case with an interethnic civil war entailing a high level of violence, mentalities topple and opinions undergo radical change, even within the authorities themselves. One then witnesses an astonishing metamorphosis or perhaps even a complete reversal in people’s behaviour and value judgements.
As stated previously, the government will most likely resort to terrible harshness when dealing with the natives who choose to resist; which also implies that a part of the central and local state apparatus, as well as that of its accomplices, will experience a shock and openly switch to the ‘bad’ camp, i.e. that of the Resistance. The official state will then erect an uncompromising wall around its collaboration with the invaders, especially if Macron is still in charge at the Élysée.
Insulting several democratically elected European governments in passing, whose members are against the grave migrational invasion systematically played down by our elites, the latter spoke of ‘populist leprosy’, thus stupidly contrasting one’s service to ‘the people’ with ugly and villainous ‘populism’. Who does this young president, catapulted to power through globalist support and Jewish funding, think he is?
In this regard, Ivan Rioufol writes that ‘in the eyes of the state, those who m
ention the threat of a civil war are lepers that remain ignorant of their own affliction’. He goes on to add: ‘No offence intended to the salesmen of this “living-together”, but the threat of a domestic war is not a figment of one’s imagination’ (Le Figaro, 29/06/2018).
Repressive Measures That Target the Resistance, Not the Occupiers
Following a wave of jihadist attacks (230 fatal casualties in France from 2015 to 2016 is no small number), General Pierre de Villiers, the Chief of Staff of the French Armed Forces, declared that we had ‘entered a different age’ and that ‘peace’ was ‘no longer to be taken for granted’. In other words, what he stated was that a war is brewing on our soil, right? The very idea was considered so politically incorrect that he was humiliated and forced to resign by Emmanuel Macron’s statal apparatus, all under yet another false pretence.
The French state, furthermore, never ceases to butter up these allogeneic populations and Islam with them while persevering in its incessant repression of native Frenchmen who could attempt to resist and, through legitimate provocations, initiate a racial civil war. Here is an example of such cowardly, ridiculous and ineffective behaviour: believing themselves to be part of an S.A.S.60 novel, our valiant and highly professional DGSI (our intelligence services and so-called internal security) arrested a group of extreme-right Pieds Nickelés61 in October 2017, suspecting them of wanting to respond to Islamisation through violence.
Presented as terrorists, these losers wanted to spray graffiti on mosques or leave some pork in front of the entrance. Rather unintelligent symbolism, of course, yet devoid of any homicidal, criminal or heinous intention, and therefore not a source of danger in any way. Who is the enemy, then? To the authorities, the answer is the Islamophobic far-Right, whose adherents are in a minority, and not the terrorists and plethoric invaders who share the same ethnic origin and are, more often than not, co-religionists.
Ethnic Apocalypse Page 6