Wednesday, 20 June 2012

On this blog I often use the words colonisation and colonist instead of immigration and immigrant. When foreigners arrive in a country alone, or in small groups, and assimilate to the country's norms, the process can be called immigration. When they arrive complete with large extended family groupings, retain their own customs and language, reproduce their own culture in the country of destination while maintaining strong and abiding links with their countries of origin, the process is more properly described as colonisation.

Philippe Meunier. a recently re-elected MP for Sarkozy's UMP party, has issued a statement in which he denounces the colonisation of France.
The national cohesion of the country is ill served by a totally unbridled globalisation which only serves the interests of a minority and more and more districts are struck by immigration that takes on all the appearance of colonisation.
Hinting that his party, the UMP, France's mainstream right-wing political grouping, should seek some form of alliance with the Front National, he criticises his own party for failing to heed the will of the people:
All the UMP's elected officials and members have an obligation to face up to their responsibilities and draw the appropriate conclusions, especially with regard to alliances.

Not resolving this issue would be suicidal.
Source: Lyoncapitale

Meunier is a member of the Droite Populaire, an especially right-wing faction within the UMP that has long been regarded as sympathetic to the Front National. Around 20 or so of the Droite Populaire MPs lost their seats a few days ago in the recent elections. This has triggered a debate about whether their approach is unsound or not. Meunier discussed this in an interview

Some voices within the UMP now regret the UMP's drift to the right which led to electoral failure. What do you think?

Nicolas Sarkozy didn't lose because of a drift to the right in his campaign, but because there was no drift to the right in his policy. When he launched his campaign, he was right at the bottom. We needed another couple of weeks of campaigning to win.

The Droite Populaire lost half of its numbers in the elections. Isn't that proof that this line is not a good one?

If there were losses, it's because the Droite populaire MPs are not in safe seats. When you are in a three-way contest against the Front National in the south of France, it's more difficult than being in certain electoral districts in Paris. If you add their scores to those of the FN, you get 60% to 70% of the vote.

...You denounce "a colonisation". That suggests a wave of immigration, but also political control. Where do you see that?

There are different forms of colonisation: colonisation of population, cultural, religious and political. Some elected officials are already under their control. Look at the Palestinian flag which floats at the front of the Vaulx-en-Velin town hall. Go and look at the town centres in certain local authorities where you will see no non-halal commerce. That's one of the reasons I'm not in favour of the right to vote for foreigners.
Source: Lyoncapitale


Anonymous said...

I am sympathetic with the distinction you draw between immigration and colonisation. I wonder though, what is your opinion on non-European immigration, because it seems to me like integration which you say is the difference between immigration and colonisation, is far harder to achieve when, as Ernest Gellner would say, 'counter-entropic traits' (ie. those traits which will never disappear through the generations so mainly physical differences but religion too) are present amongst the immigrants.

Cheradenine Zakalwe said...

At this point I think all non-European immigration should be stopped completely. I'm not averse in principle to non-European immigrants as long as they are not Muslim, but they should be intelligent and highly-skilled enough to make a clearly positive contribution to the country and they should be so few in number that they make no substantial difference to its character. We are clearly way past that point, so as an emergency remedial measure in my view there should just be a total stop to the immigration of non-Europeans except ultra specialists (Nobel prize-winners and the like).

I have come to see the genetic homogeneity of a nation as one of its major assets. Scientific studies have shown that we empathise more greatly with those who are genetically like us and the idea of "inclusive fitness" from evolutionary biology explains why this is so. People are ineluctably drawn to identify with those of similar genetic ancestry. The more genetically diverse a population is, the more it will be subject to emotional and political stresses because the different groups empathise primarily with their own kind rather than the country as a whole. Diversity is a disaster. It destroys the natural sense of community.

Anonymous said...

Your argument here is completely the same as my own, put rather more clearer though. I do believe a country is weakened from having too much diversity, and that a feeling of 'we-ness' is degraded. This may be manageable today, but in the not-so-distant future, when we may face tests and challenges such as the rising powers or resource shortages, or anarchy, this would be bad news indeed.

I think also, on a personal note (and a highly 'unRational', Romanticist one at that), as somebody who has no god, and believes in no religion, my country and to a lesser extent my civilization is like my religion, at least something I can relate to very much. I see it as almost myself bound in time, stretching back and forwards, giving myself an element of, absurdly some might say, immortality. But increasingly I despair with the knowledge that very soon my country will not be my country. Most would not care for this argument, but for me it will be the saddest day of all when we no longer say that 'we' defeated the French at Waterloo, or the Germans in WWII, but rather 'they' or 'the British' or just some other subtle difference which indicates the history is no longer my own for the future inhabitants of this island will have no connection with it.

Danish said...

I coudent find an e mail adress to your blog.
So i post it hier in the weekend, some danish Patriots have been putting stickers from the danish National Patriotic organisation on a muslim club/mosque and the muslims are now whining :)and saying that they had to remove it before the muslim youth arriwed so that they dident see it...

There are to stickers that has been putting on the club/mosque. 1 one says "stop imigration with a red man on". The second one says "start repatritaion with a green man on" :)
The best thing is that the spockesman from Vederfølner are allowed to say to the public that he dosent lay sleeples about what happend. And secondly he shows the stickers on national television! Perhaps you can use that ?

(dont post my e mail but if you want to know more write me )

Cheradenine Zakalwe said...

Thanks. I'll take a look at it. My email address is:

Anonymous said...

The Muslim/Black invasion of France, as can be seen by the recent election, has already changed the course of France. The next elections will see that influence even more marked then the last. What this new MP is now belatedly moaning, is far too late.

As in Europe, France will require a violent revolution to undo what the stupid liberal elite have done to Europe. The poison that will be created in this conflict will embitter global relations for centuries.

If only Muslims had not been allowed into Christendom, we would be friends with not just Muslims but Muslim countries. Their would be normal political rivalry but not what we will see after a poisonous and bitter civil war.

Blog Archive

Powered by Blogger.

Blog Archive

Total Pageviews