„Immigration has become invasion, invasion a migratory submersion. France and Europe are a hundred times more colonised, and more seriously so, than they ever colonised themselves. The only irreversible colonisation is a demographic one, the one which takes place via population transfer.
Some people now say there is no colonisation, that the word is not proper, because there is no military conquest. Those people are wrong. The army of conquest are the delinquents large and small, all of those people who make life impossible for Europeans by harming them in every possible way, from the so-called incivilities to terrorism, which is in fact nothing but an extension of the rest. All the perpetrators of terrorist attacks launched their career in the violation of common law. Moreover, there are no terrorists. There is an Occupier who, from time to time, executes a few hostages, as occupiers have always done. I call occupiers all those who declare themselves to be such, or behave as such.
The change in people, ethnic substitution, the Great Replacement, is by far the most important event in the history of our country since it has existed, because, with another people, the history, if it continues, will no longer be the history of France. France has always marvellously assimilated individuals who wanted to be assimilated. It cannot – it simply cannot – assimilate peoples, much less peoples who are hostile, demanding, even hateful and conquering. It requires a peerless form of vanity and complete ignorance of what a people is to think that with a changed population, another people, France would still be France. In the present situation, all words are liars but the most mendacious of all is “French”. There are no “French” jihadists, for example. If they are jihadists then they are not French.
To believe that there are only French people in France is a complete illusion. There are invaders and invaded, colonisers and colonised, occupiers and the occupied.
One doesn’t put an end to colonisation without the departure of the colonist: Algeria, in its time, showed us French that the hard way – a good opportunity for us now to underline the difference in civilisations.
One doesn’t put an end to an occupation without the departure of the occupying power, the occupying forces. There is no way out other than remigration. The same people who say this is impracticable want to bring forty million migrants to Europe, when it is not two hundred million. They say mankind has entered an era of general migration. Let them migrate and remigrate then. What is possible in one direction should also be possible in the other, with greater gentleness, human respect, and more resources.
The time for politics, elections, political parties, that time is over. The next presidential election in France is too far away. The change of people will by then have gone too far, the replacers will then be the kingmakers, unless they decide to be themselves the kings – the masters. In any case, there is no way to win a game in which your adversary holds all the cards and has set up all the rules. The powers-that-be, their banks, their judges and their media all want ethnic substitution. They are not in the least protecting us from it. Quite the contrary, they are organising it and promoting it. They have drugged people into accepting it, by the teaching of oblivion, by general deculturation, by censorship, by repression and permanent injections of self-hatred. They are not importing workers, because there is no work and there will be less and less in the future. They’re importing future consumers whom they are no longer even making the effort to pretend are refugees since the vast majority of these migrants come from countries where there is not even a hint of war: there are often sick people, adventurous or conquest-minded youths, teenagers who’ve rowed with their parents or had run-ins with the police, tradesmen whose trade has failed.
I know you object as these future consumers have no money. You are mistaken, if you permit me to say so. Tomorrow they will have yours. In truth, the supposed social transfers are little else than ethnic transfers. Europe is the first continent ever to pay for its own colonisation.
A spectre haunts Europe and the world. It is Replacism, the tendency to replace everything with and by its double – standardised, normalised, interchangeable, low-cost: the original by the copy, the authentic by its imitation, the true by the false, mothers by surrogate mothers, culture by leisure and entertainment, knowledge by diplomas, the country and town by the universal suburb, the indigene by the allogene, Europe by Africa, men by women, men and women by robots, peoples by other peoples, humanity by a dazed posthumanity, undifferentiated, standardised, as interchangeable as you like.
Of all forms of genetic manipulation, the Great Replacement, a kind of surrogate pregnancy applied to the entire planet, is by far the worst. Genocide by substitution, in the words of Aimé Césaire, the black communist Caribbean poet, is the Crime Against Humanity of the 21stcentury. It is a very strange thing, for that matter, that environmentalists seem to exclude man of their very commendable concern for biodiversity.
Replacism now considers itself strong enough to take management of the human stock in hand directly, without intermediaries. In France, Emmanuel Macron, who, along with Justin Trudeau, is its most accomplished representative in the world, has already neutralised the political microcosm and sent the main actors in French political life over the last thirty years back to their homes, peopling the National Assembly with foot soldiers in his pay, building an ad hoc government, shattering all the major parties. He doesn’t govern. He manages – as he would a bank or a PLC. He exits politics via the economy, finance or corporate management. We want to exit it via history. The independence or subjection of a great nation, the survival or the disappearance of a great civilisation, that is not a question of politics, but of history. Charles de Gaulle in London, that was not politics. Jean Moulin in Lyon was not politics. Nor was Joan of Arc in Chinon, nor Churchill in the War Rooms, nor Gandhi in Calcutta, nor anyone who rose up for the independence of their country and the dignity of their people.
What we need today is not a new party, not even a union of the Right: the rejection of totalitarian Replacism is no less a matter of the Left than the Right. What we need today is a coming together of all those who say a resounding No to Islamisation and the African conquest. What we need is a Council of National Resistance, of European resistance, because all European nations are invited to fight at our side for the well-being of our shared civilisation, Celt, Slav, Norman, Saxon, Germanic, Greco-Latin, Judeo-Christian and free-thinking.
My friend Karim Ouchikh, president of the SIEL, and myself, Renaud Camus, have decided to found exactly that, a National and European Council of Resistance. We will publicly offer to unite with all public figures who seem to be motivated by the same desire to save our country and all European countries and we will expand our committee this way, through co-option. But all French people and all Europeans who think like us are invited to link up with us and offer their support. The aim is to put together a force such that, ideally, it would be unnecessary to make use of it.
That said, if through misfortune it turned out that the only alternative left to us was submission or war, then let it be war, a hundred times over. There would be nothing civil about it, despite the high number of collaborators to the invasion. It will form part of the great tradition of peoples struggling for the right to self-determination, for the liberation of their territory and for decolonisation. We must finally put an end to the colonial age, as our colonisers say, while they are colonising us. The crazy pendulum swing of colonisation and counter-colonisation needs to be brought to an end once and for all, preferably across the Mediterranean.
Long live free France. Vive la France libre. Long live European civilisation”.
– Renaud Camus, president of the National Council of European Resistance (Conseil National de la Résistance Européenne)
Vox: Could you explain a little bit about your philosophy and whether you think it applies to the US context?
Renaud Camus: It applies to all contexts in the world, I think. Replacement is the very essence of modernity that things are being replaced [by industry]. Objects are being replaced, landscapes are being replaced. Everything is being replaced. It is the very character of what it is to be alive today. Of course it does apply to America, as it applies to all the world.
– My sense is that your work has been much more focused on Europe, immigration, and Islam. Correct me if I’m wrong on that. Can you articulate a bit for me how your work, and the idea of the Great Replacement, applies to Muslim immigration specifically – or if it doesn’t?
– No, it doesn’t.
– I think the replacement is, in general, a phenomenon. Islam [and Muslim migration] is just the form it takes in Occidental Europe especially, and especially in France probably. And it does make the matter worse because it is very strong, it’s a very strong culture and civilization with its own language and its own religion. But it’s not essential to the very idea of replacement. And for instance, in Western Europe, the replacement is just as much by black Africa as it is by Northern Islamic Africans.
– But the idea is that of a replacement of white, Christian Europe, right? Or is it in general?
– It’s about Western civilization as a whole, yes, of which Christianity is one central composing matter. But not only that. It could also be Jewish civilization in Europe or free-thinking civilization in Europe, or sort of European tradition, which are progressively replaced by another population. Of course, if you change populations, you can’t expect the same civilization to hold on.
– And your idea is that, basically, this is a risk? This “replacement” is not a positive – in your mind, it’s negative?
– Yes, it is very negative. I think the very idea of replacing everything by something else is awful. I think it’s disastrous. I think it’s the worst totalitarianism at work in the world today. So yes I think it’s perfectly awful for the world to become, for instance, just a site for tourism and not for normal places.
Like Las Vegas is a replacement for Venice. Or amusement parks are replacements for nature or natural monuments. Everything is being replaced by mass production. I think it is perfectly awful, yes, because I think the dignity of man is that he is not replaceable. The nightmare is what I call “the replaceable man,” the man who is just something which can be replaced by someone else or something else at any moment.
I think that’s just perfectly terrible. It is the worst thing to happen since Nazism.
– You mentioned in a YouTube video you produced in July 2016 that the candidacy and campaign of Donald Trump connected in some ways to this idea and these fears of replacement. Can you address how or if Trump’s support from white nationalists might be a part of this same conversation or same anxiety?
– Well, Trump is, of course, a very complex figure because he seems to be, by his culture, part of the big replacement. For instance, his view on ecology, it seems to me, is absolutely terrible. … I wasn’t very impressed by his apartment, for instance, where everything is horrible and fake. He is part of a totally fake world.
But on the other hand, he seems to be opposed to massive immigration to America, which is something anti-replacist. So I have very mixed feelings about Mr. Trump. I cannot say I am very ardently Trumpist. But I approve of his resistance to massive immigration, yes.
– The white nationalists in Charlottesville were chanting, “You will not replace us,” and, “Jews will not replace us.” Do you think that sense of anxiety about replacement comes from the ideas you’ve been articulating?
– The refusal to be replaced is a very strong feeling in man. It doesn’t really need to be put into hearts and into minds.
The will not to be replaced was at the center of resistance to colonialism. The refusal of being a colony in India or in Africa is very much part of anti-replacism. People don’t want other people to come in their territory, in their country, and change their cultures and their religions, their way of living, their way of eating, their way of dressing.
It is a worry that is central to the very essence of being human. Being human is being not replaceable. That is, not being an object, not being a thing.
– But do you worry about this idea being used by white nationalists? These white nationalists also speak against, for example, Jews and African Americans. Is this something you’re concerned about?
– They are marching against Jews? They are Nazis? Then they cannot be inspired by me, who is the very contrary of all that.
If the marchers are Nazis and/or anti-Semites, or if they make attacks – I am of course very much against all of that, and I cannot say they are inspired by me. I certainly do not approve of attacks, of whatever origins they might be. I have a very small political party called “Innocence” – I am strongly nonviolent.
– So you would condemn the violence that took place in Charlottesville? Is that what you’re saying?
– Oh, yes, certainly, totally, and without the slightest reserve.
– So even though they were chanting, „We will not be replaced,” do you think they took this idea to a point that you would not support? And, obviously, some of them used Nazi imagery, which is something that you don’t support? They used Nazi imagery, and they used swastikas.
– You are asking me if I support that?! I think it’s absolutely horrible, awful. I can very well understand why people in America would think “we won’t be replaced,” and I approve of that. But if they are Nazis or if they ram cars into people, I am appalled by the attitude.
Maybe there is a slight confusion between several kinds of people. Are they all the same? Are you saying all the people marching and chanting, “We won’t be replaced,” are Nazis? Is that what you are saying?
– No. I’m not saying that. I can’t speak to who they all are, obviously, but I think in the United States we have seen a resurgence of a kind of white nationalism and some pro-Nazi sentiment that seems to be emboldened.
– These are very different – white nationalism or Nazism.
– Wait, I’m sorry. Say that again. So you’re saying you think white nationalism and Nazis are two different things?
– Yes. Very different, I certainly hope so. Although I would not define myself by white nationalism, that is not my way of thinking or my way of speaking, but I kind of understand that whites, wherever they are in the world and especially in South Africa, tend to be very anxious about their destiny. There is a very horrible drama taking place now in South Africa, about being white.
– Do you consider your ideology or philosophy racist? Is racism a negative in your mind?
– I cannot consider my general conception of the world or myself “racist” since the word is already taken by something else entirely.
But I think races do exist and that they are infinitely precious, all of them, like everything – sexes, cultures, civilizations, private property, nations – which helps men and women resist general interchangeability and makes each human being unique, irreplaceable.
I think one of the dramas of modernity is that anti-racism has taken the word “race” in exactly the same silly pseudoscientific and incredibly limited way that “racists” did before them.
I pray for the conservation of all races, beginning with those which are the most under menace.
– Which are those under the most menace?
– Well, probably the white one, which is by far the least numerous of the old major classical “races.” By the privileges it has long enjoyed, it has been, in a manner of speaking, the aristocracy of the world.
I would say that this French race, or, if you’d rather, the French people, in all its dimensions – ethnic, cultural, civilizational – is especially under menace: It is fast losing its own territory, where its own culture and civilization is quickly becoming just one among others, and not the most dynamic, and which is rapidly being colonized.
– Is coexistence possible? Is multiculturalism an idea that can work?
– Everything is always possible. But it is not so desirable that it should be artificially created where it did not exist before. It generates violence, crime, mistrust, misery, ugliness.
– But the white nationalists chanting against being replaced are against both African Americans and Jews, among other groups in America. But these are both groups already in America. How does this fit the idea of replacism?
– I’m afraid there might be a slight misunderstanding between us. You ask me questions about those people in Charlottesville as if I was an expert on the subject. I never heard of them before three days ago, and I certainly cannot tell you who they are and what they want. I suspect, and I hope, that they might not be all such as the general press describe them, namely racist neo-Nazi white supremacists.
On the other hand, I totally sympathize with the slogan: “We will not be replaced.” And I think Americans have every good reason to be worried about their country, one of the two main elements that make up Western civilization, being changed into just another poor, derelict, hyperviolent, and stupefied quarter of the “global village.”